PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown III

[photoLith]

Sorry to say that I highly doubt that building was by him. First of all, it's too early for his work and second of all, Hornbostel didn't seem to build just normal looking factory buildings. Either way, I wish they could preserve that building because I'm sure another storage shed cladded building will replace it.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Sorry to say that I highly doubt that building was by him. First of all, it's too early for his work and second of all, Hornbostel didn't seem to build just normal looking factory buildings. Either way, I wish they could preserve that building because I'm sure another storage shed cladded building will replace it.

The design is much, much better than Coda on Centre, but who knows how it will get value engineered:

[BrianTH]

Yeah, that is a pretty cool example of commercial architecture at the time, but it is all pretty common vernacular for the period, nothing that would suggest Hornbostel (or anyone else famous) in particular designed it.

And in fact, looking at the historic maps--I am pretty sure the stepped back portion was older, maybe built right before 1910, as the home of the Highland Auto Company. It appears the bigger portion in a somewhat different style (with different bricks--see streetview on Commercial) was built much later, between 1923 and 1939.

Anyway, I think Walter Kidney's book on Hornbostel includes as comprehensive a list of his Pittsburgh works as anyone has ever compiled. So, someone could check that.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Yeah, that is a pretty cool example of commercial architecture at the time, but it is all pretty common vernacular for the period, nothing that would suggest Hornbostel (or anyone else famous) in particular designed it.

And in fact, looking at the historic maps--I am pretty sure the stepped back portion was older, maybe built right before 1910, as the home of the Highland Auto Company. It appears the bigger portion in a somewhat different style (with different bricks--see streetview on Commercial) was built much later, between 1923 and 1939.

Anyway, I think Walter Kidney's book on Hornbostel includes as comprehensive a list of his Pittsburgh works as anyone has ever compiled. So, someone could check that.

I have that book at home, I'll check tonight.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by GeneW

I have that book at home, I'll check tonight.

Great! Thanks in advance.

[eschaton]

Fuck you very much, North Side NIMBYs.

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Fuck you very much, North Side NIMBYs.

FWIW...I think it helps if we name names. David Demko and Stephen Pascal...and ultimately just Pascal.

All the meaningful Northside neighborhood associations were for the original 8 story Trek plan. We supported it for years, showed up in force to the zoning board to support the proposed waiver, which was granted.

The neighborhood was overwhelmingly for it...one guy wasn't. I just don't want it to appear that there was a large faction of people in the neighborhood fighting against it.

Also, PS...I saw previously that you referenced the defeat of the expansion of the War Street Historic District. Not so fast. The Court ruled on appeal that the City Council failed to vote against the expansion in time as required by the City Code. The expansion is thus in effect by default, but the City is appealing the decision again. I had Judge Coleville's opinion on it somewhere but I can't find it right now. I will post when I do.

[bossride]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Fuck you very much, North Side NIMBYs.

You can blame the NIMBYs all you want, but the real blame lies with the URA and city council. They've had decades to change the zoning laws to accommodate the changing neighborhood. If the zoning laws had been changed, there would not have been the need for a variance and special exception.

The ZBA decision was doomed the moment it was appealed despite all the neighborhood support. The URA and Trek did a horrible job claiming a hardship at the ZBA to justify the variance. It seemed that they took it for granted that Trek would get the variance because of the neighborhood support and didn't properly build their record. Even if they did build a better record, it may not have mattered. The trial court used the ZBA record, without new testimony, to make its decision and the Commonwealth Court used the trial court's record. Based on that record, the Commonwealth Court concluded that the ZBA didn't have the authority to grant the variance and that rezoning would have been the proper way to allow Trek's plan.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Lobick

FWIW...I think it helps if we name names. David Demko and Stephen Pascal...and ultimately just Pascal.

I did almost say "North Side NIMBY" in singular instead.

I was aware of almost all of the backstory, and have posted about it before, but I felt like something short and pithy and angry.

Originally Posted by bossride

You can blame the NIMBYs all you want, but the real blame lies with the URA and city council. They've had decades to change the zoning laws to accommodate the changing neighborhood. If the zoning laws had been changed, there would not have been the need for a variance and special exception.

This is a good point. I've mentioned to people before there's something deeply wrong with Pittsburgh zoning insofar as it just takes someone willing to hire a lawyer to essentially kill any project which requires a variance. The logical conclusion here would be to overhaul city zoning. It's been done to a limited extent in select parts of the city (Uptown, and now the riverfronts) but we really need to have something more comprehensive.


I'd like to see the city drastically simplify the zoning code. I realize that the areas zoned for single-family residential aren't going anywhere. But I think the city could roll Residential Multifamily (RM), the commercial zoning types (LNC, UNC, HC, and the little used NDO), and a lot of the land now zoned for light industrial (NDI and UI) into a new "mixed use" category. Make there be three different potential building heights, but have the areas open to just about any use other than heavy manufacturing. Then see what happens.

[cityofblindinglights]

That picture makes me so mad. I have followed this project for 10 years since moving to the north side in 2009. I cannot believe after all that they just tore it all down. Unbelievable.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Great! Thanks in advance.

From the appendix of the Kidney book:

117. Frank D. Saupp, Inc. truck sales building
5803 Centre Avenue (East Liberty)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Eric Fisher Co. and Henry Hornbostel,
associated architects
built 1925
now largely altered

So the answer is yes, it is a Hornbostel, although a minor work and changed quite a bit.

Edit: Should should be able to see the paragraph here in Google Books.

[Wally G]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Fuck you very much, North Side NIMBYs.

Well said! We can only hope the new building looks okay with the older ones.

[Don't Be That Guy]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I did almost say "North Side NIMBY" in singular instead.

I was aware of almost all of the backstory, and have posted about it before, but I felt like something short and pithy and angry.



This is a good point. I've mentioned to people before there's something deeply wrong with Pittsburgh zoning insofar as it just takes someone willing to hire a lawyer to essentially kill any project which requires a variance. The logical conclusion here would be to overhaul city zoning. It's been done to a limited extent in select parts of the city (Uptown, and now the riverfronts) but we really need to have something more comprehensive.


I'd like to see the city drastically simplify the zoning code. I realize that the areas zoned for single-family residential aren't going anywhere. But I think the city could roll Residential Multifamily (RM), the commercial zoning types (LNC, UNC, HC, and the little used NDO), and a lot of the land now zoned for light industrial (NDI and UI) into a new "mixed use" category. Make there be three different potential building heights, but have the areas open to just about any use other than heavy manufacturing. Then see what happens.

While that's the logical way to go about it, I don't know if the riverfront and Uptown zoning changes are great examples of fixing the problems with the code. Looking at the ZBA agenda and there are already variance requests on the riverfronts.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Wally G

Well said! We can only hope the new building looks okay with the older ones.

I wouldn't bet on anything new happening right away. Remember the original variance (which was defeated) called for a taller building and less parking than LNC zoning allowed for. Provided Pascal was really being a NIMBY, and wasn't trying to get a hold of one or more of the buildings in a deluded attempt to restore/flip himself, he would likely block a new construction plan which also required variances.

Thus, unless the plan to upzone the block to UNC ever goes forward, whatever is built is going to be no more than three stories/45 feet, and require one parking space per unit. I'm sure it's going to be modern in design as well.

[photoLith]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Fuck you very much, North Side NIMBYs.

I would very much like to punch every last NIMBY square in the jaw and then forcibly move them to the suburbs where they can complain all they want.

[photoLith]

Originally Posted by GeneW

From the appendix of the Kidney book:

So the answer is yes, it is a Hornbostel, although a minor work and changed quite a bit.

Edit: Should should be able to see the paragraph here in Google Books.

Whoa, awesome; so hopefully they can just restore that building to its former glory without getting another shit clad building to replace it. Theres a whole load of ugly 50's buildings and junk around there to tear down instead and replace. Guess I should research buildings before theyre torn down forever and replaced with trash to see if they were built by famous architects. Wonder if that building on Forbes, the old Croatian Hall building or whatever it was at 3441 Forbes that Pitt wants to tear down was built by any well known local architects....

[eschaton]

Looks like the city council is set to vote on an IPOD (Interim Planning Overlay District) for all of Lawrenceville on April 23rd. This overlay will mandate 10% affordable housing units in any residential project in Lawrenceville with greater than 20 units.

As I said in the past, the more I have read the inclusionary zoning proposal, the more flawed I think it is. First, it covers very little land, since it's only legal to build 20+ unit apartment buildings along Butler Street and in the formerly industrially-zoned areas along the riverfront. It does nothing to stop gentrification within the "rowhouse core" of the neighborhood, which I think was the real concern of neighborhood residents. Secondly, it simply adds the inclusionary zoning requirement without loosening zoning anywhere else. Although the market study done concluded that developers could still turn a profit with this level of affordable housing, I worry the reaction of developers will be to reduce the total number of units downward. Less overall units being developed more or less cancels out the benefit of inclusionary zoning, because the people who couldn't get market-rate units will instead gentrify people out of historic housing units.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Wonder if that building on Forbes, the old Croatian Hall building or whatever it was at 3441 Forbes that Pitt wants to tear down was built by any well known local architects....

It was built by an associate of Frederick Osterling, who among other things built the Union Trust building downtown. The two buildings share a similar Flemish Gothic facade.

[markson33]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Whoa, awesome; so hopefully they can just restore that building to its former glory without getting another shit clad building to replace it. Theres a whole load of ugly 50's buildings and junk around there to tear down instead and replace. Guess I should research buildings before theyre torn down forever and replaced with trash to see if they were built by famous architects. Wonder if that building on Forbes, the old Croatian Hall building or whatever it was at 3441 Forbes that Pitt wants to tear down was built by any well known local architects....

Meh, not every building has to be preserved. That building really doesn't have much historical significance.

Arguably the Croatian Hall building is a much better candidate for preservation.

[qwho]

City residents question proposed redevelopment of Shadyside Giant Eagle plaza

https://www.post-gazette.com/local/c...s/201903140082


Each one of those "City Residents" named is probably a local slumlord.