Category Archive: Neighborhood Development
-
Murphy: City moving to tear down eyesores
By Tom Barnes,
Post-Gazette Staff Writer
Saturday, June 07, 2003Since last fall, the Murphy administration has reduced the number of vacant and condemned buildings in the city from 1,250 to about 800, but much still must be done to correct the problem of abandoned property, Mayor Tom Murphy said yesterday.
He said he hopes to either raze or rehabilitate the remaining 800 condemned structures over the next four years.
He spoke at a daylong Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation symposium on the problem the city faces from the years-long existence of empty, dilapidated properties and vacant lots.
Murphy said the city is using two main techniques to reduce the number of abandoned buildings, which can be in danger of collapsing, be used as hangouts by drug addicts or criminals and pose a visual blight on a neighborhood. He said the city is actively trying to demolish empty, dangerous structures while also working with neighborhood development groups to fix up those that are worth saving.
The city undertook an aggressive demolition program in Homewood last fall, razing 120 buildings at a cost of $700,000.
Landmarks President Arthur Ziegler urged that buildings be looked at for a second chance.
“We were concerned to learn of the city’s possible plan to demolish several thousand buildings,” he said. “We believe that in many cases, these buildings, although abandoned and often in poor condition, can still be community assets.”
To demolish some of these older buildings “is to lose architectural and economic assets,” Ziegler said.
By holding yesterday’s symposium, said Landmarks official Cathy McCollom, “We hope we can spur some discussion for a broader look at other solutions. Demolition should not be the only one.”
Yesterday’s conference was held at Soldiers & Sailors Memorial Hall in Oakland and attended by 250 community activists and housing officials. Speakers outlined some financial techniques, such as federal tax credits, that have been used here and in other cities to restore old, vacant structures.
Stanley Lowe, vice president of Landmarks and former director of the Pittsburgh Housing Authority, estimated that there were as many as 12,000 vacant buildings in the city, a far greater number than the 1,250 that the city Bureau of Building Inspections last year had officially condemned.
“For the last 15 years, we’ve always had at least 1,500 buildings on the condemned list,” Murphy said. “We would tear 200 or 300 down and another 200 or 300 would go onto the condemned list. A house or a block of houses that are vacant and abandoned in a neighborhood just drags the whole neighborhood down.”
He is trying to be aggressive in removing such hazardous urban blight. But contrary to criticism from some historic preservationists, Murphy also said he’s willing to consult with community groups and City Council members to find which structures in a neighborhood are historically important and worth saving for reuse.
(Tom Barnes can be reached at tbarnes@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1548.)
This article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. © Pittsburgh Post Gazette
-
South Fayette tries to balance growth with its rural roots
By Patrick Ponticell
Pittsburgh Post Gazette
Wednesday, April 23, 2003South Fayette wants to be extra careful as one of the few Allegheny County municipalities retaining a largely rural character to balance the pros and cons of economic growth.
It is pushing for industrial and commercial development via a tax-exemption strategy. But it also plans to contract with a historical preservation organization to ensure that a tract of farmland owned by the township doesn’t become just another large, cookie-cutter housing subdivision.
The prime property in question is the old Boys Home near Oakdale, and Commissioner Sue Caffrey is leading the preservation charge.
Although conservation-minded (she’s a member of the South Fayette Conservation Group and the Allegheny County Farmland Preservation Board), she is not slamming the door on the idea that part of the 214-acre tract could be devoted to residential development.
“I’m very open to a variety of uses for the property, from total preservation to partial development and partial preservation,” she said. “But under no circumstances do I want to see that property developed 100 percent.”
South Fayette will work with the Pittsburgh History and Landmarks Foundation to reconcile the competing forces of conservation and economic development. The township will have ultimate say in what happens to the property, with the foundation providing expertise to help township commissioners make informed decisions.
Most of the tract is leased by the township for farming, Caffrey said. Portions have been farmed at least since 1899, when it became an orphan asylum. Within a year, it became the Boys Industrial Home of Western Pennsylvania under the Rev. John McCleland serving troubled boys with discipline or crime-related problems.
By 1905, the Boys Home site encompassed almost 400 acres. Schooled on-site, the youths farmed the land and raised chicken and livestock. A gym was built at an undetermined time and has interesting architecture worth saving, foundation president Arthur Ziegler said. Although the gym needs major repair, Caffery said the foundation hopes to find a new use for the building.
The Boy’s Home was closed by the state Department of Welfare in 1972, and the property was acquired by the Wesley Institute in 1980. As far as Caffrey can verify, that organization sold the property to South Fayette in 1987 at a cost of $725,000 for 321 acres.
Between 1987 and the early 1990s, the township sold several parcels for residential housing and some land to adjoining homeowners.
“The question has always been, what are we going to do with the property?” Caffrey said. “Instead of making an impulsive decision, I thought it much better to take a more proactive approach and look at all the possible uses for the property before determining its best use.”
Caffrey sent letters last year to several regional and national preservation groups to gauge their willingness to help with site planning. The Pittsburgh History and Landmarks Foundation indicated interest. The foundation will cover half of the project cost, the township the other half.
“We’re just trying to help the community get a good conceptual plan,” Ziegler said. “It’s unusual for a community to have this kind of foresight and values.” He described the tract as “beautiful Western Pennsylvania countryside.”
The first order of business is to assemble an advisory committee with representatives from the township, South Fayette School District and the foundation. Ziegler said he hoped to have the committee formed within a month.
Patrick Ponticell is a freelance writer.
This article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. © Pittsburgh Post Gazette
-
Group Works to Save Only Surviving 18th Century Stone House in City of Pittsburgh
April 14, 2003
Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, in conjunction with the Hazelwood Initiative, Inc., Doug Shields from City Council District 5, and the Urban Redevelopment Authority, are working to preserve the Woods Home, an important historical site located in the Hazelwood section of the city.
The group is submitting an application for Save America’s Treasures to the National Parks Service which, in partnership with the National Endowment for the Arts, administers this grant program, the purpose of which is to preserve the nation’s cultural heritage. Grants for preservation and/or conservation work on nationally significant historic structures and sites are awarded through a competitive process in amounts of up to $1 million.
Doug Shields, former administrative assistant to Councilman Bob O’Connor and acting administrator for District 5, said, “We are grateful to Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation for funding a preliminary structural review of the Woods Home. It is an important community asset and we hope that the Save America’s Treasures funding will allow us to rehabilitate the structure.”
The Woods Home, built of cut stone, is one of only three surviving 18th century structures in Pittsburgh, the other two being the Fort Pitt Blockhouse at the Point and the Neill Log House in Schenley Park.
“The house is in pretty bad shape now,” said Arthur Ziegler, President of Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, “but the structural analysis undertaken by Landmarks Design Associates does show that it is still possible to restore the structure, and because of its significance as a rare survivor of late 18th century architecture this makes it worth while to continue to explore funding mechanisms to rehabilitate it.”
The site is already designated as an Historic Landmark by the City of Pittsburgh and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The Woods family, at one time wealthy and socially prominent, were the pioneer landowners in Hazelwood. The vast extent of the Woods holdings may be imagined when it is stated that the original area embraced all of the land between “Frankstown” at Second Avenue and Forward Avenue in Glenwood, extending from the river to Squirrel Hill. The first survey of Pittsburgh was made in 1784 by Colonel George Woods; the present Wood Street in downtown Pittsburgh honors him. George Woods, the Colonel’s son, was a prosperous lawyer who in 1792 built the estate he called “Hazel Hill.” Hazelwood, in fact, received its name from him.
While the Woods Home is important in terms of Pittsburgh’s history, the home has national significance as well. According to research conducted last year by Bob O’Connor, at the time Councilman for District 5, it was found that Stephen Foster, recognized as America’s first professional composer, spent a lot of time there in the mid-1800s. He apparently wrote or performed a number of his most famous songs at the Woods House. The Woods family piano is now housed at the Stephen Foster Memorial in Pittsburgh.
The deadline for the Save America’s Treasures grants is May 20th. The group is also exploring other funds and a sustainable use for the building.
-
Buffalo, New York Launches Preservation Planning
The Buffalo News recently reported that the Mayor of Buffalo, Mayor Anthony M. Masiello, has created a committee to devise a citywide plan for preservation that will launch with inventory of the city’s historic buildings and recommend a broader, more community-based approach to preservation. The committee also will work on a strategy for cultural tourism and for improved relations with real estate developers.
Mayor Masiello credits this new appreciation of preservation to a new program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation which launched last June with Buffalo city hall representatives, preservationists, architects and developers visiting with members of the preservation community in Pittsburgh. The exchange was hosted by Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation and underwritten by the National Trust.
-
Questions arise over use, management of Main Street TIF money
By Jim Hosek,
Tri-State Sports & News Service
for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette
Wednesday, March 26, 2003A $1.5 million county loan to jump-start so-called “Main Street” revitalization of the Homestead/Munhall/West Homestead business district could be in jeopardy.
At issue is who will manage an annual $100,000 allotment from The Waterfront’s multipurpose Tax Increment Financing program.
Allegheny County said it would give the three boroughs a $1.5 million advance toward a larger multimillion-dollar business district project. The $1.5 million, in the $100,000 annual allotments, would go for the Main Street corridor.
The county and the three boroughs had picked the Steel Valley Enterprise Zone Corp. to handle distribution of Main Street money.
But, besieged by some questioning of the plan, Munhall council last Wednesday withdrew its support from the corporation. Homestead council is considering doing the same thing on Monday. West Homestead council is not considering such action.
Allocation of $100,000 annually is clouded by how many streets are covered in the Main Street corridor.
In that regard, it’s not clear whether the money can be used for projects on 6th and 7th avenues in all three boroughs.
The 1998 Main Street agreement signed by county and borough officials refers to money going to the Main Street corridor, then later mentions only State Route 837, which is 8th Avenue.
Elisa Cavalier, general counsel of the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, said the $100,000 annual payments should not cover 6th and 7th avenues.
“The Main Street agreement says 8th Avenue only,” she said, adding that if there have been any decisions regarding the Main Street fund, they have not been made publicly under the state Sunshine Act. “This process should be democracy in action, and it’s not.”
Cavalier said a procedure for administering the annual $100,000 fund should be worked out and made public. She said other groups besides the enterprise zone corporation should be able to put together proposals for using the money; bid solicitations should go out, if necessary, for services; and audits should be done.
She also questioned the enterprise zone corporation’s proposal for coordination and administration of the fund: $18,000 for itself through Starrett & Associates; $8,500 to Mon Valley Initiative; and $8,500 for the Homestead-area Economic Revitalization Corp.’s Main Street manager.
Homestead council President Evan Baker said his council is having Solicitor Bernard Schneider look into administration of the Main Street fund. Maybe it should be handled by a government agency, Baker said.
He admitted the TIF meetings haven’t been advertised, but maintained the information is public. He said the Sunshine Law is a concern.
Baker said he had been under the impression the county’s $1.5 million loan using TIF money was approved, “but, now, I’m not so sure.”
But he defended the plan. He interpreted the Main Street corridor to mean 6th, 7th and 8th avenues. “Anything good that happens on 6th and 7th benefits 8th. And it’s our feeling that if we take that money up-front instead of just using $100,000 per year for small projects, the community will be better served; $100,000 doesn’t go very far.”
West Homestead council President Dan Isaacs said his council has no questions about the way anything is set up or interpreted.
Jim Thomas, the enterprise corporation president, said anyone could have come to his organization with proposals on how to use the money. He said he feared that if other organizations make proposals, with so many people having cross memberships on other local boards, it would cause disunity and delay any proposed projects.
He said his organization has been able to accomplish millions of dollars in improvements since it formed 10 years ago.
“We want to fix up the area that makes sense in relation to The Waterfront, and that includes 6th and 7th avenues, too,” he said.
Thomas and Baker defended TIF money going toward administrative fees.
Copyright ©1997-2003 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. © Pittsburgh Post Gazette
-
Landmarks Partners With Manchester Citizens Corporation in Neighborhood Transformation Initiative
On March 12, Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation (Landmarks) in partnership with the Manchester Citizens Corporation (MCC) presented the Manchester Neighborhood Transformation Initiative to the Historic Review Commission (HRC) at its monthly meeting. The report represents the culmination of several months work by MCC and Landmarks to access, inventory, and recommend action on 162 abandoned buildings and vacant parcels of land in Manchester.
The organizations began this work when the City appeared to be advocating demolition of many of these abandoned buildings. The neighborhood felt that a closer examination of each of the buildings was needed prior to demolition and the HRC urged the neighborhood to look at these buildings as part of a total plan rather than as individual units.
As a result of this report, MCC and Landmarks made the following recommendations:
1. Ninety-two buildings are recommended for restoration;
2. Thirty-four buildings are recommended for demolition;
3. Twenty vacant parcels are recommended for in-fill new construction;
4. Twelve abandoned buildings are recommended for demolition followed by in-fill new construction;
5. Four buildings should have façade and parcel restorations.The total cost for restoration and demolition is approximately at $24 million. It is estimated that 66% most come from private sources.
An initial review by the City was enthusiastically positive and the City has expressed the hope that other neighborhoods will model this approach.
Over the next several weeks, MCC with continuing assistance from Landmarks will hold neighborhood meetings to further involve the community as the program moves forward.
Next steps also include verifying cost estimates, further visits with city
officials and private funding sources to determine the level of funding
interest. -
City gets advice on developing waterfronts
By Patricia Lowry,
Post-Gazette Architecture Critic
Wednesday, February 12, 2003What makes a great waterfront?
Ann Breen should know. As co-founder and director of the nonprofit Waterfront Center in Washington, D.C., the city and regional planner has been visiting, studying and consulting on urban waterfronts for more than 25 years.
“Every waterfront should be unique and not remind you of someplace else,” Breen told a group of 160 people at a luncheon talk yesterday at the Renaissance Pittsburgh hotel. It is Pittsburgh’s challenge, she said, “to capture the asset and character that is unique to this place.”
As Pittsburgh inches toward implementation of its Three Rivers Park waterfront plan and makeover of Point State Park, the event provided food for thought for planners, architects, funders and interested others. The luncheon was part of Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation’s “Making Cities Work” series.
“You have this marvelous industrial heritage,” something to work with and embrace, Breen said, rather than erase.
“You have a lot of water here in Pittsburgh. We’ve gone to cities where they have barely a trickle and try to make something of it.”
During a slide tour of more than two dozen cities, from Prague, Czech Republic, to Portland, Ore., Breen stressed that the best waterfronts are those that incorporate a variety of uses and capture the spirit of a city.
“What I like about Prague is there are all these nooks and crannies where you can eat,” Breen said. “A floating barge with umbrellas and tables is instant fun.”
In Budapest, Hungary, where trolley tracks run along the river, barges can make the riverfront come alive, as in other cities with waterfront road and rail barriers.
Barges can hold not only restaurants, Breen showed, but also swimming pools and outdoor cinemas.
She praised parks built to withstand and accommodate the inevitable flooding, like Cincinnati’s riverfront park, with its walkway embossed with a geological timeline.
And she praised variety: “A riverfront is not uniform; it should have many, many different places, some green, some hard.” Still, “many cities want nothing but green on their waterfront. That’s for each city to decide.”
Good riverfronts also have “a lot of programming and a lot of public art,” and don’t skimp on the way-finding signs.
As for architecture, she said, “you can have great buildings, but do they address the waterfront?”
Breen lauded the Sydney Opera House, with its balconies and welcoming walkways, but criticized Frank Gehry’s Bilbao Guggenheim for its lack of integration with and views of the Nervion River.
In a smaller session after the luncheon, Breen said Pittsburgh “doesn’t need another big bell and whistle” with high visibility and impact.
She diagnosed the problem with Pittsburgh’s riverfronts in a single, simple sentence: “Your edges don’t sing.”
Patricia Lowry can be reached at plowry@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1590.
This article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. © Pittsburgh Post Gazette
-
Redevelopment in limbo for Homestead’s old business district
By Jim Hosek,
Tri-State Sports & News Service
Pittsburgh Post Gazette
Wednesday, November 20, 2002The Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County is prepared to move quickly on a $3 million redevelopment plan for what some refer to as the “forgotten Homestead,” the old business district. But the plan was dealt a severe blow.
After a unanimous council told county officials at a public hearing Thursday that it wanted to exclude eminent-domain takeover of viable businesses that pay taxes, the county’s Lee Mueller told council, “You can’t amend. You have to approve or deny as submitted.”
“We’d have to start the entire process over,” the county’s Mark Patrick said, adding that it took four years to get to this point.
Council, nonetheless, voted 9-0 to table the plan and send a letter to the authority listing the properties it doesn’t want threatened by eminent domain.
That action followed two hours of comments about the plan, which includes 39 properties — 18 structures including businesses and 21 vacant lots — to be taken over. Mueller said $1.7 million would be used for acquiring properties, $220,000 for the relocation of businesses and residents, $430,000 for demolition of buildings and $630,000 for site improvements.
Council President Evan Baker said he and the rest of council wanted to see an amended plan go through quickly. “We’re trying to create an environment to get people to come to this side of the [railroad] tracks. People habitually ignore that area when going to and from The Waterfront.”
Elisa Cavalier, general counsel of the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, called the plan “an egregious error.” She said the county should not be taking away viable businesses when “you have no idea what will go into this site.”
Jim Laux said he would lose two businesses and other property on and near Sixth Avenue.
“This is a slap in the face. This doesn’t make sense,” he said, adding that he has waited years for his area to improve. “I just don’t want to be the one to go. You’re throwing out people who have stayed with the borough in bad times.”
“Replace my business with what and when?” asked George DeBolt, president of DeBolt Unlimited Travel Services.
He said his family’s business has been in Homestead for more than 100 years. “Against the odds, we stayed. This is our home. It’s a good place to do business.”
Main Street manager Steve Paul said the executive board of the Homestead area Economic Revitalization Corp. agreed that council should amend the plan to take out eminent domain takeover. Also voicing that sentiment were borough planning commissioners Lloyd Cunningham and Donna Mima.
Business people Larry Levine, Kitty Lesko and David Lewis said they backed the plan, adding that they believed Laux and DeBolt could be accommodated.
“Those properties are not set in stone [for eminent domain takeover],” Patrick said. “I can assure you we will not act arbitrarily. … We’re not trying to take anyone out of business.”
He said county officials would talk with DeBolt and Laux about their properties, but he didn’t guarantee what the results might be. He said although the county would consult with council before using eminent domain on a particular property, the county wouldn’t need council’s approval, if council OK’d the plan as presented.
“I’m not voting on this until I know exactly which businesses will be taken. Take out the viable businesses and those who paid taxes,” Councilwoman Joan DeSimone said, and the rest of council agreed.
This article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. © Pittsburgh Post Gazette