Category Archive: Threatened Historic Resources
-
Future of historical buildings precarious
By Craig Smith
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Monday, December 24, 2007The stone house built two centuries ago by John Woods played host to the movers and shakers of its day but stands silent, its windows and doors boarded shut.
Composer Stephen Foster was a frequent visitor to the two-story home in Hazelwood, often entertaining the Woods family and their guests by playing guitar or piano.“They would be the local leaders of the day — judges, mayors, town leaders. The social register of that period,” said Deane Root, a University of Pittsburgh professor and director of the Center for American Music.
“They would read poetry or sing,” Root said. Foster loved to hear Woods’ daughters sing the songs of the day.
As Pittsburgh readies to celebrate its 250th anniversary in 2008, Root is thankful the vacant Woods house is standing because it is one of the oldest, tangible connections to the origins of the city.
“Why don’t we appreciate that? What’s wrong? Why do we always have to live life as if we were the first ones here?” Root said.The home, built in 1792, is among 589 sites in Southwestern Pennsylvania that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and one of three surviving 18th century structures in Pittsburgh.
Some of the buildings have been lovingly restored; others never will be. One building — the oldest structure designed by an architect in Pittsburgh — is for sale.
“Competition for restoration dollars is very keen,” said Arthur P. Ziegler Jr., president of the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, which did work to stabilize the Woods house in 2003 in conjunction with the Hazelwood Initiative.
Those looking to buy and renovate a historic structure won’t get any help from the state or federal government, said Bill Callahan, community preservation coordinator at the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission’s Bureau for Historic Preservation.
“There are no monies available for owner/occupied structures for preservation purposes,” he said. “I get phone calls every day about that. I wish I could give them a different answer.”
That leaves communities, local history groups or private citizens scrambling to preserve the buildings.
“We’ve got these gems in the community. It’s interesting what they could be,” said Jim Richter, director of the Hazelwood Initiative.
But the price of restoration is high.
The cost of a historical preservation of the Woods home has been estimated at $600,000. Just to make it liveable would cost $200,000, Richter said. A century-old Carnegie library down the street needs $900,000 in repairs.
Woods, the first surveyor of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, was a state senator in 1797 and elected to the 14th Congress in 1815. He died in 1817 at age 55.
The Young Preservationists Association of Pittsburgh in 2005 included the Woods home among its top 10 historical renovation opportunities.
“It’s a very important house. It needs a sponsor, a chief advocate,” said Dan Holland, who founded the association.
In Westmoreland County, Don and Cordelia Miller of Irwin bought Brush Hill, one of the first “mansion-style” homes constructed west of the Appalachians, 30 years ago and have been carefully restoring it since.
“You have to love it. I basically work on it full time,” Don Miller said about the home that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Brush Hill was built by Col. John Irwin, the town’s namesake, and was the largest of Irwin’s three plantations. Work on the Federal-style, two-story fieldstone home began in 1792, Miller said.
Materials used in its construction came from the area, he said.
“The stone was quarried here, the nails were handmade,” Miller said.
Living in a house this old isn’t for everyone, said Miller, a retired engineer. Homes of the era didn’t come with bathrooms so finding space to include such modern amenities must be included in the planning, he said.
There are other aspects peculiar to the times.
“Every window was a different size,” Cordelia Miller said.
The Millers have demolished a later addition to the house, renovated the kitchen and removed six inches of carpet, concrete and other flooring to reach the original wood floors. Future projects include replacing a slate roof that was added in the 1800s.
—Rich heritage
Southwestern Pennsylvania’s rich heritage is reflected in the number of sites registered as national historic places.Allegheny County — 207
Armstrong County — 18
Beaver County — 20
Butler County — 10
Fayette County — 72
Greene County — 46
Indiana County — 27
Somerset County — 32
Washington County — 104
Westmoreland County — 53
Source: The Pennsylvania History and Museum Commission
Testaments to the past
The region’s oldest buildings include:
• The Fort Pitt Blockhouse, built in 1764. It’s Pittsburgh’s earliest building and the oldest authenticated structure west of the Allegheny Mountains. The five-sided, two-story building constructed by Col. Henry Bouquet is in Point State Park and administered by the Daughters of the American Revolution.
• The Neill Log House was built about 1787 in Schenley Park. The Neills, who owned 262 acres in the northern section of the park, moved in 1795 to what is now Market Square. After their deaths, the log house and property were handed down to different people before being sold to Col. James O’Hara and his granddaughter Mary Schenley, who gave the property to the city in 1889. The Neill house received a City of Pittsburgh historic designation on Feb. 22, 1977.
• The Burke Building, 209 Fourth St., is the oldest building in Pittsburgh designed by an architect. The Greek revival-style, 3-story structure was built in 1836. The building was designed by William Chislett for Robert and Andrew Burke, attorneys active in land development in Pittsburgh. It has been the home of the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy for 10 years. The sale of the building is under negotiation.
• Nemacolin Castle was built in Brownsville by stages between 1789 and 1900 by several generations of the Jacob Bowman family. The 22-room castle features a three-story octagonal tower and a squared third-story tower room. Jacob Bowman operated a trading post at the site and was named commissary to government troops during the Whiskey Rebellion. In 1795, he was commissioned justice of the peace and was named Brownsville’s first postmaster by President Washington. The castle, owned by the county and maintained by the Brownsville Historical Society, is a museum.
• The David Bradford House was built in Washington in 1788. Bradford was one of the leading lawyers and politicians of the area, serving as deputy attorney general for Washington County and as a delegate to the Whiskey Rebellion conferences in 1791 and 1792. The home is owned by the state and is a museum.
Craig Smith can be reached at csmith@tribweb.com or 412-380-5646.
-
North Side library debate at historic dimension
By Bill Zlatos
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Wednesday, December 19, 2007Supporters of a new Carnegie library on Federal Street say the city can develop the North Side and still preserve a 117-year-old branch that has been closed for 20 months.
Annette Green, 66, of the North Side told City Council on Tuesday evening that redevelopment does not have to wipe out historic preservation.
“The two can live together in peace,” she said at a public hearing on the proposed relocation of the library.
The Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh wants to move its Allegheny Regional branch from 5 Allegheny Square to 1210 Federal St. City Council is considering a resolution authorizing the transfer of the Federal Street property from the Urban Redevelopment Authority to the Carnegie Library.
The Allegheny Square site has been closed since April 7, 2006, when lightning struck the clock tower, causing a piece of granite weighing several hundred pounds to fall into the second-floor lecture hall. A 1-ton chunk of rock destroyed the building’s heating and cooling system.
The lightning caused more than $2 million in damage. Insurance covered most of the cost.
The damage has been repaired, but library officials want the building, which opened in 1890, to stay closed and construct the new branch. The Federal Street site is near the old Garden Theatre, a former X-rated movie house that is being restored as part of a North Side development project
“We believe in the importance of historic preservation,” said North Side resident David McMunn. “We also believe in redevelopment and appreciate a more accessible and updated library.”
Carnegie Library spokeswoman Suzanne Thinnes said the new library would have 15,000 square feet of space, compared to 12,000 feet in the Allegheny Square building. She said it would provide access for the handicapped and parents with strollers, have wireless Internet access, a teen section and more children’s programming.
The new building would house historic collections such as directories, meeting minutes and newspaper clippings of the former Allegheny City, a community that was annexed by Pittsburgh in 1907.
But opponents of the move complained that Carnegie Library had decided on relocating before getting public input or considering alternatives.
“I urge you to rethink your abandonment of this building,” said Mary Barbush, 54, of Allegheny West.
Another North Side resident, David Tessitor, expressed concern about the fate of the building. It was named a historic landmark by the Pittsburgh History and Landmarks Foundation in 1970 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974.
“The No. 1 asset that the North Side has, besides the people who live here, is its historic character,” Tessitor said.
Carnegie Library hopes to break ground for the building in the spring and open it in 2009.
Bill Zlatos can be reached at bzlatos@tribweb.com or 412-320-7828.
-
Library’s plan to build anew on North Side meets strong opposition
Monday, December 17, 2007
By Diana Nelson Jones,
Pittsburgh Post-GazetteWhen Carnegie Library officials decided last year not to reopen the Allegheny Regional branch — the second Carnegie Library in the country and one that had been damaged in April 2006 by lightning — traditionalists and preservationists were livid.
After heated public meetings, most North Siders accepted plans for new construction at the site at Federal and Parkhurst streets, even some persnickety advocates of preservation.
The hoped-for groundbreaking this fall is now set back to spring, but there could be another delay.
Two weeks ago, in the wake of City Council’s draft of a resolution to approve transfer of land for the new library, it received a petition for a public hearing, from people who want to reopen the old branch. The hearing will be tomorrow at 5 p.m. in the New Hazlett Theater in Allegheny Center. (To speak before council, register in advance by calling the city clerk’s office at 412-255-2138.)
The library’s administration has been unequivocal about the need to leave the current location, but one petitioner, Glenn Walsh of Mt. Lebanon, wrote in an e-mail, “Carnegie Library is not a private club that can do as they please. Carnegie Library is a public trust, funded by the taxpayers! They operate out of buildings owned by the taxpayers. This is all intentional, the specific will of Andrew Carnegie.”
Of 58 petitioners, 16 live outside the North Side but in Allegheny County. Two live near Harrisburg.
Most are residents of Allegheny West, whose civic council in November 2006 opposed the relocation in its minutes, said Gloria Rayman, the civic council president.
“We also support opening Federal and East Ohio streets [cutting through a traffic circle] to make the existing library building more viable,” she said.
The site of the new construction at 1210 Federal St. in the Central North Side, was approved unanimously by that neighborhood council in September 2006, said Claudia Keyes, president of the board.
The Manchester Citizens Corp. and East Allegheny Community Council have not taken positions.
Of 19 library branches to be updated, six have been completed, either by renovation or new building, said library spokeswoman Suzanne Thinnes. The Allegheny branch jumped to the front in priority after the lightning hit. While subsequent repairs cost $2 million, library officials had already determined that the cost of adapting the building for energy efficiency, accessibility and technological upgrades could not be justified against the needs of the other branches. There has been no service at the library for the past 18 months.
The proposed new building would be 15,000 square feet and include a children’s room and program space, a separate area for teens, a meeting room and a room for Allegheny City history materials.
Tomorrow’s hearing prompted a rash of chat on North Side Web sites, most in favor of the move.
The branch in Allegheny Center, with its Richardsonian Romanesque style, is protected from demolition by historic status.
Denise Mahone, a young mother on the Central North Side, credits the Carnegie’s decision to build on a stretch that, for years, has not been child friendly or socially well integrated.
She said the Federal Street location was “site specific in the best sense of the term.”
“Preservation and new spaces are not mutually exclusive,” she said. “In this neighborhood, the emphasis will always be to marry the historic with places that reflect the present.”
David Shlapak, a Central North Sider, said the fight against a new library “is a classic case of people knowing how to spend other people’s money.”
“We can continue to fight until we get a perfect solution no one can pay for, or we can say, ‘This is a positive step, let’s go forward.’
“The Federal-North corridor is the heart of the North Side, and revitalizing that area should be a high priority,” he said.
Petitioners, however, say the best way to preserve Carnegie Library buildings is to use them as libraries.
David Tessitor, an Allegheny West resident who spearheaded the petition drive with Mr. Walsh, said the new construction “is a way to support under-performing real estate speculation projects” at Federal-North while the best chance for success on Federal is to build north from Allegheny Center by first unblocking its arteries.
“There’s a strong sense among neighborhood residents of seeing Ohio Street opened through and Federal reconnected” by getting rid of Allegheny Center’s traffic circle,” Mr. Tessitor said.
“With the library gone, there’s less impetus for that to happen. When we build new, we undermine the history that’s there.”
Diana Nelson Jones can be reached at djones@post-gazette.com or412-263-1626.
First published on December 17, 2007 at 12:00 am -
Farmers like option to ‘save’ agriculture
By Michael Aubele
VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH
Sunday, December 2, 2007Butler County farmer Ed Thiele said he has no regrets about enlisting in the state’s Farmland Preservation program.
“I’ve had a lot of people tell me I was foolish for doing it,” he said. “But I did it to preserve the ground. We have to do something to preserve our farmland. We’re losing too much of it.”
The state paid Thiele $363,432 in 1996 for development rights on his dairy farm in Jefferson and Winfield townships. The easement guarantees the farm remains designated for agricultural use.
Thiele likely could’ve earned much more by selling his farm, or a portion, to a developer. But he said he has plans to keep the farm working and pass it on to his children.
The goal of the program is to conserve valuable farmland that can’t be reclaimed once it’s developed, That’s because the soil won’t be suitable for agriculture after it’s been so seriously disturbed.
Thiele and a few other Butler County farmers said the state’s program has been successful in reaching that goal. “There are always people stopping by, asking if I’ll sell them a portion to build a house or a church,” he said. “I tell them right off the bat that there’s a deed restriction on it.
“It’s a pretty big decision if you’re going to do it. If you’re going to do it, you’d better make sure it’s the right thing,” Thiele added. “If your goal is to make money, don’t get into the program. If it’s to preserve the land, then do it.”
Thiele said that once a farmer decides to sell development rights to the state, there’s no turning back.
“It’s not something you can get into and then get back out of again,” he said. “I’ve heard of cases where people tried to get out by paying back the money plus interest but couldn’t.”
According to the state Department of Agriculture, there are more than 100 farms in Allegheny, Armstrong, Butler and Westmoreland counties that are protected by the state’s program. About a dozen of those farms are in the Alle-Kiski Valley — the bulk of them in Butler County.
Agriculture department officials said more than 370,000 acres are preserved in the state, representing about 5 percent of the state’s farmland.
“Pennsylvania leads the nation in farmland preservation,” said Doug Wolfgang, director for the agriculture department’s Bureau of Farmland Preservation.
Wolfgang said it is unknown how many of the state’s farms would qualify for the program. The USDA, he said, has classified 7.65 million acres in Pennsylvania as farmland.
According to the American Farmland Trust, about 150,000 acres in the state have been developed over the last 10 years.
“Pennsylvania is blessed with a lot of good soil that’s better used in the long run keeping it farmland,” said Jim Baird, American Farmland Trust official. “There is other suitable land available to put buildings on to deal with growth.”
Ed Goldscheitter, who farms in Buffalo and Clinton townships, agreed and said that’s why he decided to protect his land through the state’s program.
“For 40 years I’ve been concerned about losing farmland to development and urban sprawl,” he said.
Goldscheitter has two parcels in the state’s program. He said he intends to pass the property down to family.
“We’re stewards of the land,” he said. “You just can’t keep putting up housing plans on it and continuing to destroy it. It’s not something we can let disappear because we don’t understand the value of it.
Goldscheitter said that when he decided to enter his second parcel into the program, he was one of the farmers forced to wait for funding to become available.
But he declined to say he felt any disappointment at having to wait. He said that’s the nature of the program.
“It is more difficult to get in now,” he said. “You make the assumption that farmers want to keep their land in the family and continue farming.”
Goldscheitter said he doubts farmers seek out the program to make money.
Fellow Butler County farmer Harold Foertsch estimated that he could earn three times as much money by selling his land to a developer than by selling development rights to the state.
Still, Foertsch said that didn’t dissuade him from applying this year for the program.
Foertsch farms corn, beans, wheat and potatoes and raises cattle. He said he’s seeking to have 100 acres protected and has been told his farm was accepted although he hasn’t been paid yet.
Like Thiele and Goldscheitter, Foertsch said his concern is watching good farmland turn into developed property that can’t be returned to agricultural use.
Farming for Foertsch is a family affair and he said he plans to keep it that way.
“It’s a way of life,” he said.
Michael Aubele can be reached at maubele@tribweb.com or 724-226-4673.
-
Private, public groups encourage farm protections
By Bob Stiles
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, December 2, 2007Levi Miller’s straw hat and long, white beard moved from side to side as he shook his head at the notion of the Amish accepting government money to preserve farmland.
“I don’t think any of our people would go for that,” said Miller, 80, of Smicksburg, Indiana County, who has farmed for more than 50 years. “They don’t take pay for something they don’t do.”Amish farmers in the counties of Indiana, Somerset or Lawrence — areas with large Amish settlements — don’t participate in farmland preservation programs, according to preservation officials in those communities. But in Eastern Pennsylvania, Amish in fast-growing counties such as Lancaster and Chester have come to realize that preservation programs may be the best way to preserve farmland.
“I think part of it is, in southeastern Pennsylvania, it’s right in your face,” said Matt Knepper, director of Lancaster County’s farmland preservation program. “The conversion of farmland to other uses, we see it every day.”
With the preservation program, a farmer sells the right to develop the property, and receives a set amount of money per acre in exchange for keeping the land in agriculture. The amount varies from county to county, based on real estate values and the money available, agriculture officials said.
There has been less of a push with the farm preservation program in southwestern Pennsylvania than in eastern counties, where development is more rapid. The Amish in Western Pennsylvania also tend to be more conservative than those in the southeast, Kraybill said.“They won’t accept any money from the government,” said Susan Moon, assistant manager of Somerset County’s conservation district.
Pennsylvania’s Amish population of about 48,600 ranks second to Ohio’s nearly 55,000 Amish residents, according to the Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies at Elizabethtown College in Lancaster County. Amish settlements in Lancaster County, Indiana County and the New Wilmington region of Lawrence County are among the largest in the country, according to the college’s Web site.
Pennsylvania ranks No. 1 in the nation in farmland preservation, according to the American Farmland Trust. About $536 million has been spent through the state’s conservation easement program, preserving 344,465 acres and nearly 3,050 farms.
Knepper said time, more liberal thinking among some Amish religious leaders and a better understanding of the purpose of the money were factors in getting the Amish involved.
Betty Reefer, of Westmoreland County’s agriculture preservation program, said that’s helped encourage Amish participation.
“In the beginning in Lancaster County, it was very tough getting them involved in farmland preservation because it involved the government, but they were able to convince them it fit into their lifestyle, and it caught on,” she said.
Of the 694 farms preserved through the Lancaster County program, about 25 involve Amish farmers, Knepper said. Most of those became involved in the program within the last three years, he said.
Karen Martynick, executive director of the nonprofit Lancaster County Farmland Trust, said about 60 percent of the 273 farms preserved through the trust, or approximately 165 farms, involve the Amish.
She said her group’s use of private money appealed to more Amish than the government-funded preservation program, even though the Trust is paying about $800 per acre compared to the $3,000 to $4,000 per acre typically paid through the state-county preservation program.
“They see changes on the horizon, and they see more and more young people going off the farms,” Martynick said. “They want to see it stay in agriculture.”
The trust began accepting government funding in 2005. Martynick said that money isn’t used to preserve Amish properties if the Amish object.
Henry Beiler, an Amish farmer in Lancaster County who participates in the preservation program, said many Amish farmers didn’t understand how they could receive money for something they couldn’t see.
Donald Kraybill, professor of sociology at Elizabethtown College and a noted Amish scholar, said the Amish reluctance to participate with the government stems from an age-old conviction.
“In general, they’ve always drawn a line between the church and the state,” he said.
They don’t take out insurance policies, Kraybill added, because “they feel the church should take care of its members and its people.”
About 20 Amish farms are included in the more than 200 farms preserved through Chester County’s open space and farmland-preservation programs, said Bill Gladden, director of the county’s open space program.
He said efforts of public and private groups have met with the Amish and that has made a big difference.
A farmland-preservation arm of the private Brandywine Conservancy was formed a few months ago, and Patrick Fasano of the conservancy said two Amish farms have been preserved so far through the conservancy’s efforts.
Bob Stiles can be reached at bstiles@tribweb.com or 724-836-6622.
-
District presses to close Schenley
By Bill Zlatos
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, November 20, 2007Sixty-eight percent of the materials tested at Schenley High School contained asbestos, according to a report released Monday by city schools Superintendent Mark Roosevelt.
AGX Inc., Wexford-based environmental consultants, collected 406 samples from the plaster, ceiling, tiles, carpet and other areas of the Oakland school and found that 277 contained asbestos.The firm collected the samples five years ago, but the Pittsburgh Public Schools released the data for the first time to quell concerns that the district was overreacting to the asbestos problem.
“This is the only building I know (in the district) where every ceiling, every wall on every floor has asbestos in it,” said Richard Fellers, the district’s chief operating officer, during a tour of the building with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.
The danger of the asbestos and falling plaster, coupled with the cost of renovating the school, has prompted Roosevelt to recommend for a second time that the school board close Schenley after this school year.
During the past four years, estimates for the cost of abating the asbestos and renovating the building’s mechanical systems have ranged from $42.4 million to $86.9 million. Roosevelt has touted $64.4 million as the best estimate.“You’re talking about a basic gut job where every system needs to be replaced,” Roosevelt said at a news conference yesterday.
Fellers and a team of architects and other professionals noted some of the 10,000 patches made to repair falling plaster last summer. Asbestos was used in the 91-year-old building for binding plaster, insulation and as a fire retardant.
Patches, bubbles or sites of fallen plaster sealed with bridging compound could be seen in some hallways. In some stairwells, hallways or classrooms, fallen plaster had caused holes or exposed the brick behind a radiator.
Roosevelt assured that the school is safe. He said the district monitors the plaster three times a week and the air quality once a week.
“Every decision I make is based on the question: ‘Would this be right for my child?’ ” Roosevelt said.
He has suggested that Schenley’s ninth-, 10th- and 11th-graders go to the former Reizenstein school in East Liberty and graduate with a Schenley diploma.
Schenley’s asbestos problem is compounded by a lack of ventilation that causes the plaster to bubble and fall. Because of the school’s historic status, Fellers said, the district was required to choose a type of window that preserved the building’s architectural character but accelerated its deterioration through insufficient ventilation.
The proposal to close Schenley has stirred student and parent protests. Schenley advocates went to Allegheny Common Pleas Court last week in an unsuccessful attempt to block the school board from hiring an architect and construction manager for the renovation of Reizenstein.
The uncertainty over the school’s fate has caused a family feud.
Vidya Patil, the district’s acting director of facilities, is in charge of maintaining the building and keeping it safe. His daughter, Oona, 16, is a junior at Schenley and unhappy with the proposal to close it.
“I’m very concerned about the deteriorating condition in the building — particularly the asbestos,” Patil said. “The amount of monitoring and dollars it takes to keep it safe is almost unbearable.”
Bill Zlatos can be reached at bzlatos@tribweb.com or 412-320-7828.
-
ARC building avoids wrecking ball
By Craig Smith
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, November 4, 2007Two community groups have saved a North Side building from the wrecking ball by asking a city commission to decide if the structure qualifies as historically significant.
The Historic Review Commission of Pittsburgh will hold a hearing Wednesday on whether the former Alcohol Recovery Center House at 800 East Ohio St. should be protected as a historical structure.
“We’re interested in saving the building,” said Mike Coleman, president of the Allegheny City Society, which made the request along with the East Allegheny Community Council.
The request puts plans to raze the structure on hold — at least temporarily. Members of the community groups acknowledge this is a last-ditch effort.
“Right now, we’re reacting. We had to. Once the (demolition) permit is issued, it’s gone,” Coleman said.
Developer Lou Lamana’s company, Bentley Commercial Inc., bought the building for $266,000 earlier this month at a sheriff’s sale. The company planned to demolish it to make way for a $5 million retail development.
Lamana has constructed stores at Pittsburgh Mills mall in Frazer and Center Pointe and Stone Quarry Commons, in Center in Beaver County. He did not return calls seeking comment. He had hoped to begin demolition within four to six months.
To be designated historically significant by the commission, the building must meet at least one of 10 criteria, such as being the site of a historic event or connected with someone who had an impact on the city, state or U.S. history, said Katherine Molnar, historic preservation planner for the city.
The ARC building was built in 1901 to house the Workingman’s Savings Bank & Trust Co., according to the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation. Mellon Bank operated a branch office there until selling the building to the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh, according to documents at Carnegie Library.
The diocese sold the brick building to Charles Cain for $1 in 1987. Cain operated the alcohol recovery program that at one point housed more than 100 inmates on work release. In its heyday, the ARC House held about 150 prisoners assigned there by county judges.
The application for the historical designation — filed nine days after the sheriff’s sale — states that a 1920 addition to the building was worked on by an engineer and architect from the office of D.H. Burnham. An architect and urban planner, Burnham designed the Frick and Oliver buildings in Pittsburgh, the Flatiron Building in New York and Union Station in Washington, D.C.
The process to determine if the building is historically significant could take up to eight months. If the historic commission approves the structure as historically significant, approval also would be needed from the city Planning Commission and City Council, Molnar said.
During that time, no demolition work can occur, she said.
Craig Smith can be reached at csmith@tribweb.com or 412-380-5646.
-
Union Trust Building excites latest suitor
By Ron DaParma
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, November 2, 2007An investment group led by executives of the Mika Realty Group in Los Angeles said Thursday it hopes to complete the purchase of the historic Union Trust Building, Downtown, by the end of the month.
The group, which includes Michael Kamen, founder of the privately held company, and a business associate, Gerson Fox, also of Los Angeles, said it has plans to restore the grandeur of the block-long structure at 501 Grant St. that experts say is one of Pittsburgh’s most architecturally significant buildings.
The purchase price has not been disclosed, but the building is assessed at $30.75 million, according to Allegheny County records.
“We look at the Union Trust Building as a classic building that can’t be duplicated,” said Rick Barreca, CEO of Mika Realty, also one of the investors.
Plans are to continue using the 11-story, 800,000-square-foot structure as an office building and attract a mix of upscale retail tenants to the first level, he said.
“We think that is the highest and best use for it,” Barreca said. “We’re looking forward to bringing in some exciting retail to the first level, and leasing the office space to some very good tenants.”
The Union Trust Building, which has been known as Two Mellon Bank Center, has been nearly empty since Mellon Financial Corp. — now Bank of New York Mellon Corp. — moved its personnel out of the structure in May 2006. A small number of mostly retail tenants remain on the first level, the largest being Lorrimer’s clothing store.
“Several major office tenants and retail tenants already have expressed interest in the building,” said Jeffrey Ackerman, commercial real estate broker with CB Richard Ellis/Pittsburgh, the firm commissioned to sell the building by the owner, Teal Rock 501 Grant Street LP, a partnership owned by Philadelphia-based Cigna Corp.
CB Richard Ellis will handle leasing and management of the building once the sale is completed, Ackerman said.
The investment group is working with two architectural firms on ideas for the building that would not disturb its historic character, Barreca said.
Mika’s Internet site said it is the 13th-largest developer in the Los Angeles area, with some 5.9 million square feet in commercial real estate developed.
Barreca said Kamen has been involved in the commercial real estate business for more than 40 years and has specialized on “adaptive reuse” of older buildings, including conversion of office facilities to loft apartments.
One of Mika’s projects was the Star News Building, an 80,000-square-foot building in Pasadena, Calif., that was renovated as a $20 million residential building. The project included installation of a 24-hour fitness club and other amenities in a 30,000-square-foot basement that used to house newspaper printing presses.
A current project is Victory Lofts, where the company is developing 102 residential units in a Cleveland building in the vicinity of the Cleveland Clinic, Barreca said.
“We are really enthused that it appears a very promising buyer is very interested in the building,” said Arthur P. Ziegler, president of Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation. He met Barreca recently when he was visiting the city.
“This is a developer who appears to have considerable experience with historic buildings and is particularly attracted to the Union Trust Building because of his positive feelings about the future of the Pittsburgh market and the extraordinary architectural quality of the building,” Ziegler said. “I think he is going to treat it very well.”
Barreca said the group is finalizing financing for the purchase with a bank, rather than go to the capital markets or Wall Street sources. Thus, he said, there should not be a problem with financing because of the mortgage crisis, which has played havoc with the national residential real estate market and impacted some commercial deals.
Securing financing was said to be a problem with the previous potential buyer, a New York investment group that included Houlihan-Parnes/iCap Realty Advisors of White Plains and J.J. Operating Corp. of New York City.
Ron DaParma can be reached at rdaparma@tribweb.com or 412-320-7907.