Arena Preservationists: Give it up it's coming down! (Pittsburgh, Oakland: hotel, neighborhood)

[jtpgh]

Originally Posted by greg42

Are you guys all for it coming down if the only thing there for the next 5-10 years or longer is a parking lot (or empty lot), plus the street grid reconnected? That's what I foresee happening. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

Also a YES vote for me ...

[BrianTH]

In order for the development process to get going, a master plan for the area including the fate of the Arena needs to be put in place first. I suppose you could hold off actually demo'ing it for a little longer, but that is some of the first land that is likely to be developed so you aren't talking for long anyway.

By the way, I've been following the process pretty closely, including reading the minutes from the meetings they have been holding. I'm not aware of any substantial number of people fitting the description above (people trying to keep the Arena in place to block development of the Lower Hill). Instead, the pro-Arena people tend to be non-Hill people who think the building is worth saving (for historic, environmental, or so on, reasons). That's not to say there is no concern among people on the Hill about gentrification, but for various reasons they are not pro-Arena anyway.

[raubre]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

In order to restore the original street grid, the old arena must go.

Thank you. I keep wondering what the purpose of saving the arena was if the Hill leaders want to reconnect the Hill to downtown.

[nuwaver88]

Originally Posted by greg42

I'm okay with it going as long as something useful and worthwhile is put up in its place SOON. Are you guys all for it coming down if the only thing there for the next 5-10 years or longer is a parking lot (or empty lot), plus the street grid reconnected? That's what I foresee happening. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

There is an incentive to build the site. This was put into place to prevent what happened development wise around Three Rivers Stadium over a thirty year period. That would be zilch, despite renderings from the late 1960s showing hotels, offices etc. Why did this happen? Was it the city's poor image of the Smoky City still fresh in outside investors mind's? Was it crooked politicians and/or Alco parking lot owners who had these politicians on the take. I find it hard to believe that they could be given so much valuable urban property and not develop a single thing over thirty years.
Anyway, for those not informed. The Pittsburgh Penguins, who have been given exclusive development rights to the twenty-eight acres of the Mellon Arena property, have to develop a minimum of 2.8 acres per year after Mellon Arena is razed. 2.8 X 10 equals 28. In other words, the entire site has to be fully developed within ten years after tearing the building down. If 2.8 acres or more is not developed, the Penguins face stifff fines.

[nuwaver88]

Some of them, I'm told, want to keep the Hill the way it is,

What's would that be? A predominantly squalid neighborhood? Ok, let's cave in to their needs, even though they often, not always, are unrealistic.

[supersoulty]

Personally, I have no emotional attachment to it. It's a hideous building, that is not worth saving, in my mind. It's far better to fill the space back in with development and reconnect the Hill District with Downtown.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by supersoulty

personally, i have no emotional attachment to it. It's a hideous building, that is not worth saving, in my mind. It's far better to fill the space back in with development and reconnect the hill district with downtown.

Butt it was bilt with Picksbrugh still!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[Aqua Teen Carl]

Let's be honest, it'll be yet another haven of corporate shops/hotels that seem to pop up here every single time there's an empty space.

[hempfield mania]

Originally Posted by Aqua Teen Carl

Let's be honest, it'll be yet another haven of corporate shops/hotels that seem to pop up here every single time there's an empty space.

And your point is?

[BrianTH]

The plan is for a mix of offices, residential, and retail (with an entertainment focus). I hope the retail isn't all "corporate", but I don't mind if some of it is.

Incidentally, I do understand why people are skeptical after the North Shore fiasco. But at the same time, I don't think that is reason enough to just give up on redevelopment in Pittsburgh. Instead, it is reason to make sure we are forcing people with development rights to use them.

Moreover, I do think it is worth noting the context is very different today. Since around 2000 or so, Downtown as a residential neighborhood has started to take off. Meanwhile, today Pittsburgh has among the lowest apartment vacancy rates in the country, Downtown has among the lowest office vacancy rates in the country for a central business district, and the vacancy rate in Oakland is effectively zero. So I think there is clearly a need for a development like this, and thus it shouldn't be an act of charity--people should be making money.