SS Planning Forum

The LTV Steering Committee issued a report at a meeting I attended.

The LTV Steering Committee had met twice since the Feb 9 Planning Forum Meeting. On Feb 17 the committee met with Dr. Mulu Birru, Exec. Director of URA to review the planning process being used for the LTV site and discuss current projects and challenges. Dr. Birru reaffirmed the URA's commitment to working on the South Side Planning Forum and the LTV Steering Committee and expressed his confidence in the process.

The committee met again on Feb 22 with representatives from UPMC and IBEW to review the status of their proposals.

UPMC Sports Medicine Complex

It appears that the peices are in place to insure that UPMC will be making payments to the URA at the same rate as commcercial property taxes for as long as the property is owned by them. Further, the URA is committed to adding a covenant to the deed of the property to insure that the future non-profit owners would be under the same arrangement. A letter to this effect has been received and was distributed at the last Forum meeting. The Steering Committee has indicated to the URA and UPMC that it would like to insure tht the final PILOT (payment in leu of taxes) documents reflect these considerations.

UPMC has indicated that it would be open to considering community access for structured uses of the site. That is, the fields could be made available to specific community programs, though a lease or reservation system. The proposed 4 outdoor football fields will be limited to use by the University of Pittsburgh Panthers and Pittsburgh Steelers football teams, however, there are possibilities for uses of the indoor field -- which is full size. UPMC will consider a request from the Forum or another designated community group to run a specific number of programs each year. A group and individual point person would need to be identified to handle this planning. As evidence of the above commitment, UPMC will bring a list of current community programs that use UPMC facilities.

In addition to above, the Steering Committee discussed options for a proposed investment to South Side recreational facilities by UPMC. Ideas will be discussed at the Forum meeting on February 23. The Steering Committee agreed to have a formal response to the offer ready prior to the April 8th URA board meeting, when the project will be presented for final approval.

Also, the URA agreeded to provide an analysis of the job projections for the UPMC use of the portion of the site versus the flex office space use outlined in the master plan.

With regard to the approval process, after the presentation to the Forum on teh 23rd, the URA board would like to vote on accepting a proposal from UPMC at a special board meeting, to be held as early as February 26. The SSLDC's Design Committee will review the project at their March meeting. The project will go before Council for a motion to sell the property in March. On April 8 the URA board would like to vote on the final projet and the financing.

IBEW Complex

The committe also met with the IBEW and their architects to review changes to the design as suggested by the LTV Steering Committee and SSLDC Design Committee. Although the group has elected not to move the parking from the frst level of the building, they have implemented several design enhancements to improve the appearance of the first floor of the building. These include changes to reduce the scale of the front elevation cornice and consideration fo the use of offset brick to break up the surface at street level. IBEW has also agreed to investigate using non-reflective glass on the building and would like to avoid using reflective glass. An East Carson Street entrance to the building has been added, with more development being don t the landscaping of this entrance. The curb cut into the site has been moved to be consistent with the contunuation of Sidney Street.

Other

The Life Sciences building plans and the Final Land Development Plan for sub-district B will be presented to the Forum on March 9.

The URA's Life-Science Building

The URA's Life-Science Building

Jerry Williams of the URA presented some of the facts at a public meetings.

Much of the speculation and delivery of the information below is not from the URA, but rather is opinion and fuel for in-depth discussions to come.

Ownership

The building is going to be owned by the URA. This building increases the URA's land-lord role to a higher level. The URA already owns many buildings around town such as 200 Ross Street. Some of these building built by and maintained by the URA are viable commercial buildings that should be sold into the free marketplace. The public money is being spent, and this expense needs to be justified.

Building Specifics

plans call for:
1. 45K square foot in size
2. costs $10.7M
3. 2 stories tall
4. next to the ugly UPMC-warehouse-distribution site by Stoffer (closer to SS Biz)
5. located near the Electrical Union building
6. corner of Sarah Street Extension and East Carson Street
7. has parking behind the building

Purpose of the Life-Science Building

1. biomedical incubator
2. ideal for professors who start a business while keeping their teaching jobs
3. building to be open around the clock with much work getting done in evenings due to nature of the inventors schedules
4. flex-office space
5. shared lobby and entry with rest-rooms in the center of the building.

Traffic

Some red flags come to mind when trying to visualize the building and a flow of traffic and visitors to and by this building.
• Most of the traffic is going to come from Oakland.
• Most of the traffic is going to use the new bridge.
• Parking is in the back of the building on a surface lot.
• the construction of a parking garage is expected in later phases
• Because Sarah Street Extension is not going to cross over the RR tracks, all traffic leaving the building is going to have to go to East Carson Street.
• A short cut road from the back of the Life-Science Building across the back of the lot of the IBEW property would allow for cars to avoid East Carson Street.
• The decisions to move all of the UPMC Sports Performance compound to the river-side of the RR Tracks, and to NOT build a costly bridge over the RR Tracks, hence splitting the land of the site, is costly to the fate of this building. All traffic into and out of this building might be forced to drive onto a bumper to bumper traffic on East Carson Street. Driving on East Carson Street, even for one-block, only to turn onto the new Gateway Blvd. is not good. That street has gridlock on a daily basis now, with zero development on the LTV site due to folks driving to and from Brentwood, Baldwin, the valley and to and beyond the Saw Mill Run areas.
• The lack of a bike way and foot traffic across the bridge is going to greatly hinder this building's success. People will not be able to walk across the bridge from Second Avenue. Nor will people be able to ride a bike from Oakland to this building.
• Connections within the site are important so traffic does not need to pour out onto East Carson Street and making gridlock all the way to Station Square.
• Connections from one side of the river to the other side of the river for walkers and bikers are important to the success of this building and the entire site. The construction of parking garages is costly and should not occur until after the bridge has been made to pass foot and bike traffic.

---

Other Points:

• Inventors of Sterioids, Andro, Ergo-genic aids, Supplements and masking agents can easily reach the football players for research studies and then in turn, the marketplace, with the drug warehouse, as both are neighbors.
• This is the third building to be done by IKM on this site. Another sign of in-breeding and a lack of diversity.
• This is NOT a grand landmark building, nor is is as ugly as the existing UPMC Drug Warehouse building either. The building has a long, low, warehouse feel none-the-less.

  "To combat that look, we sheared it in half and pulled half down in an offset, using a series of brick and glass facade pannels."

  Pannels, without doors, simulate storefront spaces.

• Some trees in part of the front.
• Smart set back from the street allows for later widening of East Carson Street.

Job Points:

• Expect 100 people to work there.
• Not new jobs, but more of incubator work expansion jobs.

---

What is the Real Deal?

The URA folks know who is going to occupy a good portion of this building, but the URA officials declined to comment on who that could be.

High Tech Business Incubators have been build and in operation in other parts of the US since the 1970s. In the early 1980s, Northwestern University had such a building, but it was not a brand-new building. Rather the space was a converted warehouse that was in a part of town behind the college that was able to be gutted and re-used as a high-tech space.

Rehab or Build New Buildings

Why not pick-up a few of the older buildings that are for sale and on the market for many years now in the South Side and convert those into high-tech spaces? The old police station has been sitting on 13th Street for more than a decade. The free market is not going to reclaim that building, and the URA should. The old Emerald Art Glass building is vacant on the South Side. Same too for the old Bingham building. These buildings could serve as flex office space for bio-medical outfits.

Then, when the company starts to take off, the company could build its own building in new space.

The overhead of new building space for a start-up company is suspect. Unless, of course, there is a hidden agenda. Perhaps a specific company or department at a university wants to have the URA build a building and only pay rent to them, dodging the capital and finances.

The URA has asked for a $25M TIF cap for finances on the LTV site. The URA can build a lot of buildings based upon this source of funding.

Comparison Speculation:

I'd love to see an alternative plan put forth where the URA acquires three, vacant buildings in the South Side and does a major rehab on those properties to be used for bio-tech incubator space. In the end, the cost would be much less than what is going to occur in these plans. Furthermore, the benefits would be much greater to the area as well.

Alternative Plans

Let's take the last steps for the development of the Life-Science building, get final approval, and then pause for 12 months. In the pause, let's uncover some alternatives with existing structures on the South Side. Then let's see how much it would cost to renovate those spaces and what issues are discovered. Then let's look to see what other type of developement would be possible for that section of the LTV site.

Perhaps a large community recreation center, like a YMCA or a Jewish Community Center, should be built by the URA on the site that is now slated for the Life-Sciences Building? It would not be possible to retro-fit an existing police station to a large gym space, with locker facilities and with ample parking.

Perhaps an expansion of the retail district is possible on the space? Then the building won't have to be made to look like retail space, but it could be retail space for small business.

Perhaps the demand for bio-tech incubator space is so great that both the rehab of the existing buildings could advance and then the Life-Science building could be built too?

---

Approval Process Ahead

The Life-Science Building seems to be another example of another project that is expected to get the approval of the LTV Steering Committee and the SS Planning Forum, (of course).

The South Side Forum and Steering Committee is fully justified in approving this project as the spirit of the preliminary plans of past years are being considered. The Life-Science Building has the hope of job creation. The ownership issue is suspect however. The traffic problems are highly suspect too.

City Council could insist that the Life-Science Building be built and opened with a "For Sale Sign" planted firmly in the middle of the front lawn of the building. Go so far as to put up the sign and note a clear asking price as well.

If the building is built and opened and then sold, all the better. Then the money can be turned into other endeavors.

To Pittsburgh Planning Commission

The Life-Science Building is going to be a topic of discussion at the Pittsburgh Planning Commission meeting in early April. The URA is going to submit Final Land Development Plans for subsection B. That includes the three IKM buildings.