Developers for Pittsburgh's Saks property identified by URA
Pittsburgh's Urban Redevelopment Authority is expected to vote on Thursday to start negotiations with a pair of developers who would transform the former Saks Fifth Avenue store, Downtown, into a parking garage with retail and residential space, an official said.
The development partners are Downtown-based McKnight Realty Partners and Millcraft Investments in Washington County, said Robert Rubinstein, URA's acting executive director.
Pittsburgh Parking Authority also would be involved in the talks, which could last up to 150 days if a 60-day extension is approved, Rubinstein said. If successful, construction could begin 12 to 18 months after talks end, he said.
“This agreement gives us all the flexibility to try to put what are some great conceptual ideas and flesh them out in terms of costs, structure of ownership and rules of ownership,” Rubinstein said.
Officials have discussed building a 400- to 600-space parking garage at the site, with retail space at ground level. Rubinstein said the proposed development also includes a 101-unit residential development above the retail and parking space.
It's unknown how many levels of parking would be located below ground and how many would be above.
Rubinstein said URA board member Bill Rudolph will not participate in the board's discussion of the proposed project or vote on it, because he is a principal in McKnight Realty Partners.
Tom Fontaine is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7847. or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.