Planning Commission OKs historic status for Produce Terminal in Strip District
By Tom Fontaine
Published: Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2013, 5:03 p.m.
Pittsburgh Planning Commission members chastised a preservation group on Tuesday for waiting until May to seek historic designation for the Produce Terminal in the Strip District.
Then commissioners gave the preservationists what they wanted, voting 7-1 to recommend the designation to City Council in a move that puts a proposed $400 million development on hold.
“It is so bothersome to me that (preservationists) come in and back-door the developer. It's unfair,” said commission Chairwoman Wrenna Watson, who cast the dissenting vote.
Preservation Pittsburgh, a nonprofit, and Lawrenceville architect Sarah Kroloff filed paperwork to nominate the Produce Terminal for historic status.
Watson said they used the nomination as “a political tool” to halt a development project that has been discussed publicly for more than three years.
Preservation Pittsburgh President Peter Margittai said residents expressed concern about preserving the building at public meetings dating to at least December 2011.
Margittai described the historic nomination as the “nuclear option,” a last resort used when it became apparent that a portion of the building might be torn down.
The Strip District-based Buncher Co. has a $1.8 million option on the quarter-mile-long building. The company wants to demolish a third of the building so it can extend 17th Street from Smallman Street to the edge of the Allegheny River, where it plans housing, office and retail development between 11th and 21st streets. Preservation Pittsburgh and Kroloff nominated the building for historic status after Buncher applied for a demolition permit.
“We're obviously disappointed that the Planning Commission took the position that it did, but it is what it is,” said Buncher President and CEO Tom Balestrieri.
City Council has to vote on whether to grant historic status by the end of February, officials said.
“Until then, the project is on hold,” Balestrieri said.
Several commissioners who voted in favor of the designation took exception to the nomination.
“What happened to Buncher is totally unfair, and I think they've done an excellent job of designing this project, but that's not the issue before us today,” said Commissioner Kirk Burkley, noting the vote should be based on whether the Produce Terminal meets any of 10 criteria used to define historic buildings.
“It meets the criteria. To not uphold the law would be unfair,” Burkley said.
Tom Fontaine is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7847 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
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 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.
- Penguins stave off Ducks’ shooting barrage to win in shootout
- Steelers restructure Brown’s contract to become salary cap compliant
- Pirates seek to tap Alvarez’s remaining upside
- Trade to Penguins caps frenetic period for winger Stempniak
- Greensburg woman accused of assaulting nurse in Excela Health Westmoreland Hospital
- Penguins notebook: Maatta leaves lasting impression with Selanne
- Gorman: Pitt should be happy with Dixon
- Minorities crucial to filling Marcellus shale gas drilling jobs
- Web of surveillance videos helps ensnare suspect in East Liberty slayings
- Unity woman loses appeal of DUI conviction
- Ex-tow truck operator says Pittsburgh officer, city put him out of business