Share This Page

Pittsburgh Public Schools urged to sell Administration Building in Oakland, close others

| Wednesday, April 10, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

The company marketing Pittsburgh Public Schools' closed buildings told district officials Tuesday night that they have plenty of untapped assets.

Foremost among them might be the cash-strapped district's offices in Oakland.

Fourth River Development suggested selling the building on South Bellefield Avenue.

Pat Morosetti, sales and leasing manager for the company, declined to estimate how much the building is worth but noted that Oakland is regarded “as a very strong market.”

“It's important to discuss the building as we determine the assets the district has,” explained Peter Camarda, chief financial and operations officer for the district.

But many board members were cool to selling the Administration Building.

“I for one would not — not — want to get rid of it. It's a city treasure,” said board member Jean Fink.

Board member Regina Holley wondered whether the district could rent the fourth floor and continue to use the other three floors.

“This is a fine building,” she said. “I hate to sell it.”

Renting properties for billboards and communication towers and retaining mineral rights on land were other recommendations.

The company identified four schools as drawing the most interest: Burgwin, Columbus, McCleary and Morningside. Potential buyers are considering residential or community purposes, such as a senior center. Propel Schools would like to make Columbus a charter school.

Bill Zlatos is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.

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.