Archive

ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh eyes 88 Hill District properties to expand Addison Terrace | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Pittsburgh eyes 88 Hill District properties to expand Addison Terrace

Tribune-Review
| Tuesday, November 11, 2014 12:01 a.m.

The Housing Authority of Pittsburgh may acquire 88 properties in the Hill District to expand its Addison Terrace development.

The city’s Urban Redevelopment Authority on Thursday will ask its board to approve purchasing the properties from the city for $1 plus costs and then to sell them to the housing authority in two segments — 69 properties first, and then 19 — for the same price.

The properties are mostly vacant lots, although three parcels on Trent Street have vacant structures.

The authority would build 57 houses, mostly rentals, with KBK Enterprises, an Ohio developer who plans to apply for low-income tax credits from the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, said Tom Cummings, URA’s director of housing.

The estimated cost of this segment, involving 69 properties, is $19 million, he said.

The other 19 properties are primarily along Rose Street, where homeownership is planned.

This is the third phase of redeveloping the 400-unit Addison Terrace. The first two phases involve building 275 rental units on the site.

The URA is placing a 90-day exclusive negotiation period on the Housing Authority’s acqusition of the properties. The URA would require final working drawings and evidence of financing before giving final approval to any deal.

Sam Spatter is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach him at 412-320-7843 or sspatter@tribweb.com.

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.