ShareThis Page
What’s in store for building? Try razing |

What’s in store for building? Try razing

Eric Heyl
| Friday, December 9, 2011 12:00 a.m

To: Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl

Allegheny County Executive-elect Rich Fitzgerald

From: Heyl Innovative Strategies LLC

Re: Home improvement alternatives


You can’t solve this problem with some spackle and a sander.

The jointly owned City-County Building — which houses city hall, courtrooms and county offices — needs expensive renovations far beyond the expertise of a weekend handyman.

The roof cap and structural beams that support it need to be replaced. The estimated cost of making those and other repairs necessary to keep chunks of the building from eventually becoming overly familiar with the fragile foreheads of passers-by below: $50 million.

Heyl Innovative Strategies has conducted a thorough review of city and county finances to determine if there is sufficient scratch to pay for this project. Our conclusion: No way, hombres.

To colloquially summarize your situation, you are up the creek. We are prepared to provide a much-needed paddle in the form of an innovative strategy that you probably haven’t considered.

Tear down the sucker.

Seems radical, we know.

The building has been the seat of city government for nearly a century, and the statue of the late Mayor Richard Caliguiri out front would have to be relocated if the building is leveled.

But it once was inconceivable that the Civic Arena would be razed, and it’s coming down. At least the arena provided people with enjoyable and entertaining experiences — the same cannot be said of the mayor’s office and city council chambers.

The city and county could profit handsomely by selling the block of prime Downtown real estate that the building occupies. A logical potential purchaser is PNC, when it builds another skyscraper in a few years to strengthen its stranglehold on the city skyline.

We have anticipated what likely would be your primary objection to demolishing a building that needs to be significantly upgraded just to be considered rundown: The building’s existing 250,000 square feet cannot be conveniently and cost-effectively replaced.

With just a slight downsizing of accommodations, that’s a big au contraire, fellas.

About 215,000 square feet can be recouped by purchasing two nearby Smithfield Street buildings — the long-vacant Lord & Taylor department store and the soon-to-be-empty Saks Fifth Avenue.

The owner of the Saks building is trying to unload the property, while the Lord & Taylor building has been unoccupied since 2004. It’s not unreasonable to believe both can be obtained at fire-sale prices and retrofitted for far less than the $50 million required to keep the City-County Building upright.

The Saks building could gain new life as Courts Fifth Avenue. You wouldn’t even have to spring for a whole new sign.

County offices and city hall could move to the larger Lord & Taylor building. To keep the possibility of physical altercations between the mayor and his council adversaries to a minimum, their offices can be placed at opposite ends of the old department store.

Put council by the men’s shoe department.

Base the mayor where the Maybelline makeup lady used to roam.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.