MINUTES A Community Vision for Schenley High School Community Meeting 2 11 July 2012 Consultant Report: Findings & Analysis
Building on community comments from Meeting 1, a series of “test-fits” or capacity studies were presented for the reuse of Schenley High School, including reuse as a school. Benchmarks of successful school reuses were presented along with information on zoning, parking and the applicability of preservation tax credits for each of the possible Schenley test-fits. The following lists represent ideas and comments about each test-fit from participants of Community Meeting 2, held at UCP, 4638 Centre Avenue on July 11, 2012.
NOTES FROM BREAK-OUT DISCUSSIONS ON POTENTIAL TEST-FITS Learning • Reuse Schenley as a school, with a public school being the preferred use • Retain as a unique, innovative school of some sort • Create lifelong learning / continuing education (a Mary Schenley “Universal School”) • Besides the option of reuse as a public school, other possible uses for all or part of the building could include: - charter school - community/adult education - GED/Specialized classes - vo-tech course/labs, in innovative subjects such as robotics - studio/gallery space (for organizations such as Manchester Craftsmenʼs Guild - day care • Explore interim uses of the building until the “best” long-term use can be determined • Provide community access to auditorium, gym and pool • Show school board that reusing Schenley can be economical compared to long-term costs to renovate Peabody • Asbestos, regardless of quantity, will be an issue (perceived or real) that will have to be dealt with for any reuse option
Housing • Reuse as condominiums or higher end housing is desired and supports neighborhood character and concerns over traffic and parking • Rental housing is an option; would allow preservation tax credits (to retain historic character); need to carefully manage parking and potential other impact concerns • Some affordable housing could work; might be incentives to a developer • Campus Continuum—could fit into neighborhood and meet a variety of goals • Multi-generational uses are worth exploring, particularly in combination with housing • Live-work-teach could be a good fit for lower floors • Support for some percentage of unit set aside for handicap accessibility • Ongoing community role in the development of housing options is important • Could we strive to have Schenley become an innovative housing model? • Would a co-op housing approach qualify for Preservation Tax Credits? • What is the “ideal” housing density in terms of quantity and sizes? Hybrid / Live-Work • Be careful with the use of the specific term “CCRC” (Continuing Care Retirement Community). Schenley HS is not set up to provide advanced levels of care, but it could be good as a lifelong learning center. CCRC is not a good term since the building cannot support advance senior care. “50+ Independent Living” is a more appropriate definition. Learning/classroom uses would be a good thing. The auditorium could be used as a shared space. • How do we get an anchor tenant for this type of mixed development? Important to get buy-in for one institution or anchor organization. • Makes sense for some of the less desirable lower level spaces to be supported by residential above. This option does not preclude residential which is a good thing. • Given the parking situation, using the building as an office is not realistic. • If live-work units do go in, care should be taken to make them well-designed, and not junky looking. • How can any of this happen post recession? It appears that the level of investment will be quite high? • The swimming pool should continue to be shared/community access. • Separation of tenant uses will need to be explored especially in terms of access points and elevators. If the building is mixed use, the security and the like will need to be addressed. Office • An office option is not preferred due to concerns over parking (and since it is not allowed under zoning) • Office use would not be in keeping with the community wanting a public use/benefit for Schenleyʼs reuse • Offices could negatively impact traffic
OUTCOMES • Overall—While it was acknowledged that the community consists of a number of voices, there was clear community support for Schenley to be reused for a public good and also that demolition not be considered. Additionally, for all options there was interest in some sort of public benefit from/access to the auditorium, gym and pool along with the desire for any renovation to be as green (LEED standards) as possible. •
Learning—Within the community there was substantial interest in reusing the building as a school (preferably a public school); also supported were alternate/hybrid educational uses.
A Community Vision for Schenley High School - Minutes from Community Meeting Two —2
•
Housing—Housing is a desirable reuse, with high-end condos preferred and rental units also being a possible scenario (along with mixed uses on lower levels); assure community participation in this development option and minimization of negative impacts on the neighborhood. Private development resulting in a taxable property is viewed as highly desirable for recurring revenue benefiting the city and Pittsburgh Public Schools.
•
Hybrid / Live-Work—Mixed uses make sense--particularly since the three lower levels of the building do not offer the same level of natural light and useable space as the the upper levels. There was support for housing on the upper levels and creative learning and/or live-work on the lower levels.
•
Office—There was no support for further pursuing office options for reuse.
NEXT MEETING July 25, 7:00pm / Review Final Concepts United Cerebral Palsy of Pittsburgh Building 4638 Centre Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
FOR MORE INFORMATION & TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL IDEAS AND COMMENTS Phone: Oakland Planning and Development Corporation 412.621.7863 Email: questions@opdc.org Web: www.opdc.org/programs-services/plan-partner/community-vision-for-the-adaptive-reuse-ofschenley-high-school/
A Community Vision for Schenley High School - Minutes from Community Meeting Two —3