Downtown Pittsburgh, Upscale Retail and the Art of Control

Hey, look. I would shop at Saks Fifth Avenue if I could afford to. I assume it's a great store. But what in the world does this mean?

From today's Tribune-Review:

So city leaders and advocates of Downtown retailing are ready to do whatever they can to keep upscale Saks happy.

"We are continuing discussions with Saks," said Jerome Dettore, executive director of the Urban Redevelopment Authority. "We want to make sure that Saks stays Downtown, and we are working toward that end."

I can only imagine.

In the meantime, this seems even weirder:

Over the years, Saks has considered expanding its Smithfield Street site, possibly using the abandoned Revco drug store building that has an entrance on Fifth Avenue and stands between its store and the former Lazarus-Macy's.

Now that Washington County developer Millcraft Industries Inc. is giving the Lazarus-Macy's site new life as a $65 million residential-retail-office development known as Piatt Place, the city believes the Revco site could be used to provide a loading dock and additional access for Saks.

Millcraft, which has an option to purchase the Revco building from the URA, plans to demolish it, but it hasn't yet decided how it would use the property, said Lucas Piatt, vice president-real estate.

... Dick Skrinjar, a spokesman for Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, said the mayor is interested in working with "all parties" to help Saks prosper.

Now just hold on. Didn't Millcraft have to submit some kind of plan for the properties in question? Why in the world would the city have given the Piatts an option on the building if they didn't have a proposed use? I can think of one reason not to do that. Like maybe the city would come up with a use for it but not have control to do anything about it.

So now, rather than just giving or selling the property to Saks, the mayor has to work with "all parties" to get the deal done?

I bet that the Piatts are interested in keeping Saks around. They made rumblings a while back about government subsidies to attract Nordstrom downtown, after all. So why not just keep Saks there? They seem to want to do that:

"We'd be happy to work with Saks," Piatt said. "It's a great possibility for them to expand their space, or even to have a Fifth Avenue entrance to their store."

But what would it mean for the Piatts to "work with Saks"? Does that mean they could milk this situation for even more support? Maybe, maybe not. Anyone know? Either way, doesn't this seem like a strange arrangement? Until a very short while ago, it appeared that the URA controlled this property. Now it appears that they don't. At least not entirely.

Is that so?

Comments

[Mark Rauterkus]

FUD and Smoke works, if you are on the side of the authority. FUD = Fear, Uncertanty, Doubt. As to the smoke, the more confusion, the more complicated, and the more we can't see -- the better for them.

The more technical, the better too.