The charge of the SEA under the National Historic Preservation Act is to explore all possible options for reuse. A trained eye can see that the process is flawed and disingenuous in its intentions. Rob Pfaffmann came to the table with a "concept" that he developed as a "placeholder" for the benefit of starting the discussion on reuse. The SEA consultants chose to be passive in the pursuit of other ideas. Their responsibility under Section 106 of NHPA is to undergo extensive pursuit of reuse options.
Poor leadership and wrong initial intentions are at play -- a smokescreen to an agenda. Their approach to prove economic supremacy is like comparing "shape shifters," two options that change by the magic of economics which have not been properly explored. It is invalid.
Proper execution of this process needs to begin immediately. It will promote a sustainable development driven by reality of markets, in what can result in creating an "economic magnet."
Portland is an excellent example of the NHPA's intended process. There are many striking parallels in their former arena development and ours, including former offense to the adjacent neighbors whose lives and communities were disjointed by construction of a large urban renewal-era arena. Pittsburgh deserves no less!
REBECCA E MÖLLER