U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-13-2016, 06:45 AM
 
7,700 posts, read 4,554,568 times
Reputation: 8376

Advertisements

I'm not talking about the architecture of the city's downtown or historical residential neighborhoods, or most affluent suburbs, but rather the majority of homes that its average, middle-class residents live in?

I ask because, over on the Pittsburgh forum, people considering moving into the area from Sunbelt cities are usually appalled by the local housing stock...especially in the suburbs. There's very little shiny new construction in the area. I think people in most parts of the country would prefer housed be less than 20 years old or more than 100 years old.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2016, 08:10 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,226 posts, read 19,525,937 times
Reputation: 12968
There are lots of houses in the Pittsburgh area that are less than 20 years old. Just check on zillow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 08:22 AM
 
7,700 posts, read 4,554,568 times
Reputation: 8376
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
There are lots of houses in the Pittsburgh area that are less than 20 years old. Just check on zillow.
Comparatively speaking, no, not really.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Fountain Square, Indianapolis
628 posts, read 758,048 times
Reputation: 604
Quite a bit, actually. I love old east coast cities and their charm. This has a lot to do with their housing stock and how cities were built back then. I love row houses and structural density, and they go hand in hand with older cities. There are some great Midwestern and Southern cities that have a great stock and density, too. Cities like St. Louis, Cincinnati, Detroit, Cleveland, Savannah, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Chicago and Charleston come to mind first. I think it makes the city feel warmer and inviting rather than open and isolated when it's made up of mostly detached homes on larger lots. I love the larger homes too, but not in the central parts of the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,414 posts, read 11,913,851 times
Reputation: 10533
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndieIndy View Post
Quite a bit, actually. I love old east coast cities and their charm. This has a lot to do with their housing stock and how cities were built back then. I love row houses and structural density, and they go hand in hand with older cities. There are some great Midwestern and Southern cities that have a great stock and density, too. Cities like St. Louis, Cincinnati, Detroit, Cleveland, Savannah, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Chicago and Charleston come to mind first. I think it makes the city feel warmer and inviting rather than open and isolated when it's made up of mostly detached homes on larger lots. I love the larger homes too, but not in the central parts of the city.
Sadly, I think distinctive housing styles for regions of the country are, functionally speaking, dead. Styles began normalizing nationwide roughly 100 years ago, when Craftsmen styles became common. By the 1960s, there were virtually no differences between local vernacular remaining. Today there seem to be only two housing styles - the faux Spanish stucco style, which is common in Florida, California, and the Southwest, and brick and/or vinyl sided McMansion, which is common everywhere else in the county.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 09:39 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,460 posts, read 25,401,064 times
Reputation: 8931
I think a lot of people are or would be shocked at how much little crappy 1950's/60's one-story ranchers under 1,500 sq ft cost in the Bay Area. That's probably what the average middle class person lives in too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 11:01 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
I ask because, over on the Pittsburgh forum, people considering moving into the area from Sunbelt cities are usually appalled by the local housing stock...especially in the suburbs. There's very little shiny new construction in the area. I think people in most parts of the country would prefer housed be less than 20 years old or more than 100 years old.
Few in the Northeast expect new construction; there hasn't been enough growth. Older homes in nicer neighborhoods have often be redone or extended. You can find on say, the Boston forum the opposite perspective, people decrying "McMansions" in the burbs and preferring older suburban housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 11:10 AM
_OT
 
Location: Miami
2,143 posts, read 1,518,376 times
Reputation: 1845
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndieIndy View Post
Quite a bit, actually. I love old east coast cities and their charm. This has a lot to do with their housing stock and how cities were built back then. I love row houses and structural density, and they go hand in hand with older cities. There are some great Midwestern and Southern cities that have a great stock and density, too. Cities like St. Louis, Cincinnati, Detroit, Cleveland, Savannah, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Chicago and Charleston come to mind first. I think it makes the city feel warmer and inviting rather than open and isolated when it's made up of mostly detached homes on larger lots. I love the larger homes too, but not in the central parts of the city.
Louisville, Birmingham, Richmond, and Kansas City as well.

But what I acknowledged most about cities like those, regarding their Housing Stock, is that they have variety. I think that's probably one of the negatives about Housing in the Northeast; theirs no room for improving diversity within the Housing market. While in places like Atlanta, Houston, or Dallas, they have the platform for Urbanizing or Increasing Density in certain communities (Even though it's sprawled). Toronto is a good example; One of the reasons Toronto is growing is because of it's diverse Housing Market, from Rowhouses, to New SFH's in spacious neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 11:16 AM
 
7,700 posts, read 4,554,568 times
Reputation: 8376
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Few in the Northeast expect new construction; there hasn't been enough growth. Older homes in nicer neighborhoods have often be redone or extended. You can find on say, the Boston forum the opposite perspective, people decrying "McMansions" in the burbs and preferring older suburban housing.
You conveniently ignored the second part about hundred-year-old houses. My point is, generally speaking, people don't want houses built in the 50s ,60s, 70s, or 80s. I know I didn't; that's the reason I bought a house built in 1900.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2016, 11:42 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
You conveniently ignored the second part about hundred-year-old houses. My point is, generally speaking, people don't want houses built in the 50s ,60s, 70s, or 80s. I know I didn't; that's the reason I bought a house built in 1900.
I ignored it because I was focusing on housing from the 50s-80s; the fraction of 100+ year old houses. My point is for most in the Northeast and some of the Midwest, people don't expect new housing, 50s-80s housing is "normal".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top