Old houses, where are the new ones? (Homestead: neighborhood, to live)

[sealie]

Lowest paying metro is Orlando, which makes sense. Pittsburgh is in the middle of the pack. Please stop making up statistics and weakening your own argument, I don't have time to fact check everything.

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by The King of Um

I'm not going to argue with you, because to do so would be futile. If you feel like harshly judging a large group of people for something so insignificant, be my guest.

To the threat author: You're likely a troll, but if not, you must understand that old homes are build significantly better than are today's houses. This is fact, and that's why in the Pittsburgh region, as well as in many others, there's not much of a demand for new or newer housing stock. Moreover, old homes have character that can't be replicated. People like this, thus the great demand.

I've been judged rather harshly by ignorant morons over the years myself simply because of the way I look. I have bad allergies in some areas of the country and suffer from fatigue and look tired most of the time. Either I ignore it or give them a dose of their own medicine. I also wear glasses, have a baby face for my age and have been called a lot of unsavory things over the years. I get over it. Sorry if some of us don't believe that tattoos are wonderful accoutrements to the personal appearance of people.

To the OP. Perhaps if you contact some local builders you can find a new home in your price range. Personally I think purchasing an older home is a wiser choice though because new mass produced sub divisions are not only faceless but the quality of the construction is terrible compared to the way it was even in the 1970's.

[Copanut]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

Personally I think purchasing an older home is a wiser choice though because new mass produced sub divisions are not only faceless but the quality of the construction is terrible compared to the way it was even in the 1970's.

Most homes built after 1970 do not have plaster walls, ceramic baths, and hardwood flooring. Give me a brick split level anytime.

[zman63]

Originally Posted by sealie

Lowest paying metro is Orlando, which makes sense. Pittsburgh is in the middle of the pack. Please stop making up statistics and weakening your own argument, I don't have time to fact check everything.

Pittsburgh is one of the lowest paying large metros in the country. We are ahead of cleveland and tampa bay.

[charisb]

The only new housing development in the city I can think of is Summerset at Frick Park. Those homes/townhouses start around $450,000 and they are at something like 98% occupancy, so someone is clearly making decent wages.
But I love my 98 year old house and wouldn't trade it for anything! It is solid and I love having individual rooms-I am not into the 'open plan' craze that seems to dominate new builds.
And this is SUCH a troll thread.

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by zman63

You two are good examples of why problems neved get solved in pittsburgh. All you do is cheerlead and provide useless insight on this boad.

You hate me, but you detract from the real subject on this board. What do you two make of the lack of affordable new construction in our western pa paradise? No demand due to stagnant population growth? No demand because we have the lowest wages in the country for a major metro and people cannot afford a 150k house?

You're nearly almost always wrong or exaggerating often as well which is why no one takes you or any of your comments seriously. It's been discussed many times here that it's not hard to afford a 150k house here as well.

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by zman63

I think the poster made a good point on affordable new housing. We lack it and people want move in ready and new.

But, Pittsburgh has a TON of affordable old housing. Much of it is a much higher quality as well, even though dated.

Much of the new stuff being built in other cities, is of a very cheap quality, and will age very quickly and soon. Much of that will not look good in the coming decades. Than what's next in 20 years? Atlanta and such builds up everything from 300 miles and outward...with everyone abandoning everything within the 200 miles radius of the center? The way its going now, yes.

[metalforever]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

You know what? You are pretty thin skinned. Sorry but it is a well known fact that employers in many industries don't like to hire people that have very prominent tattoos. And yes, I think they look terrible on women.

And I might add you just perfectly illustrated my point about people with tattoos being insecure. This thread has nothing to do with you or your tattoos.

As a woman with no tattoos, I disagree. It looks equal on both men and woman. It can look good, and can look bad.

Edit: You don't want to live in Summerset at Frick Park. Someone that grew up near there told me they built it on a filled trash heap or something similar.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by metalforever

As a woman with no tattoos, I disagree. It looks equal on both men and woman. It can look good, and can look bad.

Edit: You don't want to live in Summerset at Frick Park. Someone that grew up near there told me they built it on a filled trash heap or something similar.

Summerset at Frick Park was built on a stabilized mound of slag, which is a chemically inert byproduct of steelmaking. Once they stabilized the mound, they covered it in several feet of soil and built the development. If you're expecting the second coming of the Love Canal debacle, then you'll be waiting forever since slag is, again, chemically inert.

[metalforever]

I just can't get onboard paying top dollar to live somewhere like that. Its borderline Homestead also. You may as well live in Greenfield (cheaper).