Since the northside is a hot topic at the moment - what's anyone's current, up to date thoughts on Lower Manchester? (Pittsburgh: home, to buy)

[BrassTacksGal]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Is the home listed on the market now? No. Why not?

I don't see how any neighborhood that took no steps to prevent such widespread urban prairie and "gap teeth" can ever be desirable. My hometown is trying to revitalize itself, but it looks ridiculous with so many empty lots and surface parking areas along the main drag---all of which used to house ornate buildings.

I wouldn't feel safe strolling a neighborhood with so much desolation. Why is this city so demolition-happy? I'd rather stare at abandoned homes all around me knowing that SOMEDAY they could be salvaged and returned to their former glory (such as the long-decrepit rowhouses across from me which are being rehabbed as I speak) rather than stare at empty lots, knowing they're interruptions in the fabric of the urban streetscape that shouldn't exist.

Just wondering, how would a neighborhood prevent people from abandoning their homes? A few people where I live have walked away from their homes when they could no longer afford them or afford the taxes on them. How might we prevent that? How do we tell people they MUST stay in their homes or the MUST sell them? Some people tried to sell their houses and after a year or two they gave up and walked away. Should they be arrested? Something else?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrassTacksGal

Just wondering, how would a neighborhood prevent people from abandoning their homes? A few people where I live have walked away from their homes when they could no longer afford them or afford the taxes on them. How might we prevent that? How do we tell people they MUST stay in their homes or the MUST sell them? Some people tried to sell their houses and after a year or two they gave up and walked away. Should they be arrested? Something else?

I've heard in other states some municipalities will double or triple the taxes on properties if they are found to be blighted and/or abandoned, to force the owner to have stronger incentives to sell, restore, or demolish said properties.

That said, even here if the owner is no longer paying taxes, the city/county can take the houses away and sell them at auction. Unfortunately, the current process is so bound up with red tape that it takes years to clear titles, and abandoned properties are often past the point of no return when the state can auction them off. The land bank, whenever it gets off the ground, should solve many of these issues.

[RogersParkTransplant]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Back on the subject of Manchester for a second. There are actually some semi-serious plans to convert 65 into a surface boulevard, which would allow for an easy walk between Manchester and "Chateau" again.

This may not sound like a big deal, but could be transformative for Chateau. When I look at it today, I see an area very similar to the Strip District 15 years ago - lots of underutilized semi-industrial properties, essentially no residents, and positioned very well between being close to Downtown and having riverfront access. There's already a few interesting things in this area (Chateau Cafe & Cakery, Bicycle Heaven, Drew Mathieson Center, and Manchester Craftsmen's Guild). It could really become something special with better connection to the rest of the North Side.

Eschaton, can you share any more information about converting 65?

I moved to Pgh from Rogers Park in Chicago...if you know Chicago at all, think about how Lake Shore Drive going north becomes Sheridan...I have often wished 65 could be more like this. Would make a world of difference for Manchester/Chateau.

I often think about how 279 carved up Deutschtown, and the longer I live here, the less it bothers me. I mean, I regret the destruction it caused, but...I think East Deutschtown is ready to move on & come back. In my wildest dreams, I really can imagine a quiet commercial district coming back on Chestnut St, so that "East Deutschtown" actually gets absorbed into Spring Garden. Wigle Barrelhouse and Penn Brewery are already there; we just need one or two more restaurants and things would improve rapidly, and that whole area would start to perk up.

65 in relation to Chateau, on the other hand, is a disaster. I mean, we live up here, go through it all the time, and even so about once a week we take a wrong turn near Wendy's on the way to the Cakery, and end up at Heinz Field for no apparent reason. If 65 could be a little quieter, that would be amazing.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I've heard in other states some municipalities will double or triple the taxes on properties if they are found to be blighted and/or abandoned, to force the owner to have stronger incentives to sell, restore, or demolish said properties.

That said, even here if the owner is no longer paying taxes, the city/county can take the houses away and sell them at auction. Unfortunately, the current process is so bound up with red tape that it takes years to clear titles, and abandoned properties are often past the point of no return when the state can auction them off. The land bank, whenever it gets off the ground, should solve many of these issues.

Often the owners of blighted properties are long since deceased or in a nursing home, and when the property is in a depressed community, little interest in people wanting to buy.

A property like the Beldale one may also have a lot of liens for taxes, water bills or other items which make the heir unable to deliver a clear title to a prospective owner without paying up more than the property is worth on the market. If the land bank can expedite the process of clearing titles, that could help.

[ebyrnes]

I am not the esteemed Eschaton, but some CMU students did a gorgeous plan for Chateau (I think that this is the one that he is referring to): Returning to the River: Chateau Redevelopment Plan by Carnegie Mellon School of Architecture Urban Laboratory (eBook) - Lulu.

e -


[quote=RogersParkTransplant;39554652]Eschaton, can you share any more information about converting 65?

[SteelCityRising]

I suppose I'm just browbeaten because when I look at PreservationPioneer's blog and see so many homes with character from the late-1800s facing demolition due to neglect while more and more McMansions are being built in the exurbs I just see nothing but a waste of space overall. I disagree that tearing down an 1890s-era wood-frame rowhouse with an ornate bay window, like the one on Beldale in Manchester, is "progress" because it gives the neighborhood more "breathing room". To me that "breathing room" very rarely is well-maintained and often ends up just being a "gap tooth" in the walkable urban fabric of the city. Living in Polish Hill I look at our backyard and wish it was still occupied by another three-unit tenement structure facing our rear alley, with the small yellow-brick courtyard we have being a shared backyard to foster more neighborliness and camaraderie, the way it was when the neighborhood had ~6,000 residents---not our current ~1,300.

New construction can't replicate the craftmanship or quality of old construction. Eschaton seems to like those new brick rowhouses he posted. I don't prefer those to the look of historic construction. I think the vast majority of newer construction in this city is hideous----neutral-colored, cheap exterior building materials, flat facades, suburbanesque, etc. Why no transom above front-facing windows? Why no gargoyles? Why no gingerbread? Why no crown molding? Why no dormers? Why no scalloped wood accent siding? Why no turrets? Why no bay windows? All I ever hear as a retort is "$$$$$$!!!" Okay. So basically the message we want Pittsburgh to be sending to newcomer is "we only care so much about improving the city..." Great. This is why U.S. Steel is building a new HQ's building that will look like absolute garbage; we aren't demanding anything better.

[RogersParkTransplant]

SCR, do you really not see that you're taking a very all-or-nothing approach to a very complicated situation?

I prefer older architecture. I like Pittsburgh's Victorian homes and want to see them preserved. I also understand that saving everything is not easy, or even realistic. Here on the Northside I see about 4-5 older houses rehabbed for every one I see torn down, and that seems about right to me - I can believe that the 15% or so that we lose is beyond repair, and I am fine with my glass being 85% full.

Your point about old construction having lots of charming woodwork sounds so whiny. I like gargoyles and turrets too, but there are fewer craftsmen these days and that stuff is expensive. If I had an extra $10k I would probably put it towards solar panels before gingerbread siding, wouldn't you?

Stop being such a hater. It's just silly that you imply we're all a bunch of cheapskates for letting the occasional house get torn down, when you yourself don't have the money to buy/restore a house yourself. Why do you imagine the rest of us are so rich?

[eschaton]

While I like the "gingerbread" elements of housing as much as the next person, it's worth understanding why they were common on houses before 1920 - because labor was cheap.

Besides a few non-renewable resources, like some hardwoods and stones - materials are no more expensive than they were a hundred years ago. Brick is brick, glass is glass, and plaster is plaster. But back in those days, the construction industry was largely non-union, with many workers making a fraction of a living wage. Today labor costs in construction are the main driving force in costs. This is even true for non-union construction, because contractors have to pay somewhat close to the union rate if they want to get qualified craftsmen.

So yes, I'd like to see more of a return to ornament. But not at the cost of destroying the standard of living of those who work in the construction industry. Maybe 3D printing will make more custom-designed elements affordable within the next 10-20 years. But otherwise, I think the status quo (regarding materials, not so much design) is worth the tradeoffs.

[UKyank]

It's not like people never repair house in disarray here it just has to make financial sense. I can think of two houses in the southside that were wood frame, falling apart, roof shot, missing windows, etc, which were purchased in the past year >$50,000 and are being worked on. Why? Because someone feels that the rehab cost will not exceed the value after the rehab & they'll be able to sell it at a profit.

In other areas of the city (Ie that house in Manchester) the resale value just isn't there & no one is going to be willing to spend the money rehabbing a house only to end up with a finished product that's worth significantly less the what was spent on it.

If you're so concerned with this SCR, then by all means buy a place in need of a lot of work & fix it up, until you do that I don't see how you can criticize anyone else for not doing the same.

[RogersParkTransplant]

Just got a reputation comment letting me know my last post offended someone. Good grief. I'm sorry for the lack of sugar-coating, but I still think it's hypocritical beyond belief to write long, hand-wringing posts criticizing the people of Pittsburgh for not maintaining the architectural beauty of the city's heyday, and at the same time to keep on admitting that you can't afford to buy/fix one of the old broken-down shells yourself.

Thanks for reminding me that the internet is a giant virtual bridge, with millions of trolls lurking just beneath the surface. Time to get back to the real world, where I can actually see my neighborhood getting better day by day, thanks to the hard work and positive energy of the people who live here.