Are Pittsburgers' Smarter Than We Think?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by juliegt

I agree. I can't remember which cities I heard about that were considering this. But it was going to be used in neighborhoods that had been totally decimated. Places that looked like war zones with tons of abandoned, city-owned housing that wasn't even close to worth renovating. The idea was that with dramatically lower populations these cities no longer needed the housing in those neighborhoods which were essentially ghost towns anyway. The houses would be raised and be returned to parkland/open space. Housing development would be infill near transit hubs, not housing projects in those areas that had been razed. The idea was to scale the city to the needs of a smaller population. I think I read about it at ceosforcities.org.

It is definitely a sensible idea. I might note some of this has already happened: for example, those high-rise low-income projects in East Liberty that were put up in the 1960s are being pulled back down.

I just get nervous because in Pittsburgh, we really do have some amazing housing stock, even if it doesn't always look that way, and may well be currently vacant. In fact, just to give another recent example: the neighborhood immediately to the north of my neighborhood is sometimes known as Park Place, and includes bits of Pittsburgh and Wilkinsburg. There is commercial development going on along Penn Avenue, which is the north border of Park Place. All that is fine, but recently some historic homes were razed to make room for a new drug store. Right now, Park Place is a bit transitional, and includes some abandoned homes. But down the road, those homes may well be bought and renovated, and it would be a shame to lose them for commercial development that may only temporarily be more valuable.

Fortunately, the local community in Park Place has organized and so far has managed to push back against much more of this happening. But other historic Pittsburgh neighborhoods may not be so lucky, and I do think there is sometimes a shortage of people willing to take a longer perspective.

[juliegt]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

It is definitely a sensible idea. I might note some of this has already happened: for example, those high-rise low-income projects in East Liberty that were put up in the 1960s are being pulled back down.

I just get nervous because in Pittsburgh, we really do have some amazing housing stock, even if it doesn't always look that way, and may well be currently vacant. In fact, just to give another recent example: the neighborhood immediately to the north of my neighborhood is sometimes known as Park Place, and includes bits of Pittsburgh and Wilkinsburg. There is commercial development going on along Penn Avenue, which is the north border of Park Place. All that is fine, but recently some historic homes were razed to make room for a new drug store. Right now, Park Place is a bit transitional, and includes some abandoned homes. But down the road, those homes may well be bought and renovated, and it would be a shame to lose them for commercial development that may only temporarily be more valuable.

Fortunately, the local community in Park Place has organized and so far has managed to push back against much more of this happening. But other historic Pittsburgh neighborhoods may not be so lucky, and I do think there is sometimes a shortage of people willing to take a longer perspective.

Again, I agree completely. But I had heard that it was being done in cities where homes had been abandoned and vandalized for years. many were burnt down. You know those areas that look like a war zone with lots of vacant lots and what remains standing are essentially shells.