Why are the values of homes in the suburbs/urban areas of Pittsburgh the inverse of other cities? (Washington: mortgages, credit score)

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

My point was that I think a renovated city house is going to be similar in quality to a modern suburban house in the same way that a renovated city apartment is going to be similar in quality to a modern suburban apartment.

Not knowing what Pittsburgh's modern suburban housing looks like...but it seems throughout most of the country, that new shiny suburban housing seems to be made quite cheaply and deteriote quickly.

Whereas when I view a lot of the older Pittsburgh inventory, the housing looks strong, sturdy, and just solid.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Not knowing what Pittsburgh's modern suburban housing looks like...but it seems throughout most of the country, that new shiny suburban housing seems to be made quite cheaply and deteriote quickly.

I'd say for both good and ill, Pittsburgh's suburban housing is typical in terms of build. On the plus side, there are modern building techniques that can make houses much more energy efficient, and of course they are laid out with contemporary family sizes and lifestyles in mind. On the minus side, you can in fact run into build quality issues.

Whereas when I view a lot of the older Pittsburgh inventory, the housing looks strong, sturdy, and just solid.

Obviously there is a big mix, and some of the mill towns in particular contain a bunch of shoddy wood-frame houses that were the historic forerunners of shoddy master-planned suburbs. But in the more organic Pittsburgh neighborhoods, you do to tend to find a lot of solid houses built by skilled tradespeople using quality local products. And the professional- and upper-class houses in particular can be spectacular--as I understand it, you would literally get whole crews of guys who had been working together building cathedrals in Italy or Germany arriving as immigrants and being put to work building houses for the wealthier classes.

As an aside, for basically the same reasons we made steel in Pittsburgh, we also made ceramics, including lots of brick. Also, apparently those aforementioned Central and Southern European immigrants were more fond of brick than some other groups at the time. So while there were again a decent number of wood-frame houses in the area, a lot of what would likely have been wood-frame houses in many other cities were built with brick in Pittsburgh, and I think that has contributed greatly to the solidity and longevity of many Pittsburgh homes. Particularly in fact the more neglected ones (typically a brick house will stand up to neglect a lot longer than a wood-frame one).

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Not knowing what Pittsburgh's modern suburban housing looks like...but it seems throughout most of the country, that new shiny suburban housing seems to be made quite cheaply and deteriote quickly.

Whereas when I view a lot of the older Pittsburgh inventory, the housing looks strong, sturdy, and just solid.

Age isn't as much of a factor as brick or frame construction. Frame construction deteriorates rather quickly if not maintained. There are multitude of frame houses over 100 years old in the county that are very deteriorated. At the same time, newer or older brick houses retain their strudiness and can afford to be neglected to an extent.

Once you start tearing down walls, you wouldn't believe the crap materials you'll find in the older houses. They aren't square. They were hodge podged together. I should know. I live in a house that's over 100 years old. We completely renovated it. I'm not knocking old houses. I love them, but I think it's important to be realistic because buying a 100 year old house can be a money pitt.

[ferraris]

My point was that I think a renovated city house is going to be similar in quality to a modern suburban house in the same way that a renovated city apartment is going to be similar in quality to a modern suburban apartment.

I agree, but I think that apartments are more likely to be renovated than houses.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I agree, but I think that apartments are more likely to be renovated than houses.

It is indeed more of a problem controlling for the state of renovation when it comes to houses. I would think in some of the more established neighborhoods the gap would not be terribly significant, but I couldn't quantify that.

[SteelCityRising]

Why do you think I (and some of my fresh college graduate peers) are now seriously looking into Pittsburgh for relocation? At age 22 I'm earning a $42,000 salary in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area and can only barely afford a 1-BR apartment in a sterile suburb a half-hour west of the District. Even if I were earning a $100,000 salary with my MBA and CPA I still couldn't afford a home here. I just don't see the "upshot" of living here long-term and putting up with the heinous traffic congestion, horrible urban sprawl (that the people here actually "like"), and noticeable dearth of charm, soul, or character in most fake-feeling neighborhoods and our chain restaurant-dominated "town centers" if I'll never be able to afford anything better than a suburban apartment.

In Pittsburgh I can easily afford my dream 2 BR, 1 BA, 1,100-square-foot old rowhome in the Mexican War Streets or a similarly-sized bungalow in Mt. Washington, even with a lower salary. The upside? I am also able to walk or take a bus to mostly everything I need from sporting events to museums to shopping, dining, nightlife, parks, and employment centers. I actually don't understand why people would want to live in a place like Cranberry Township when the level of charm Pittsburgh has is unrivaled.

It's juts a no-brainer to me. Nobody can ever give me a good reason to love living in Reston, Virginia other than "there's good jobs" (there's also jobs in my field in Pittsburgh), and "you're near a great city" (Pittsburgh has all of the amenities of a city twice its size with half the crowds to knock over). What good is an $80,000 salary in DC if you are living frugally whereas a $60,000 salary in Pittsburgh permits you to live comfortably? Seriously. What gives? Why is DC the "Best Place for Young Hip Singles" instead of Pittsburgh?

[Fiddlehead]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

What good is an $80,000 salary in DC if you are living frugally whereas a $60,000 salary in Pittsburgh permits you to live comfortably? Seriously. What gives? Why is DC the "Best Place for Young Hip Singles" instead of Pittsburgh?

Well, over the last couple decades those who earned higher salaries in more rapidly appreciating areas were accumulating equity far faster than their peers in lower rent markets with lower salaries. I think a lot of that had to do with a larger societal flux into a few elite markets with good jobs (Boston, NYC, DC, SanFran, LA, Seattle), coupled with a lot of housing materialism among the boomers. They essentially created a long-term bubble through their geographic choices and desire for larger and second homes.

Meanwhile in Pittsburgh....but that story has been told already.

Interesting to note though that Pittsburgh's decline was parallel with the boomer migrations above. I am sure a few 70's flowerpower types turned yuppies ended up on the burgh, but ....it does not seem like Berkeley from what I am getting on this board.

Point I would would make is that the old rules were to work in a terrible place and overpay, or crowd into an elite hipster paradise and overpay. Either way, appreciation would give you a huge boost at retirement. That certainly was very true out here in the West, but I believe that game has played out in both the short and long-term.

[Tiger Beer]

It seems like with all the jobs in DC, they'll probably remain skyhigh.

Seems like out West, most of those places will never have the jobs to pay for the overpriced housing.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Not knowing what Pittsburgh's modern suburban housing looks like...but it seems throughout most of the country, that new shiny suburban housing seems to be made quite cheaply and deteriote quickly.

Whereas when I view a lot of the older Pittsburgh inventory, the housing looks strong, sturdy, and just solid.

Not this again! Seriously, there have been threads on this before. It's very much a matter of opinion. Funny how most of the homes in the burbs are still standing after 60 years or so of suburbanization, for all that people thought and still think they are cheaply built, and will soon fall down. My parents owned a "this old house" in Beaver Falls, built in 1918. It was one of these higher end homes of its day. It needed a lot of work, even in 1956 when they bought it.

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

It seems like with all the jobs in DC, they'll probably remain skyhigh.

Seems like out West, most of those places will never have the jobs to pay for the overpriced housing.

"The West" covers a large area. What is true for Idaho is not necessarily true for California.

[Fiddlehead]

Originally Posted by Katiana

"The West" covers a large area. What is true for Idaho is not necessarily true for California.

Very true. But the only places in the West with prices like Boston, NYC, DC are in the Far West (and, ok, maybe Boulder, Santa Fe, a few high end areas of Denver, and resorts like Aspen, Jackson Hole). I would also agree that a few places will likely have well-paying jobs for some time (Seattle, parts of Cali, Front Range). However, I believe he was suggesting that the outrageous prices of many parts of the West are disconnected from economics, which they certainly have been, and IMO still are.

And, parenthetically, I would add many parts of Idaho are more closely linked to California than they would like! Check out the Boise board and see what they think. Now Utah is another story.....