The future of Pittsburgh housing/architecture...? (Manchester, Riverside: fit in, condos, townhouses)

[Tiger Beer]

Just thinking. Pittsburgh has very unique, appealing, and interesting housing styles. Quite varied as well. I like all kinds, but one unique one is the tall 3-story houses dotted up in the mountains, probably with some real nice views.

However, shifting the topic slightly. As good as some of Pittsburgh's housing/architecture might be with quality craftsmanship. There is another element of dilipitated architecture that won't be standing the test of time.

At this point in time, it seems that the supply of housing is way higher than the demand for housing. So, it seems that these old houses can become just completely abandoned or run into the ground.

So, I guess the question becomes...what do you think would eventually replace them if they aren't remodeled from someone who has the knowledge and interest in doing so?

Do you think people would rebuild in a similar style? Especially thinking of the ones perched up dotting the hills overlooking with the views. It seems due to many of them being close to each other, than the replacement would have to be height over width as well.

But, just curious as to how you guys see it. Also, seems like developers just prefer new land to build - cost productive. So, wondering that since developers wouldn't have the interest in building on a small plot of land replacing one building...what do you see as the fate of many of these older houses with way too much neglect? Do you see a day where individuals might buy them for the land, and replace it with a new house? If so, what kind of replacement types of housing have you seen? I think I've heard of some condos occassionally replacing houses up in the hills. Many houses replacing houses? Or do they just seem to just be left alone for the time being?

[gallacus]

Most of the new homes being built today in the Southside and Southside Slopes (two areas which are chok-full of the homes you describe) are built in exactly the same style as the existing homes. Some of them you can hardly tell just by looking at them that they are brand new.

Here and there, however, you'll get a new house that is completely out of place, that would look more at home in the suburbs in some planned community, but they definitely are not the norm for new buildings.

[BrianTH]

Interesting question.

I see a lot of this sort of thing in the future, in the areas you are describing:

Windom Hill Place - xSota Construction Servi

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09269/1000865-30.stm

[PreservationPioneer]

The short answer is, especially in poorer areas of the city, the housing that becomes abandoned and derelict will simply be bull-dozed, and nothing will be rebuilt on the site. This is called urban prairie and it is already rapidly encroaching on certain neighborhoods, such as Manchester, East Allegheny, Esplen, the Bluff, etc. The one neighborhood I can think of that is a perfect example of urban prairie is Calbride Place.

In the more prosperous neighborhoods, there is infill, where new houses are built on vacant land where buildings probably stood in the past. This helps the neighborhood maintain a more cohesive and intact appearance.

Will more old houses fall down and be replaced? Absolutely, particularly in the poorer neighborhoods, but the houses will only be replaced on the day that people actually have a reason to live there again. The more affluent areas do a pretty good job of rehabbing the houses. You don't find too many abandoned houses in Shadyside or the South Side.

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Builder and buyer create modern South Side Slopes townhouse with great rooms, great views

I wonder how long houses that are built on hills last?

I mean, even if a house has been there 100 years, would it make it another 100 years with just the effects of general land erosion? I mean, if built on a hill.

On the other hand...as to housing style. Those photos look a little too modern, but still have a similar style. I saw the same in photos of Baltimore, where people build modern-looking rowhomes. But, they do still seem to be several floors high and tall..very Pittsburgh-like.

[BrianTH]

My understanding is that the stability of structures on slopes all depends on the nature of the slope in question. The most problematic areas tend to be where other areas are draining through. But if your structure is on a relatively high, relatively stable plot, it could last indefinitely.

Those townhouses were desiged to look modern/stylish/chic, but also fit into the overall look of the Slopes. They are not necessarily my cup of tea, but I appreciate the effort to at least somewhat blend in, and they are also land- and energy-efficient.

I tend to agree with AA that in many of the farther-flung slope neighborhoods, we are unlikely to see a lot of infill in the near term. I think we will get back to investing in those areas eventually, but for the next 20-30 years I expect most of the infill to happen in areas that provide more convenient access to existing amenities, transportation infrastructure, and so on.

Turning that point around, to attract developers and buyers up the slopes, you have to offer something a bit special/unusual for Pittsburgh. The view can be part of that, but I think the modern/chic approach is one way of sweetening the deal (another is conversions of cool older buildings, like churches, into upscale condos).

[jtpgh]

thinking about the "urban prarie" concept (and I know many folks may disagree with me) but I see nothing wrong with a little bit of thinning in some neighborhoods. Pgh is very dense, and i dont think the loss of the bottom 10% of our worst housing stock would be the end of the world.

I see it alot in my hood, Mt wash... there is an interesting mix of quality housing built to last and low quality "temp" housing clearly built 70-100 years ago as mill housing - built quickly and cheaply, and not built to last. Combine that with the fact that this same neighborhood lacks 2 things that modern people like - yards and parkin - and a little bit of spotted urban praire aint so bad...

on my street, for instance, there are a few blocks of ultra dense housing, but my block all of the houses are on double lots (which frankly is still pretty dense). But the point is, I have a little 50x60 lot (50ft of frontage) and technically I could build another house next to mine (legally) ...but my little yard is wonderful (small garden, place for a dog/kid to run around, maybe a game of horse shoes, who knows...) and the slightly lower density means there is room for parking, and room for drivways/garages if so desired.

If the current popluation trends continue, which I would say indicate we are finally bottoming out our population loss, we would still be a long way away from adding hundredds of thousands of people to the area....so its not like we are going to need TONS of new housing like we did after WW2

[BrianTH]

Keep in mind that there are a lot fewer people per household than back in our peak population years. That means we have lost fewer occupied housing units in percentage terms than we have people, and conversely if we are gaining population now, we will start gaining occupied housing units faster than you might otherwise think. Brownfield developments will absorb some of that, but still, I think people might be surprised how quickly we need to start infilling some of the current high-vacancy areas.

The other problem is that you can't maintain walkable neighborhoods and frequent public transit services below a certain population density range. Combine that with the fewer people per household, and you can't have TOO many vacant/side lots.

[Doowlle34]

Apropos of this discussion, I note that a local architecture firm has, for several months, advertised on craigslist a custom-designed "infill" home for under 300k, not including site acquisition costs.

Urban Living Project - Design for New Construction (http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/reo/2114642545.html - broken link)


It's seemingly a more economical alternative (assuming you can find a reasonably-priced plot of land in the City to build on) to the Windom and Riverside Mews developments, which I think were in the 600k and 400k price range, respectively.

However, I'm not sure if they have built one of these yet. Moreover, based on the Porsche in the blueprint, they appear to be aiming at a fairly affluent customer.

[BrianTH]

Apparently their market is middle-aged men looking to build city homes for their mistresses.