Suburbanites: What Would it Take to Entice You to Consider Urban Living? (Pittsburgh: home, public school)

[pit2atl]

Originally Posted by Sideblinded

It feels like the Government is trying to turn teaching into being akin to a waiter/waitress. Here is your base pay, we will "*Tip" (bonus) you if you turn your kids into PSSA robots. Added bonus, you get to work in the 5 star school and get better *tips if we like you.

no child left behind murdered our public school system for 8 whole years (Bush) i was in HS when that law was put into effect and i remember Teachers stressing about us passing those test than we where because their jobs were on the line! SAD

[greg42]

For us, all it's going to take is time and ability to sell the house. We're going to do some work on the house this year and I think stick around a little bit to enjoy it ourselves as opposed to getting it in a little better shape only to sell it. If I knew then what I know now I probably wouldn't have bought this house, but it's okay. I don't expect to be underwater or anything, and the payment is nowhere near problem level. (Indeed moving to the city our rent would likely be significantly more than the mortgage payment including the taxes.) If we take another dip for the worse I suppose it could be a little problem but not a big one.

Assuming work and such remains the same, I suspect we could in fact end up living in the city within a few years. The major impediment is owning a house outside the city. Although I'd also like to see more rental units in downtown (this seems to be coming, perhaps, with state office and Verizon buildings among others) and in the Strip, and rent more in the $1200 or less range for preferably two bedrooms rather than just one. The more units that come on line, the more likely the rents won't be so high.

Major impediments for others include schools (not an issue for me), desire for larger yards (I think I've grown out of this one now) and perhaps costs involved for same (sometimes it's possible to have those things in the city but not at the same cost as you can have them outside, even including commuting costs). For me added costs of taxes and rent could mostly be offset by reduced commuting costs and reduced upkeep costs on the house. I'm not sure even $1200 is low enough to keep the costs equal all the time, but I need to consider everything, like the water heater I just replaced, etc.

[Caladium]

Originally Posted by grimacista

However, there are a lot of people that aren't into 'fixer upper' type places and - in the suburbs, you can get newer houses that are in better shape. Of course, places will not change from 'run down' to 'alright' if people don't move in and fix them. Otherwise, if people from the suburbs don't want to live in 'run down' areas, it is probably going to cost them a good buck in the city's 'nice' neighborhoods.

There's a lot of truth to this. There are many folks who only want to live in a place with newer construction, a large yard, a "spread out" feeling, cul de sacs, and the lower cost of housing.

So how do you lure them, especially the ones who feel claustrophobic in cities, or who don't like the idea of density? In addition to better schools, you'd need to create neighborhoods that are attractive to these people. In other words, places that have the attributes listed above. A few areas like that might already exist, but new construction is a key element so it might be more successful to build a few developments. Make sure there are cul de sacs and Starbucks! Of course, the question is: do you really want to build a "faux suburb" inside city limits just to attract people?

A fair number of people move out to the burbs because their work is out there. To attract them, you'd have to give the company $$$ in some form to convince them to move inside city limits--if you can get the company to move, you might get the employees to move with it. Maybe.

[hinsey86]

We did look in the city when we first moved here. I love the vibe of the city and would consider the move give the right situation but I don't see it happening. So we will continue to enjoy where we are and drive 20-25 minutes into the city to get our dose as needed. We are currently looking at moving further out so to go the other direction we would need:

Lower taxes

Jobs in the city (our jobs are both in Butler area and we actually would like to find a house in Butler but are now in Gibsonia). I don't see this one changing.

At least 1/2 acre for less than 300000!

[FreightTrainRunning]

There's a lot of truth to this. There are many folks who only want to live in a place with newer construction, a large yard, a "spread out" feeling, cul de sacs, and the lower cost of housing.

Boy, I've never gotten that myself. I lived out in Murrysville for most of the 00s and just hated it. You couldn't walk anywhere, there weren't any good places to eat and it took forever to drive anywhere to do anything. I gladly pay a little more in taxes just so I don't have to spend my entire life sitting in the car.

Obviously, many people disagree with me. I'm fine with that.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by jimmyev

Just because a politician is using this as an excuse doesn't make it true. Cities with military bases (San Antonio, Austin) should be the poorest of the poor. But they aren't.

It is tough to make apples to apples comparisons between cities. For example, the City of San Antonio is huge: it is 412 square miles and contains 1.3 million people, which is 62% of the Metro population. The City of Pittsburgh is 58 square miles and contains 305,000 people, which is 13% of the Metro population. They are facing very different situations.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Caladium

There are many folks who only want to live in a place with newer construction, a large yard, a "spread out" feeling, cul de sacs, and the lower cost of housing. So how do you lure them, especially the ones who feel claustrophobic in cities, or who don't like the idea of density?

If people really prefer that lifestyle and are willing to pay the full cost of their preferred lifestyle, then fine. But I think a lot of people are dealing with long commutes and an autocentric lifestyle because that is the only decent housing in a decent neighborhood that they can afford, and that is because the supply of decent housing in decent urban/dense neighborhoods is artificially low.

Of course, the question is: do you really want to build a "faux suburb" inside city limits just to attract people?

Absolutely not. Cities tried to compete with post-WWII masterplanned suburbs, and failed. Cities should offer what they are best at offering, and let people who want something else (and are willing to pay for it) live elsewhere.

A fair number of people move out to the burbs because their work is out there.

Again, this works for some people. However, a lot of people find themselves with a long commute from one suburb to another suburb.

To attract them, you'd have to give the company $$$ in some form to convince them to move inside city limits--if you can get the company to move, you might get the employees to move with it. Maybe.

Employment in the City is not really something Pittsburgh in particular has a problem with right now.

[Caladium]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

If people really prefer that lifestyle and are willing to pay the full cost of their preferred lifestyle, then fine. But I think a lot of people are dealing with long commutes and an autocentric lifestyle because that is the only decent housing in a decent neighborhood that they can afford, and that is because the supply of decent housing in decent urban/dense neighborhoods is artificially low.

Yup, $$$ is a big factor, indeed. You could always try bribery, I suppose. Give every Cranberry resident who agrees to move inside city limits a rebate equal to one year of their annual salary. Of course, that could cause lots of other problems, but it would bring in a lot of people!

Or, you could try moving the city line. Hey, it might work.

[Caladium]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Absolutely not. Cities tried to compete with post-WWII masterplanned suburbs, and failed. Cities should offer what they are best at offering, and let people who want something else (and are willing to pay for it) live elsewhere.

Yes, I totally agree. I was just being facetious. As for those people who find themselves with a long commute from one suburb to another suburb--I have no solution for that. I guess that happens when you buy a house to be near work, but then the company moves?

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Suburbanites: What Would it Take to Entice You to Consider Urban Living?

It would take a divorce. My husband hates city living. He even hates the suburbs. He wants to move to the mountains.