Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-21-2011, 02:30 PM
 
4,412 posts, read 3,940,548 times
Reputation: 2325

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
what were the neighborhoods that grew in the last decade despite the overall population loss?
I remember it being the central northside, downtown, the strip, and the south side. is this correct Brian?
I'd venture to say that the first three will see substantial growth again this decade and the neighborhoods adjacent to them will be the next neighborhoods.
Something getting mixed-up here is that gentrification is not necessarily dependent upon population growth, especially in a city with the demographics of Pittsburgh. There are several neighborhoods and municipalities that saw gains in housing costs and household income (two primary indicators of gentrification), while experiencing a net population loss. This is mostly attributed to younger, more affluent, and smaller households. Smaller household in turn creates a demand for more housing units, thus increasing demand for renovated and new homes that push up neighboring property values.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2011, 02:31 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,871,363 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by calvin20874 View Post
Yes, I agree that the core area will experience more development. What about places like Wilkinsburg, though?
So I would define the core area to include at least the City and most of its adjacent municipalities, including Wilkinsburg.

Quote:
You mentioned the busway as a possible catalyst for revitalization. The busway has been around for more than 20 years, has it not? If anything, Wilkinsburg has decayed further during that time.
I believe the first segment opened in 1993. It was extended in 2003.

I think Wilkinsburg's history in that time is a little more complex than straight decay, and it varies by which part of Wilkinsburg you are talking about. But generally, I would agree that until very recently, most of Wilkinsburg was the victim of a negative reinforcement spiral. But I also think things are changing for the better in Wilkinsburg, and for the reasons I gave above, I think the dynamics in the Pittsburgh area in general are changing as well in ways likely to be beneficial for Wilkinsburg. Finally, I would suggest that although Wilkinsburg did not fare well in recent decades, it also didn't entirely collapse in the period since 1983, unlike some other areas, and the Busway may have helped prevent that from happening.

Quote:
In fact, it seems to me that the eastern suburbs are slowly fading away in general (having grown up in the eastern suburbs).
I don't think all of the eastern suburbs can be put into a single category. I do think the upcoming decades could be harder on the established areas which don't have great transportation links into the core area. But other areas could do better than they have in recent decades as less autocentric and more urban areas become more popular again.

Quote:
You could point to the fact that the busway goes through East Liberty as a counter-example, but what has been the catalyst for revitalization of East Liberty? I was under the impression it was spillover (lack of available commercial real estate, etc) from Shadyside, as opposed to the busway.
I think a number of factors are involved. It is certainly true that Shadyside is out of room, but of course for a long time people in the East End were expected to head to suburban shopping areas anyway. What is happening in East Liberty is basically that people are rediscovering how convenient it is to have a major commercial center in that location. Part of that is just a matter of proximity, but it is also the case that East Liberty is at the center of a transportation network that was built up back when East Liberty first became a commercial center, which in turn happened because it was a stop on the Main Line of the PA RR as it came into Pittsburgh, and this is the same route being followed by the East Busway.

Of course that transportation network doesn't just include the East Busway--a bunch of major arterial streets also converge on East Liberty. But the Busway is part of that mix, and not a trivial part. It is particularly relevant insofar as East Liberty is reviving not just as a commercial center but also a high-density residential area, because the East Busway provides a direct and very quick transit link to Downtown.

To sum up a lot of general thoughts: I would agree that transit infrastructure alone can't force development to occur. You need enough potential demand to begin with, and you need to have a lot of other factors properly aligned. But under the right circumstances, it can in fact serve as an anchor for high-density redevelopment, meaning it can help provide an incentive and the means for high-density redevelopment to occur in a particular locale.

Are those circumstances going to be right for transit-oriented development in Wilkinsburg in the next couple decades? I think so, and other people think so, and there are preliminary signs that is already working. But we'll have to wait and see to know for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Philly
10,220 posts, read 16,729,984 times
Reputation: 2971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon View Post
Something getting mixed-up here is that gentrification is not necessarily dependent upon population growth, especially in a city with the demographics of Pittsburgh. There are several neighborhoods and municipalities that saw gains in housing costs and household income (two primary indicators of gentrification), while experiencing a net population loss. This is mostly attributed to younger, more affluent, and smaller households. Smaller household in turn creates a demand for more housing units, thus increasing demand for renovated and new homes that push up neighboring property values.
and revitalization is not necessarily the same thing as gentrification. for example, if beechview did take off as a hispanic neighborhood, it could be revitalized but not gentrified. neighborhoods with significant new housing stock of renewal of vacant housing stock will likely see increases in population. on the other hand, if an area of lawrenceville simply sees an increase in incomes it might still be viewed as revitalization even if the area didn't grow. lastly, there's turnover. if an area that is aging in place begins to be replaced by people with similar backgrounds, you may see changes in businesses (ie more coffee shops, better beer selection) even if the neighborhood is just getting new blood.
it's not a clear answer ut I do think where vacant land or buildings are filled up with people it can certainly be considered revitalization.

edited to add
east liberty railroad station
http://bradystewartphoto.photoshelte...000sWYXD0HdAJg

also, interestingly, the old wilkinsburg train station is still there. the question once came up, why is there no commuter rail? the obvious answer seems to be the east busway is in the most logical location for commuter rail...the former PRR ROW. I'd also point out the the value of the busway is only as good as the areas it serves. a revitalized east liberty is good for the value of being on the busway for wilkinsburg

Last edited by pman; 04-21-2011 at 02:57 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 02:53 PM
 
4,412 posts, read 3,940,548 times
Reputation: 2325
Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
and revitalization is not necessarily the same thing as gentrification. for example, if beechview did take off as a hispanic neighborhood, it could be revitalized but not gentrified. neighborhoods with significant new housing stock of renewal of vacant housing stock will likely see increases in population. on the other hand, if an area of lawrenceville simply sees an increase in incomes it might still be viewed as revitalization even if the area didn't grow. lastly, there's turnover. if an area that is aging in place begins to be replaced by people with similar backgrounds, you may see changes in businesses (ie more coffee shops, better beer selection) even if the neighborhood is just getting new blood.
it's not a clear answer ut I do think where vacant land or buildings are filled up with people it can certainly be considered revitalization.

edited to add
east liberty railroad station
East Liberty Railroad Station | The Brady Stewart Collection
I'm glad you used the word "revitalization." and i wish I had as well.
However, it is undeniable that the household replacing the traditional populations of places like the Mexican War Streets, Central L'Ville, South Side Flats, etc... is more educated and affluent, two significant markers of gentrification. I guess what I'm trying to say is that revitalization is a part of gentrification, but gentrification is not dependent upon revitalization. See Regent Square 20 years ago, or Greenfield today; Areas that were never in need of true revitalization, but have seen definite changes in household demographics.

Last edited by Mr. Mon; 04-21-2011 at 03:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:08 PM
 
Location: Philly
10,220 posts, read 16,729,984 times
Reputation: 2971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon View Post
I'm glad you used the word "revitalization." and i wish I had as well.
However, it is undeniable that the household replacing the traditional populations of places like the Mexican War Streets, Central L'Ville, South Side Flats, etc... is more educated and affluent, two significant markers of gentrification. I guess what I'm trying to say is that revitalization is a part of gentrification, but gentrification is not dependent upon revitalization. See Regent Square 20 years ago, or Greenfield and Mornignside today; Areas that were never in need of true revitalization, but have seen definite changes in household demographics.
no disagreement there but the central northside has seen increases in its population and there is potential for more even with smaller household sizes...there's room between east and west allegheny, the war streets and manchester not to mention the "north shore"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:41 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,871,363 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Copanut View Post
My point, replace a factory or a mill with a boat dock or shopping mall, the jobs to make a good living just aren't there. My two cents n'at.
No need to rely on anecdotes, because there are statistics available on the jobs being created in the Pittsburgh area:

Pittsburgh, PA Economy at a Glance

We're up 1.7% nonfarm jobs in the twelve months to March, which is a pretty good rate of increase for an area with a lot less population growth than that.

Above-average contributors:

Mining and logging +24.2% (you can bet that is mostly mining)
Manufacturing +2.1%
Professional and Business Services +2.8%
Education and Health Services +2.2%
Leisure and Hospitality +3.5%

Positive but below average this month (but again, all pretty good relative to population growth):

Construction +0.5%
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities +0.9%
Financial Activities +1.3%

The only sectors down are:

Information -2.2%
Government -0.3%
Other Services -0.6% (this is a catchall which includes repairs, drycleaning, religious services, pet care, and so forth)

That is a very diverse group of growing sectors, and many of those sectors have a lot of good jobs in them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Mid-Atlantic
12,528 posts, read 17,443,200 times
Reputation: 10629
Fine, call me Mr. Anecdote, but you can you honestly tell me that tearing down the Homestead works and replacing it with that God awful mall means more money for the people that work there than the mills?

That used to be a hardworking neighborhood, now it's a shooting gallery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:47 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,871,363 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
what were the neighborhoods that grew in the last decade despite the overall population loss?
I remember it being the central northside, downtown, the strip, and the south side. is this correct Brian?
I'd venture to say that the first three will see substantial growth again this decade and the neighborhoods adjacent to them will be the next neighborhoods.
It is actually really complicated. Since we last discussed it, someone actually generated a block-level map:

Growth Rings – Maps Of U.S. Population Change, 2000-2010



Blue is growing, red is shrinking, gray is unchanged, the darker the color the more in that direction. It would be nice if that map was more interactive and zoomable, but bottomline, there are are several spots of growth, and in fact strong growth, in the core area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:53 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,871,363 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon View Post
Something getting mixed-up here is that gentrification is not necessarily dependent upon population growth, especially in a city with the demographics of Pittsburgh. There are several neighborhoods and municipalities that saw gains in housing costs and household income (two primary indicators of gentrification), while experiencing a net population loss. This is mostly attributed to younger, more affluent, and smaller households. Smaller household in turn creates a demand for more housing units, thus increasing demand for renovated and new homes that push up neighboring property values.
Excellent point. What we would really want for this purpose is trends based on an occupied housing unit count rather than a population count. And one of the reasons that gentrification is going to move a lot faster than some people think is that we are down WAY less occupied units than we are down population, thanks to large decreases in the average people per occupied unit. Conversely, even small population increases will lead to relatively rapid gains in occupied units, for the same reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2011, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh area
9,912 posts, read 24,540,264 times
Reputation: 5162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Copanut View Post
Fine, call me Mr. Anecdote, but you can you honestly tell me that tearing down the Homestead works and replacing it with that God awful mall means more money for the people that work there than the mills?
Everything can't always continue the way it used to be. The mill was already closed. Do you honestly think the mall is not better than an EMPTY MILL?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top