What's getting torn down??? (Lawrenceville: real estate, houses, neighborhood)

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

You know what I wish downtown had? Townhouses. You know, fifty years ago, downtown Pittsburgh still retained some of its original townhouses from the 19th century. There are still a few on Strawberry Way and in the Wharf section. Wouldn't it be cool if more historic-looking townhouse streets could be recreated downtown to complement the few that are left? I'm thinking of Center City Philly, Baltimore, and NYC, which have streets of modest homes in their downtown neighborhoods still.

While I would be in favor of preserving any existing townhouses, I can't really agree with you about new townhouses. Land Downtown is just way too valuable at this point to justify using it for townhouses, and in fact ultimately such a plan would contribute to making Downtown less affordable (the townhouses would end up incredibly expensive, and take up land that could be used to offer many more less expensive units instead).

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by greg42

Well, if you could undo the lower Hill and Point State Park/Gateway Center....

I think it will eventually become apparent that even the Lower Hill (and near Strip, and near Uptown, and North Shore) is ill-suited to townhouses, and will really need to be mostly or entirely developed with multi-story apartment buildings. If for some reason part of Point Park was reclaimed for redevelopment, I think it would be the same thing.

I understand the aesthetic appeal of townhouse neighborhoods, but as I noted before, when you put them on land that could sustain a much higher density of residential units, what you end up doing is making the cost of housing in the relevant area artificially more expensive.

[greg42]

I only brought that up because I figured if those couple of actions hadn't happened there might be more remaining old townhouses/rowhouses/whatever houses in the immediate vicinity of downtown.

I wouldn't really suggest that we put up townhouses here now; that's just not the density for this spot. They would have to be crazy expensive anyway. And there are several other good spots rather close by where you can get houses, sometimes even detached ones. Mt Washington is another one.

The townhouses that fit downtown are the "townhouses" that are part of condo or apartment buildings, 2-level units that have their own internal stairways. For example, The Pennsylvanian has had 2-level apartment units configured as townhouses for at least 18 years. I remember because someone I knew back then moved into one from another unit in that building. Piatt Place also has condo units on the top I think they call townhouses, and as I recall The Carlyle has some townhouse units as well. Otto Milk has some 2-level units, but I think they were more loft than townhouse. (The Pennsylvanian has some loft units too.) And these are just the ones I know of.

No, they're not the same as having your own street-level entrance and such. But that's okay. We don't have to have that style of housing right in the middle of the office/financial district.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by greg42

The townhouses that fit downtown are the "townhouses" that are part of condo or apartment buildings, 2-level units that have their own internal stairways.

I agree--those can be cool.

[fleetiebelle]

Of interest to the board preservationists: 1822-vintage log house doomed?

While driving on Butler Street on Saturday, Keith Cochran glanced toward 38th Street and noticed that a gable had disappeared from a two-story log house in Lawrenceville.
The architect was dismayed to see demolition had begun on what might be the oldest log house to remain a residence in the 21st century in any major American city.

[gg]

Originally Posted by fleetiebelle

Of interest to the board preservationists: 1822-vintage log house doomed?

Why do they call it a "log house"? Sure doesn't look like a log house, it looks like clapboard. They also look like homes that should be torn down. Junk!

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Why do they call it a "log house"? Sure doesn't look like a log house, it looks like clapboard.

This picture from the article may help clarify:



The actual structure is built out of stacks of notched logs, rather than framing.

They also look like homes that should be torn down. Junk!

Oh please. In this case the historical value is really undeniable, although I would be fine if they were moved into Arsenal Park before restoration (as discussed in the article).

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Oh please. In this case the historical value is really undeniable, although I would be fine if they were moved into Arsenal Park before restoration (as discussed in the article).

Looks like an unsalvageable home, but some of the materials look like they may have some value. I remember the homes now. They were on the market a while back. I thought about them to rehab because I love interesting places, but they were so butchered up, they had no value left. Seems I was correct in my thinking at the time and thankfully didn't take them on.

[BrianTH]

It is true that if you are looking at these homes purely with the eyes of a real-estate flipper, and are unable to understand their historical significance, then you may not be capable of understanding what you can actually do with them to extract and present that historical value.

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

It is true that if you are looking at these homes purely with the eyes of a real-estate flipper, and are unable to understand their historical significance, then you may not be capable of understanding what you can actually do with them to extract and present that historical value.

You are kidding I hope. My first home I restored from a complete mess was as historic as they come. I returned the amazing Victorian to its original state and then some. I don't renovate homes, I restore them. There is a difference. You won't see garbage plastic windows going in on any home I touch.

Anyway, there is a point that the restoration gets silly. Those homes are really at that state. I never went through them because the pictures showed how chopped up they are. What are you going to do with that? Do you think I can find matching timbers? Maybe, but that is a pretty tall order.

Anyone that wants to rebuild them might be better off tearing one down and using the parts to fix one of them. That is possible. Saving one is better than none, but how much money are you going to sink into something like that? I guess if you have lots of money and just want to do it to do it, but most people that have that much money aren't going to live where those are located.

It was fun to think about saving them and I did think about it. Best to tear them down and build something better.