Tim Stevens, B-PEP complain about house demolitions (Pittsburgh, Plum: renting, houses)

[I_Like_Spam]

According to this morning's P-G, the complaint of the Black Political Empowerment Project is that the city of Pittsburgh has been too aggressive in their program of razing dilapitated and abandoned properties in Homewood-Brushton and other majority African American communities.

The suggestion was that the city should be looking to renovate the properties as it hurts the community fabric to have so many vacant lots.


I'm not sure I agree with Stevens et al on this.

In my L'ville alley, the razing of several houses and garages has improved the whole street in my view. Down in the 10th ward, a lot of houses were razed in Dresden and Natrona Ways and other alleys and streets. The area has improved since then.


Vacant land gives an opportunity to build anew, and I just don't see the houses being razed in Homewood Brushton as being that historical and neither were the razed homes in Lawrenceville.

[Herodotus]

I bet Tim doesn't have a vacant house next door to him. The problem is that midnight plumbers strip the pipes from these houses. This even happens in places like Mt. Lebanon sometimes. The difference is that it makes economic sense to spend 20 to 40 thousand dollars to repair a stripped house in an area where houses go for 6 figures. There is little demand for houses in Homewood, and the cost of repairs is usually more than the house would be worth, even if restored to good condition. Thus, the stripped house will remain vacant, drawing vagrants, drug users, and other riff raff, and creating a fire hazard.

[PreservationPioneer]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

In my L'ville alley, the razing of several houses and garages has improved the whole street in my view. Down in the 10th ward, a lot of houses were razed in Dresden and Natrona Ways and other alleys and streets. The area has improved since then.

I was hoping the gentrification of Lawrenceville would bring about preservation of the historic alley houses.

Vacant land gives an opportunity to build anew, and I just don't see the houses being razed in Homewood Brushton as being that historical and neither were the razed homes in Lawrenceville.

Are you sure about that?

It is technically true that excessive demolitions over the course of time destroy not only the architectural integrity and history of the neighborhood, but also the neighborhood itself. See California-Kirkbride, Esplen, the Bluff, Schweizer Loch. In ten years, see what's left of Spring Garden. Look how awful modern housing looks next to historic housing in Garfield and North Braddock.

This is my favorite article about how demolitions adversely affect urban neighborhoods, from the Built St. Louis blog.

Here is how it applies to Pittsburgh (from my blog).

[Bert Peters]

I don't think so, Tim

[Pghuser]

I can see both sides of the argument. Look at Beltzhoover, the community has been ravaged by the wrecking ball. No one is developing anything there and there is little hope. The city demos an eye sore house then the vacant land becomes an eyesore in the spring/summer when the grass and weeds get out of control.

[Geeo]

I believe that it was the neighborhood people who have been asking for more demolition in that area, since vacant houses were drawing drug dealers, vagrants and midnight plumbers. Some were even set on fire. Some of those houses have been sititng vacant for years, and some were falling down.

While it would be nice if they could be saved, present circumstances don't seem to point in that direction.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

I was hoping the gentrification of Lawrenceville would bring about preservation of the historic alley houses.



Are you sure about that?

It is technically true that excessive demolitions over the course of time destroy not only the architectural integrity and history of the neighborhood, but also the neighborhood itself. See California-Kirkbride, Esplen, the Bluff, Schweizer Loch. In ten years, see what's left of Spring Garden. Look how awful modern housing looks next to historic housing in Garfield and North Braddock.

This is my favorite article about how demolitions adversely affect urban neighborhoods, from the Built St. Louis blog.

Here is how it applies to Pittsburgh (from my blog).

The St. Louis link refers to how that city had corner store retail in the devastated blocks being discussed.


This kind of retail is gone forever.

Looking at city directories from Pittsburgh from a hundred years ago, in every community there were numerous corner groceries, meat markets, etc. and in less devastated communities you can see where the stores at. Near here, at the corner of 45 and Plummer, you can see houses which used to be retail outlets. That was from a previous age, where most folks didn't have automobiles at their disposal and toting food from the waterworks Wal-mart just wasn't a practical option.

Better transportation options in the modern era have made the kind of setup in ultradense communities that formerly existed less necessary. And just as well, as the prices and efficiencies offered at the Wal-mart and other mass retailers provide for an increase in living standards across the board.

[PreservationPioneer]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

The St. Louis link refers to how that city had corner store retail in the devastated blocks being discussed.

This kind of retail is gone forever.

Actually, my neighborhood (West Park) has several operating corner stores. There are also several other operating corner stores in McKees Rocks, The Bottoms, and Presston.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the topic at hand: historic urban neighborhoods being demolished past the point of no return.

Your argument seems to be that "corner stores have moved out, because the people now live and shop in the suburbs, which is better for everyone." It just seems like you are saying that having urban neighborhoods is no longer applicable to modern life.

That was from a previous age, where most folks didn't have automobiles at their disposal and toting food from the waterworks Wal-mart just wasn't a practical option.

But the article I cited wasn't about corner stores. It was about the erosion of urban neighborhoods by demolition. So you're saying that because corner store retail no longer exists (according to you), there is no reason to live in an urban neighborhood?

Better transportation options in the modern era have made the kind of setup in ultradense communities that formerly existed less necessary. And just as well, as the prices and efficiencies offered at the Wal-mart and other mass retailers provide for an increase in living standards across the board.

Yes, Wal-Mart has done so much for the good of our country. The second largest employer in our state, where minimum wage prevails, has really increased living standards. The extinction of local business, and the availability of cheap Chinese goods at the expense of products made in America and American jobs have really helped, too.

There's nothing like the quality of life represented by driving to Wal-Mart from your vinyl house, in your Hyundai SUV, and buying a bunch of cheap crap.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

There's nothing like the quality of life represented by driving to Wal-Mart from your vinyl house, in your Hyundai SUV, and buying a bunch of cheap crap.

Typical Americans nowadays. This short-sightedness is what I think of when I think of Cranberry Township.


JibJab - Big Box Mart - YouTube

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

In my L'ville alley, the razing of several houses and garages has improved the whole street in my view. Down in the 10th ward, a lot of houses were razed in Dresden and Natrona Ways and other alleys and streets. The area has improved since then.

You live in an alley? I thought you lived on 47th or somewhere else around a block from me.

Regardless, I sort of disagree. At one point I would have agreed, but the remaining alley houses are being fixed up pretty rapidly and don't really seem any worse in terms of the residents in them than those on the streets any longer. Selltheburgh has mentioned he knows people renting out alley houses in Dresden Way now for $1,000 per month. I think if Lawrenceville "turned" ten years earlier a lot of the demoed houses could have been saved. Look at how nice Banner Way is these days - it's full of houses and mostly homeowner-occupied.

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

Vacant land gives an opportunity to build anew, and I just don't see the houses being razed in Homewood Brushton as being that historical and neither were the razed homes in Lawrenceville.

If they ever rebuild in Homewood, it will be "mixed-income" new construction suburban-style garbage which no "urban pioneers" will be caught dead buying (e.g., the same crap they are building in Garfield, and for the most part in the Lower Hill).

At least Homewood is on the outskirts of the city, so eventually turning it into an undesirable suburb isn't as bizarre.

In general though, I do think demolishing alley housing is the least damaging thing you can do in actual blighted neighborhoods. It doesn't change the view from the main streets, and if houses remain on the main streets, it does improve the value of them.

Sadly, these policies are never linked with actually trying to save the houses on the main streets. I wish that Pittsburgh had a way to take houses by eminent domain when they are unoccupied but before they actually get structurally unsound. We'd be able to save a lot more of these babies in that case.