City Employees Required to Live in City Limits (Pittsburgh, Seven Springs: 2014, job openings)

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Almost 80% of voters voted "YES". Unsurprising.

You want the entire metropolitan area to live within the city limits, but you'd be the first one to complain about how expensive everything became.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by jay5835

You want the entire metropolitan area to live within the city limits, but you'd be the first one to complain about how expensive everything became.

Housing prices wouldn't skyrocket if developers were actually keeping pace with residential demand. Our city grew during the recession---a time when banks coincidentally wouldn't lend to developers, despite the need for new apartments. Now we're playing "catch-up", hence the rapid rental increases occurring in District 7 and other districts. Bill Peduto's goal is to increase the city's population by 20,000 under his tenure, and I think that's achievable if more developers finally come to the table.

Increasing supply will help to satisfy demand, which will moderate prices.

On my ONE BLOCK alone there are FOUR rowhouses that are vacant and crumbling. Why haven't the owners fixed them up and rented them out? If you can't afford to maintain a house, then you have no business owning a house. A refurbished floor in one of these rowhomes would fetch $600/month-$800/month. A couple of these rowhomes could have three units, which means if someone fixed them up they could have a gross monthly cash flow of $1,800-$2,400. Even if one month of that income goes to property taxes, and another month goes to cover insurance and some of the utilities not paid by tenants, then that's still 10 months of net income totaling $18,000-$24,000. That's like enjoying the income from a lucrative second part-time job, yet nobody is fixing their properties up here. Why?

There is a LOT of land prime for development and/or redevelopment here in the city. Just in/around Polish Hill, a neighborhood with a true housing crisis, the former Donnie's Place Bar site near the Busway is large enough for a large-scale mid-rise apartment complex, and the Iron City Brewery site, just across the Herron Avenue Bridge, could also house a couple hundred more units. There are a lot of "gap teeth" on our blocks that could benefit from new construction infill. There is plenty of room to build in the "hidden" part of our neighborhood that is immediately between Frank Curto Park and the Busway. There is room for ~500 more residential units here in Polish Hill alone, so there's absolutely no reason for the housing shortage here.

Then you have the Strip District, where most complexes have waiting lists. With 1100 Smallman, the Wholey's Warehouse conversion, Buncher's riverfront project behind the produce terminal, and potentially those recently-announced seven-figure condos that will be hundreds MORE units in the Strip in the next few years.

This city used to house nearly 700,000 residents. We now house just over 300,000, yet we're mired within a serious "housing shortage". Why?

[Aqua Teen Carl]

For the millionth time, Pittsburgh does not have a housing crisis. The East End has a slight housing shortage. Pittsburgh =/= the East End. There is the south, north, and west chilling there too pal.

Also lol at the "why don't people magically have money to invest into property/infrascture/transit" volume 243. Oh I don't know.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

This city used to house nearly 700,000 residents. We now house just over 300,000, yet we're mired within a serious "housing shortage". Why?

Do you really not know the answer to that? Back when 700,000 people were living here, there were a lot more people living in each residence. Many places that now house one or two people were home to large families. The rhythm method wasn't really that dependable. There were lots of kids. Also, one home might have housed three generations, something you don't see much anymore.

Additionally, as you have pointed out again and again, there are simply more people who want to live in the East End than in other parts of town. So the East End, where you live, is where a "serious 'housing shortage'" is going to be felt first.

[PghYinzer]

A housing crisis would entail there not being enough housing for people, thus people ending up leaving the area or living on the streets.

What you have sir is an "income to expense" crisis or as my mother always said a "champagne tastes on a beer budget" type crisis.

Not being able to afford the most expensive version of something is not a crisis. It may be a crisis to you, but not the city as a whole. It is akin to saying there is a food crisis in Pittsburgh becasue I cannot afford to eat at Eleven every night for dinner.

I cannot afford a Range Rover, so I drive a Jeep. I cannot afford to buy a renovated rowhouse in Lawrenceville, so I bought a renovated house in Brookline.

Everything in life is not fair, and everything in the world is not equal. Some of us can afford to live in the East End, and some cannot. Live the life you can afford, and make it the best it can be....or spend your time dreaming of something that is not going to happen any time soon.

[robrobrob]

Most people make a sacrifice to save for their first house. Have you ever watched House Hunters? It is fairly common to see a young couple living with their parents while they save for a down payment on their first house. Move to the cheapest apartment that you can find in Sharpsburg, Etna or Millvale and start saving. I bet it would be about 200 a month cheaper. You would also avoid the city wage tax while you save up for a down payment.

[szug-bot]

i voted to keep the requirement (FOR the referendum).

i read most of the responses - im glad most people feel the same.

if you are paid with city dollars, it is not tyrannical, exactly, to expect you to live in the borders of the body that provides you with employment.

i think everyone associated with the schools should have to do the same

[Pghuser]

I voted to keep the workers inside the city as well. I always believed in it and still do.

The PGH school teachers should've never been allowed to move outside of the city.

[zman63]

Again, i think this vote was irrelevant. I forsee the residency requirement being dropped within 5 years or sooner. The city has trouble filling and retaining employees. People move or choose not to live in the city because of the school district. A judge will have the final say. I see this going as the same way as the ruling in cleveland for the same reason.

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by zman63

Again, i think this vote was irrelevant. I forsee the residency requirement being dropped within 5 years or sooner. The city has trouble filling and retaining employees. People move or choose not to live in the city because of the school district. A judge will have the final say. I see this going as the same way as the ruling in cleveland for the same reason.

A Judge may have the final say but that doesn't make the vote irrelevant. What it means is that the Judge will have a very recent indication that the overwhelming majority of City residents support the residency requirement, undercutting any potential argument that the rule is somehow merely a vestige of an outdated public policy and not germane to modern Pittsburgh. Additionally, anytime 80% of voters vote for anything, an elected judge is sure to take notice.

It may be bargained away eventually, but I'm not sure to what degree the Police Union will be willing to give back anything meaningful to do away with the residency requirement. It's my understanding (anecdotally...talking with some cops) that it's mostly the older police that want the requirement lifted. Younger cops, like many others of their generation, don't seem to have nearly as much of a problem living in the City.