The Burgh is the Most Affordable City

[zman63]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

309,300.

If we have gains i guess 307,000. If we have losses 303 to 304k.

[alastad]

Originally Posted by zman63

Those terms fit pittsburgh as well.... The mcdonalds in east liberty was selling heroin through its drive through to Pittsburgh Police.

I guess you chose not to read the articles? So when was the last time Pittsburgh grew by 11,000 jobs in it's downtown over 18 months?

Your response is a typical response of someone who is a supporter of less desirable cities like Detroit, you try to compare it's problems to the problems a more desirable city like the burgh faces when there is no real significant comparison to be made, live up to the facts, PGH is a more desirable city than Detroit, our higher cost of living is proof of that, the more people who want to live some place the higher the cost of living.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by aw_now_what

The owner of the two houses across the street from you bought them from the city, but had no money to rehab/restore them. He sat on them because he was in bankruptcy and could not sell anything while his debts were being sorted out. He did just sell them a few weeks ago, at a loss. The new owner of both buildings is a longtime developer who has done quality rehabs in Lawrenceville and elsewhere.

You shouldn't present your guesses about something like this as fact. Also, Brereton has no "rowhomes." Those are tenement buildings.

In any event it was highly irresponsible for this former owner to buy two historic homes in dire need of tender loving care without having the necessary funds available to rehabilitate them. The one building has decayed so much that I'm not certain it can now be salvaged, and I have no desire to look out my bedroom window and see an empty lot that would merely serve as a vivid reminder of what used to be there. Pardon me for not having sympathy if this man's bumbling mistakes now cost a responsible developer the opportunity to save either of those buildings. New construction infill always sticks out like a sore thumb---just look at the vinyl-sided monstrosities across from the Rock Room Bar at Herron & Dobson (opposite Melwood) for a good representation of that. I don't want to see two new vinyl-sided boxes with front-facing garages built across the street from me, and I know as a neighborhood we would vehemently fight such a proposal from a new developer.

We are an intimate neighborhood with a very strong civic association. We're taking years to discuss as a community what to do with a parcel of land up the hill from me that was left empty several years ago after a major fire in order to make sure it best serves everyone's needs for functionality and aesthetics. Many of our newer residents, including myself, are city-lovers who moved to this neighborhood partially based upon our affinity for its architecture and heritage. We don't want to compromise our quality-of-life for developers to make a quick buck.

Also, I was under the assumption that single-family dwellings that were attached in one long row were indeed "rowhomes". Sorry to strike such a nerve with you if you're honestly defending the former owner of those two structures across the street from me, but why did he buy not only one but TWO derelict homes in need of major upfront cash if he didn't have any spare money to spend? That was highly irresponsible for our entire neighborhood.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

New construction infill always sticks out like a sore thumb.

Manchester does an okay job with newer stuff. These in Deutschtown are good too. Minus the "clean" look of the brick/foundation, you might not know it was infill until you look at the siding on the side/back.

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Also, I was under the assumption that single-family dwellings that were attached in one long row were indeed "rowhomes". Sorry to strike such a nerve with you if you're honestly defending the former owner of those two structures across the street from me, but why did he buy not only one but TWO derelict homes in need of major upfront cash if he didn't have any spare money to spend? That was highly irresponsible for our entire neighborhood.

Her point was not that to be a rowhouse they need to be constructed in a row. It was that those two buildings (and many others in Polish Hill) were built to be multi-family apartments, not single-family houses like most of Bloomfield, Lawrenceville, South Side, etc.

[PreservationPioneer]

I don't like the infill that tries to look "modern." Why can't the infill look old fashioned like the houses around it?

[FreightTrainRunning]

I actually disagree. I'd rather infill look appropriate to the time when it was build rather than try and (often) fail to ape earlier styles. New victorian homes tend to look rather superficial or cartoonish compared to the real thing.

[eschaton]

I think it's important to have things like setback and massing align with historic structures, but you really don't need to match actual surface treatments IMHO.

[FreightTrainRunning]

I'll admit that those sixties split-levels in Manchester are pretty darn jarring in that neighborhood.