Pittsburgh's Hilly Terrain - Future Problem? (Liberty, Troy: homes, buying, universities)

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

It isn't like there is some baby boom going on.

Oh baby! Polar vortex leads to baby boom in Pittsburgh | www.wpxi.com

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

I've been thinking a lot about Pittsburgh's topography lately... and basically topography is everything here.

Topography isn't quite everything, but it's one of the most important factors in terms of whether a neighborhood thrives or declines. Others I would include would be.

1. How close is it to the East End?
2. Is there an important psychological barrier (highways, rail tracks, etc) which divides it from a more fashionable area?

Thus you end up with hilltop areas being relatively undesirable, but modified by their overall location. Greenfield will never be as hip as Shadyside, for example, but it's also not as cheap as say Westwood (which has similar topography and housing stock in a less favorable place). And also that flat areas which otherwise might be desirable (Homewood, East Deutschtown) can still languor for a long time due to not really being part of a continual urban fabric any longer.

One thing which cannot be ignored is how historical development followed topography, because it largely reinforced the hilltop neighborhoods being undesirable. Unlike say San Francisco, where they just decided to have the grid go up steep inclines, we built around major hills, and only infilled later when required. Hillside yards, all things considered, were also generally speaking less desirable, so you saw lower-quality housing stock on them - particularly more frame houses, which had a greater tendency later on to have unfavorable remuddling which removed all charm. And these areas never developed strong business districts in the old days because it was thought you could simply take a streetcar down into a flatter area. The bottom line is it may well be if you could plop down an intact 19th century neighborhood similar to South Side or Lawrencevill on the top of Perry Hilltop it would be just as trendy today, but given no such neighborhoods exist, we'll never find out.

[gottaq]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

The topography is great if you enjoy views and exercise. It is one of Pittsburgh's best features. Our city will never grow enough to worry about expanding into the hillsides. Tons of flat land all around the rivers to be developed. I don't think we will see massive growth in our area. Just a steady slow increase. It isn't like there is some baby boom going on.

70% of the country will live in cities by 2050. People are leaving the suburbs for urban environments, due to shorter commutes, walkability and communities. All major US cities, including PBurgh, will have big time growth.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by gottaq

70% of the country will live in cities by 2050. People are leaving the suburbs for urban environments, due to shorter commutes, walkability and communities. All major US cities, including PBurgh, will have big time growth.

Pittsburgh could double in population without building a single new building over four stories tall. Probably two stories.

[bluecarebear]

Yuck. Skyscrapers? One of the major draws of Pittsburgh was supposed to be walkable neighborhoods. Move to NYC if you want skyscrapers.

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Topography isn't quite everything, but it's one of the most important factors in terms of whether a neighborhood thrives or declines. Others I would include would be.

1. How close is it to the East End?
2. Is there an important psychological barrier (highways, rail tracks, etc) which divides it from a more fashionable area?

Thus you end up with hilltop areas being relatively undesirable, but modified by their overall location. Greenfield will never be as hip as Shadyside, for example, but it's also not as cheap as say Westwood (which has similar topography and housing stock in a less favorable place). And also that flat areas which otherwise might be desirable (Homewood, East Deutschtown) can still languor for a long time due to not really being part of a continual urban fabric any longer.

One thing which cannot be ignored is how historical development followed topography, because it largely reinforced the hilltop neighborhoods being undesirable. Unlike say San Francisco, where they just decided to have the grid go up steep inclines, we built around major hills, and only infilled later when required. Hillside yards, all things considered, were also generally speaking less desirable, so you saw lower-quality housing stock on them - particularly more frame houses, which had a greater tendency later on to have unfavorable remuddling which removed all charm. And these areas never developed strong business districts in the old days because it was thought you could simply take a streetcar down into a flatter area. The bottom line is it may well be if you could plop down an intact 19th century neighborhood similar to South Side or Lawrencevill on the top of Perry Hilltop it would be just as trendy today, but given no such neighborhoods exist, we'll never find out.

Do we ever think there may be some sort of East End backlash in Pgh? If your life and career have nothing to do with the universities, or tech, and you aren't interested in whatever is going on in Lawrenceville, and East Liberty there is no need to be near it. However, the East End has become the baseline for what everyone now assumes is the new Pgh, worthwhile, and what works in terms of redevelopment. I understand why, and I personally don't have issues with it, but I tend to think at some point, people are going to finally be annoyed by the E-E-E (Everything East End) attitude and focus that various areas will begin to grow becuase they are NOT the East End. I know the mayor wants to push redevelopment to all areas of the city, but the a lot of people still have that EE or bust mentality.

The problem is, you can market as such..."Tired of the overpriced, and cramped East End? Sick of all the poodle therapy and Fro-Yo? Come to this lovely, safe, and charming neighborhood full of all emenities, and everything you have been asking for..." and then people cry out it's great, it's everything I want and need!! But alas it's not the East End so I will suffer indefinitely in my overpriced rental...

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

Sick of all the poodle therapy and Fro-Yo?

I've seen maybe 1 poodle in ten years. Lots and lots of dogs, but not many poodles.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Topography isn't quite everything, but it's one of the most important factors in terms of whether a neighborhood thrives or declines. Others I would include would be.

1. How close is it to the East End?
2. Is there an important psychological barrier (highways, rail tracks, etc) which divides it from a more fashionable area?

And why is the East End so awesome? Because it's the largest expanse of relatively gentle topography in the city. Without the constant segmentation of ravines found elsewhere, the East End was able to develop a continuous urban fabric that has fostered the type of population density and economic activity not seen elsewhere in the city.

And 'psychological barriers' like highways and rail tracks were placed where they were due to topography. Most of our highways meander through narrow ravines and river flats while railroads seek the flattest corridor possible.

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

I've seen maybe 1 poodle in ten years. Lots and lots of dogs, but not many poodles.

Agree 100%, but that is the standard dog breed used to over exaggerate the EE lifestyle, so I was just following suit.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Without the constant segmentation of ravines found elsewhere, the East End was able to develop a continuous urban fabric that has fostered the type of population density and economic activity not seen elsewhere in the city.

That's true, but we shouldn't forget that some of the gentle topography is actually a filled ravine (i.e. Schenley plaza) or a bridge (i.e. Forbes over Neville). You wouldn't have an easy walk from Pitt to CMU without a whole bunch of artifice.