R.I.P. Phineas Street (Photos) (house, upkeep, taxes)

[szug-bot]

They just are not useful for someone in 2015. People need space to store all their crap. These homes were good, but maybe not even perfect, for a family in 1890. The kids then had one good outfit, 1/2 a drawer of other clothes, and their only toys were jacks and a small doll house the boy in the family threatened to destroy.

These can never serve a person of lower means, either - i bet the taxes would probably be too great or would escalate after a few years.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

They just are not useful for someone in 2015. People need space to store all their crap. These homes were good, but maybe not even perfect, for a family in 1890. The kids then had one good outfit, 1/2 a drawer of other clothes, and their only toys were jacks and a small doll house the boy in the family threatened to destroy.

There's plenty of houses structurally identical to these which are occupied, and many cases selling for over $200,000, in Lawrenceville, South Side, the Mexican War Streets, Bloomfield, Oakland, etc. Not to mention a block across the highway.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by eschaton

There's plenty of houses structurally identical to these which are occupied, and many cases selling for over $200,000, in Lawrenceville, South Side, the Mexican War Streets, Bloomfield, Oakland, etc. Not to mention a block across the highway.

I thought you had a child, and therefore moved from a Lawrenceville townhome to more accommodating digs.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

I thought you had a child, and therefore moved from a Lawrenceville townhome to more accommodating digs.

I have two kids. Our old rowhouse was snug, but doable, with only one kid.

Quite honestly, most of those houses are probably bigger than our old rowhouse in Lawrenceville. Our house was only 12 feet wide, but the standard width for North Side houses during the mid-late 1800s was 20 feet. Of course, more of it was lost due to circulation space (since the stairway was front to back and they had a hallway) but most of those houses, provided they have a real ell, should be roomier.

[DoubleStraps]

My house is covered in Insulbrick and I think it looks awesome.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have two kids. Our old rowhouse was snug, but doable, with only one kid.

Quite honestly, most of those houses are probably bigger than our old rowhouse in Lawrenceville. Our house was only 12 feet wide, but the standard width for North Side houses during the mid-late 1800s was 20 feet. Of course, more of it was lost due to circulation space (since the stairway was front to back and they had a hallway) but most of those houses, provided they have a real ell, should be roomier.

My house in L'ville is also just 12 feet wide. I checked the 1940 census online, and found that a family of 5 lived there that year. And the house next door had 5 children for a family of 7.

I guess people need a lot more room nowadays than they did during Pittsburgh's industrial hey day.

[charisb]

Well, someone is fueling this trend:
Tiny houses are big with consumers seeking economic freedom | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

[PreservationPioneer]

These houses are not tiny. Some are 2000+ square feet. But more importantly, houses like these are common to Pittsburgh's trendiest and most expensive urban neighborhoods, where people want to live in the city.

[PreservationPioneer]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Pres Pio, you of all people should know - it has to do w/ the SIGNIFICANCE of it. Am I right? Maybe there is someone here who works in the city government who might be able to answer.

This may not be everyone's opinion, or a "qualified opinion," but my opinion nonetheless: the oldest neighborhoods in the city are the most historically significant. End of story.

There are many buildings and neighborhoods deemed historic simply because they have big, beautiful old houses, or because they are in affluent areas where people are more likely to care about history (Mount Lebanon, for example, is a historic district. Is Mount Lebanon more historic than this?). Neighborhoods with more modest houses are given the short end of the stick.

One needs to take into account labor history, minority history, American immigrant history, and unwritten history -- all of which exists in the more modest dwellings of the past as well as the grand mansions.

The longer a building has stood, the more history it has witnessed.

[RogersParkTransplant]

Yikes, I am so sorry to see this thread. We live up the street and I worry about this street a lot - though I have mixed feelings about the demolition.

Pioneer, I agree with you at heart. I'm also pragmatic. Phineas suffers from neglect, true, but also from close proximity to traffic. All the streets around it are similarly endangered, but stand a better chance because they are set back from the busiest streets.

I'm hoping the new development brings economic growth to E Ohio, and also helps buffer the back streets along Chestnut (like Tripoli) so they become more desirable. I guess I am saying the sad loss of the Phineas houses will be worth it if the new hotel etc is a catalyst for renewal throughout Deutschtown, which I believe it can be. If that happens, more buildings will be saved, because most people who want to move to the North side like the Mexican War Streets and want to see more of that. But it has to come hand in hand with economic growth, and I think the hotel etc are going to nudge that along.

More to the point: I would live on Tripoli Street near Chestnut, but not on Phineas, because of the location in relation to the highways. I'm all about saving houses and I hope people are right to say some on Phineas might be retained, but if they are not I would sadly understand.

On a more happy note, I am so thankful that the Neu Kirche thing seems to be happening. That means much more to Deutschtown on the whole than poor old Phineas street.