Why is everyone leaving the city? (Pittsburgh, Penn Hills: apartment, renter, neighborhood)

[Paul2421]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Nationally I think it's a bit of all of the above, but more the latter. If you look at national statistics, for example, the 25-34 demographic (prime urban years) is decreasing slightly in urban areas, and increasing slightly in "hyper urban" areas. But this is because of young adults without college educations leaving cities, and young adults with college educations are replacing them. The "comeback of the city" is really just gentrification writ large.

At the same time though, data has suggested that those in early middle age (30s and early 40s) are heading to the suburbs at a faster rate than the 1990s. I haven't seen this broken down by education level - I'm guessing once again that the increase is being driven by early middle aged people without college degrees - but a lot of young professional types still do ultimately settle in suburbia.

this makes sense nationally but in pittsburgh there are still very affordable areas in the city even for families and the housing is even cheaprer than the desirable suburbs.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Paul2421

this makes sense nationally but in pittsburgh there are still very affordable areas in the city even for families and the housing is even cheaprer than the desirable suburbs.

I'm not sure I'd say the city is cheaper on the whole than the desirable suburbs in the case of Pittsburgh. See here.

First, at the very high end, one of the three major areas of truly expensive homes in the county ($500,000 plus average listing price) is in the city (North of Forbes and parts of Shadyside). The only areas with similar prices are Fox Chapel and areas around Sewickley. This makes Pittsburgh a real anomaly for a rust belt city - plenty of other ones maintained middle-class neighborhoods within city limits, but not rich neighborhoods like we did (unless they're "new money" areas that gentrified recently).

When you compare the housing cost in gentrified/gentrifying areas of the city - Mexican War Streets, Lawrenceville, South Side, East Liberty, Highland Park, etc - they are pretty much comparable to Upper Saint Clair, Mt. Lebanon, Hampton, Cranberry, etc, but not quite as parts of the North Hills where there's a lot of relatively new construction. Except of course the average city house is probably smaller in many cases.

Pittsburgh is just a very evenly distributed city/metro compared to most around the country. We have always retained a relatively large share of rich and middle class areas in the city, and (due to the mill towns) had a large swathe of poor areas in the suburbs. Gentrification is just exacerbating this.

[Paul2421]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I'm not sure I'd say the city is cheaper on the whole than the desirable suburbs in the case of Pittsburgh. See here.

First, at the very high end, one of the three major areas of truly expensive homes in the county ($500,000 plus average listing price) is in the city (North of Forbes and parts of Shadyside). The only areas with similar prices are Fox Chapel and areas around Sewickley. This makes Pittsburgh a real anomaly for a rust belt city - plenty of other ones maintained middle-class neighborhoods within city limits, but not rich neighborhoods like we did (unless they're "new money" areas that gentrified recently).

When you compare the housing cost in gentrified/gentrifying areas of the city - Mexican War Streets, Lawrenceville, South Side, East Liberty, Highland Park, etc - they are pretty much comparable to Upper Saint Clair, Mt. Lebanon, Hampton, Cranberry, etc, but not quite as parts of the North Hills where there's a lot of relatively new construction. Except of course the average city house is probably smaller in many cases.

Pittsburgh is just a very evenly distributed city/metro compared to most around the country. We have always retained a relatively large share of rich and middle class areas in the city, and (due to the mill towns) had a large swathe of poor areas in the suburbs. Gentrification is just exacerbating this.

I understand. I was just making the point that people aren't leaving the city because they are priced out because there are still very low priced areas of the city. There are other things at play. They are most likely priced out of the higher end areas though and don't see the value in moving to a lower cost area of the city.

[fleetiebelle]

Originally Posted by norcider

Or not at all. There was a piece recently in one of the local news outlets, the gist of it was that more people are dying than are being born. Younger generations just aren't having kids. I will look for the story.

But then wouldn't those people be less likely to pick up and move from the city to the suburbs? If they're not worried about safety or schools or having a big lawn for kids to play in, why not just stay put?

[stremba]

Originally Posted by erieguy

Living in and enjoying the city of Pittsburgh was never argued.

What was basically said, if you would have read and understood the posts clearer, is that many think city living is the only living. Meanwhile, there are many areas in including suburbs in and around the greater Pittsburgh area.

It's also a bit ironic that many of this type of people's opinions hinge upon arbitrary political boundaries, rather than on the actual built environment of the areas in question. Many of the "suburbs" in the Pittsburgh area, especially the inner ring ones, are not really suburban at all, but are just as urban as the neighborhoods that border them. I would defy any of these "the city is the only place to live"-types to tell me what the big difference is between Dormont and Beechview, between Bellvue and Brighton Heights, or between Crafton and Oakwood (just as a few examples).

[Paul2421]

Originally Posted by stremba

It's also a bit ironic that many of this type of people's opinions hinge upon arbitrary political boundaries, rather than on the actual built environment of the areas in question. Many of the "suburbs" in the Pittsburgh area, especially the inner ring ones, are not really suburban at all, but are just as urban as the neighborhoods that border them. I would defy any of these "the city is the only place to live"-types to tell me what the big difference is between Dormont and Beechview, between Bellvue and Brighton Heights, or between Crafton and Oakwood (just as a few examples).

many feel as though they are leeching services.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Paul2421

many feel as though they are leeching services.

But love tourists which is no different than anyone else visiting and patronizing the area.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by stremba

It's also a bit ironic that many of this type of people's opinions hinge upon arbitrary political boundaries, rather than on the actual built environment of the areas in question. Many of the "suburbs" in the Pittsburgh area, especially the inner ring ones, are not really suburban at all, but are just as urban as the neighborhoods that border them. I would defy any of these "the city is the only place to live"-types to tell me what the big difference is between Dormont and Beechview, between Bellvue and Brighton Heights, or between Crafton and Oakwood (just as a few examples).

Exactly.

As far as political boundaries go, I couldn't care less what my neighbors or areas political views are, much less choosing where to live because of them.

[that412]

Originally Posted by stremba

It's also a bit ironic that many of this type of people's opinions hinge upon arbitrary political boundaries, rather than on the actual built environment of the areas in question. Many of the "suburbs" in the Pittsburgh area, especially the inner ring ones, are not really suburban at all, but are just as urban as the neighborhoods that border them. I would defy any of these "the city is the only place to live"-types to tell me what the big difference is between Dormont and Beechview, between Bellvue and Brighton Heights, or between Crafton and Oakwood (just as a few examples).

I run in pretty urbanophilic circles and I don't know a single person who'd finger wag someone for living in Dormont over Beechview. "This type of people," in my experience, cares mostly about the urban experience - walkability, access to good transit, etc. - regardless of arbitrary political boundaries.

[Mtl-Cns]

Originally Posted by erieguy

Living in and enjoying the city of Pittsburgh was never argued.

What was basically said, if you would have read and understood the posts clearer, is that many think city living is the only living. Meanwhile, there are many areas in including suburbs in and around the greater Pittsburgh area.

I don't think this is true at all. I doubt if many (maybe even a majority?) of the people/urban boosters who post here regularly were born and raised in a city, let alone in Pittsburgh. These people are well aware of what it's like to live in either a suburb or a rural area.