Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A billboard does not mean that there was a dramatic population loss. Between 1960 and 1980, a time that covers the span of when this billboard was up, Seattle lost 64k people and started gaining again right after that and ending up 23k from the low by 1990.
Pittsburgh lost around 160k between 1960 and 1980 and another 50k by 1990.
I can't think of any major West Coast cities that have huge neighborhoods or surrounding communities with many abandoned homes and vacant lots like you find in Pittsburgh. There are newer subdivisions in the Central Valley and exurbs of CA that were hard hit by the housing meltdown that were abandoned, but those tend to be far away from the major cities.
It isn't as easy as you think to get some of these abandoned properties back on the market. A year or two ago I read that even in "trendy Lawrenceville" there are something like 300 vacant homes. Pennsylvania has some of the strongest laws in the country protecting homeowners, but as a side effect, it's incredibly difficult for municipalities to seize abandoned buildings and get them back on the market. The only legal way to do so is to wait until they are tax delinquent and put them up for a sheriff's sale. The problem is the houses at that point often have back liens on them besides property taxes, including utility bills and sometimes personal income taxes owed by the former homeowner. The lack of clear title makes many of these homes hard to auction, because without an expensive title search you won't know how much you're on the hook for. By the time the vacant houses actually get to the point where they can be seized, they're often in a state of extreme deterioration as well, meaning many go right from seizure to being condemned. Not to mention there's absolutely nothing that the city can do about absentee homeowners (something which happens often if someone goes into a nursing home or moves out of state and retires, but never gives a family member authority to sell) as long as they pay property taxes.
I went to a presentation on Land Banking that's getting started in Pittsburgh. Communities that sign on can put abandoned properties in the Land Bank and they clear the titles and liens making the properties available to buyers. Details here: Pittsburgh Land Bank | Introduction
Could we just drop that gawd-awful term "remuddling"? I know you and eschaton think it's cute to put down people who actually want to improve their homes, but not everyone agrees.
Many of these houses had no particular "grandeur". Having grown up in a "this old house" in Beaver Falls (well, Patterson Heights, really), I can tell you lots of them have: tiny closets, requiring you to store some of your clothes in an attic, basement, garage, wherever; speaking of garages some have no original garage, which is a good storage place not just for cars, which most of these people will have, but bikes, power tools, a freezer, an extra refrigerator, yard tools, etc; dangerously outdated wiring; kitchens with outdated appliances, no dishwasher/garbage disposal; no insulation; worn out flooring and not all of it hardwood; single pane windows with storm windows that have to be put up and taken down with the seasons; etc. Lots of etc.
I don't want to speak for others whom you addressed here but I don't think you're understanding "remuddling" properly. To me it means fixing things both improperly and as cheaply as possible without care to both the original character AND structural integrity of the house.
For example, I own a 150 year old house in the city. I have the original windows on the ground floor of my house but someone along the way "remuddled" the windows on my second floor by putting in cheap and wrong-sized windows. I'm in the process of having the original windows restored, which may be a little more expensive than newer, wrong-sized windows, but restoring the originals will make them last for another hundred years rather than a cheap quick fix that I'll have to deal with again in my lifetime. Someday when I can save up enough money I plan to fix the upstairs windows remuddling.
Another example of "remuddling" can be the exterior of the house. Some people in Pittsburgh, instead of repointing and caring for their brick facades will cover it with some god-awful substitute (stucco, fake stone, vinyl siding) that only covers up the problem instead of fixing it. I had to have my facade and my back wall repointed but this is something, again, that since I had it fixed properly I'll probably never have to do again in my lifetime.
I had to have my facade and my back wall repointed but this is something, again, that since I had it fixed properly I'll probably never have to do again in my lifetime.
You could have saved $50 but using Insulbrick and asbestos glue.
I don't want to speak for others whom you addressed here but I don't think you're understanding "remuddling" properly. To me it means fixing things both improperly and as cheaply as possible without care to both the original character AND structural integrity of the house.
For example, I own a 150 year old house in the city. I have the original windows on the ground floor of my house but someone along the way "remuddled" the windows on my second floor by putting in cheap and wrong-sized windows. I'm in the process of having the original windows restored, which may be a little more expensive than newer, wrong-sized windows, but restoring the originals will make them last for another hundred years rather than a cheap quick fix that I'll have to deal with again in my lifetime. Someday when I can save up enough money I plan to fix the upstairs windows remuddling.
Another example of "remuddling" can be the exterior of the house. Some people in Pittsburgh, instead of repointing and caring for their brick facades will cover it with some god-awful substitute (stucco, fake stone, vinyl siding) that only covers up the problem instead of fixing it. I had to have my facade and my back wall repointed but this is something, again, that since I had it fixed properly I'll probably never have to do again in my lifetime.
Yep. This isn't just a subjective matter too. One of the reasons the Design Center of Pittsburgh began offering low cost (and initially free) architectural consultation to Pittsburgh residents was because a study found that this remuddling was actually lowering the market value of homes. Residents thought they were improving the salability of their houses by "modernizing them" but they either had false ideas about what other people desired or were being sold a bad bill of goods by shady contractors (who, for example, might want to just patch in the windows they have on the back of their truck).
I don't want to speak for others whom you addressed here but I don't think you're understanding "remuddling" properly. To me it means fixing things both improperly and as cheaply as possible without care to both the original character AND structural integrity of the house.
For example, I own a 150 year old house in the city. I have the original windows on the ground floor of my house but someone along the way "remuddled" the windows on my second floor by putting in cheap and wrong-sized windows. I'm in the process of having the original windows restored, which may be a little more expensive than newer, wrong-sized windows, but restoring the originals will make them last for another hundred years rather than a cheap quick fix that I'll have to deal with again in my lifetime. Someday when I can save up enough money I plan to fix the upstairs windows remuddling.
Another example of "remuddling" can be the exterior of the house. Some people in Pittsburgh, instead of repointing and caring for their brick facades will cover it with some god-awful substitute (stucco, fake stone, vinyl siding) that only covers up the problem instead of fixing it. I had to have my facade and my back wall repointed but this is something, again, that since I had it fixed properly I'll probably never have to do again in my lifetime.
I agree with your examples, but eschaton seems to consider just about any remodeling project "remuddling". Some of these "This Old House" kitchens did not give one much to work with, and were remodeled in the 50s/60s by then youngish Greatest Generation owners according to the standards of the time. My parents' home was built in the days before everyone had refrigerators and the previous owners had the fridge in a hallway by the kitchen door. My dad, an engineer, figured out a way to get one in the kitchen, though it did cut into the space for a table and chairs, so they put in a breakfast bar against the outside wall. The bar did give them some much needed counter space too, as the house was built with exactly none. My mom used to say that she thought with these old houses (her term) the took whatever space was left over and called it the kitchen. When I did some research on kitchens, I found out she was pretty much right. Back in the 2000s, my nephew and his wife lived in a duplex in the "D" city that was built in the 1920s and had zero counter space in the kitchen. They had to use the kitchen table as a counter top. "Kitchen planning" did not become a "thing" until WW II, when research was done at the University of Illinois, my DH's alma mater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchen (See section on 'Domestic Kitchen Planning')
Older homes were often built without adequate closet space, at least not adequate for our needs/wants of today. Putting winter clothes away (in the attic or wherever) in the summer and vice versa was a semi-annual activity b/c not everything fit in the closet. They often didn't have garages which does give some added storage space as well as a place off the street for the car(s).
I think we're talking past each other. Let me discuss some topics I know something about. (I know, that's odd on CD, but humor me).
The power grid: Yes to all you said, but what is the generating capacity? If there are more people, more power will need to be generated.
Same for water, sewer and gas. More water will be consumed. Pittsburgh doesn't appear to have any water shortage, but water treatment capacity will have to increase with increasing population, as an example.
Crime: Crime stats are usually expressed as number of crimes per 100,000 people, or some such denominator. It cracks me up to read articles in the popular press, particularly women's magazines that say such drivel as "there are more incidents of 'XYZ crime' in California than anywhere else in the country". Well of course! California has the largest population of any state, 12.1% of the US' population. If the crime rate is the same, there will be fewer crimes, numerically, with a smaller population. More police will be needed for a larger population. Police departments are staffed on a police officer to population ratio.
Schools: The biggest expense in any school district is salaries. As the school population goes up, the number of teachers, bus drivers, coaches, and yes, even administrators goes up. Costs go up. Teachers are staffed on a ratio as well. Some schools have been closed in Pittsburgh, as the population has decreased. They might need to be reopened, or more likely, new schools built to accommodate more students in the area where they live.
These points aren't being disputing.
However, they can lead to the wrong conclusion when considered in isolation. The topic can be counter-intuitive if fixated only on the marginal costs you listed. It is the fixed costs shouldered by a declining population that has lead to service cuts and poorly maintained utilities and infrastructure.The increased marginal costs you listed are offset by the increased tax base of a larger population. At the same time the fixed costs are split between more people. Because Pittsburgh has had significant population decline, that second part of the equation is critical.
This is a different scenario than cities that have continued growing and are the largest they've ever been. For them, yeah, population growth can push utilities, infrastructure and service beyond their capacity and beyond their capacity to grow to meet demand. We aren't in that situation.
However, they can lead to the wrong conclusion when considered in isolation. The topic can be counter-intuitive if fixated only on the marginal costs you listed. It is the fixed costs shouldered by a declining population that has lead to service cuts and poorly maintained utilities and infrastructure.The increased marginal costs you listed are offset by the increased tax base of a larger population. At the same time the fixed costs are split between more people. Because Pittsburgh has had significant population decline, that second part of the equation is critical.
This is a different scenario than cities that have continued growing and are the largest they've ever been. For them, yeah, population growth can push utilities, infrastructure and service beyond their capacity and beyond their capacity to grow to meet demand. We aren't in that situation.
The biggest cost in a school system is salaries. Salaries are directly dependent on how many students there are. The number of teachers needed is computed on a teacher: student ratio. "For example, while most public and private organizations and businesses have 35 to 40 percent of their budgets tied to personnel and benefits, the comparable number in public schools is, on average, more than double, between 80 and 85 percent." https://www.aasa.org/uploadedFiles/P...BriefFINAL.pdf
I agree with your examples, but eschaton seems to consider just about any remodeling project "remuddling". Some of these "This Old House" kitchens did not give one much to work with, and were remodeled in the 50s/60s by then youngish Greatest Generation owners according to the standards of the time. My parents' home was built in the days before everyone had refrigerators and the previous owners had the fridge in a hallway by the kitchen door. My dad, an engineer, figured out a way to get one in the kitchen, though it did cut into the space for a table and chairs, so they put in a breakfast bar against the outside wall. The bar did give them some much needed counter space too, as the house was built with exactly none. My mom used to say that she thought with these old houses (her term) the took whatever space was left over and called it the kitchen. When I did some research on kitchens, I found out she was pretty much right. Back in the 2000s, my nephew and his wife lived in a duplex in the "D" city that was built in the 1920s and had zero counter space in the kitchen. They had to use the kitchen table as a counter top. "Kitchen planning" did not become a "thing" until WW II, when research was done at the University of Illinois, my DH's alma mater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchen (See section on 'Domestic Kitchen Planning')
Older homes were often built without adequate closet space, at least not adequate for our needs/wants of today. Putting winter clothes away (in the attic or wherever) in the summer and vice versa was a semi-annual activity b/c not everything fit in the closet. They often didn't have garages which does give some added storage space as well as a place off the street for the car(s).
Interesting. Gives some context to the idea that all these old houses were full of "grandeur".
There are varying definitions of "old" as well. Look at how many houses there are in Pittsburgh in many different neighborhoods built in the mid-to-late 19th century. They were built before electricity or plumbing let alone before automobiles were ever thought of to require building a garage. So I highly doubt eschaton would consider something like the installation of electricity and plumbing in my house "remuddling" even though that must've been one hell of a remodeling job whenever it happened. It's just certain things befefit and add value to a house (like the refrigerator your dad put in the kitchen) and certain things do not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
