Lawrenceville....good place to rent?

[TRO Z]

Lawrenceville is certainly trying to change it's reputation, there's alot of investors, realtors and community members pulling out their pom poms (as the saying goes....)
Personally, I think the area has ALOT ...I MEAN ALOT OF WORK AHEAD OF ITSELF...

By re opening the Hospital, it should give a boost to the local economy...But some people are touting this opening as a major factor in the gentrification of L'Ville...Insanity..

L'Ville is VERY shady at night, and the open drug trade in that area is ridiculous....Not to mention one of the largest areas in the city for prostitution...

Now for the GOOD...

(1) The community involvment is extremely strong, organizations like the Lawrerenceville Corp have done an excellent job...Hats off to them....
(2) The great stock of old row houses on Butler st. could provide a strong business presence, similar to the S.Side..
(3) Some local artists have accepted L'Ville as their home--major plus

The verdict is still out on L'Ville...At a time like this, I wish I had the crystal ball

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

I have my predictions on Pittsburgh you have yours, only time will tell who is correct.

Fair enough.

Its flawed when you are implying that the constrained supply is going to cause price increases. You have to also know how willing people are to substitute goods, I don't think either of us knows the answer to this.

Housing is a differentiated product market, so there will be some relative price increase caused by an increase in relative demand. Of course to build a full model of a particular local real estate market would require a lot more detail, but nothing I have suggested depends on being able to do that.

But your claims about DC are not correct, even in 2005 the rent-price ratios were getting bad in DC . . . .

What I wrote above was:

I know DC the best, having recently rented there. Home prices and rents were definitely out of line in the exurbs. But in the core urban neighborhoods, rents appreciated along with home prices.

The graph you linked doesn't speak to those claims, because it is for the overall DC market.

. . . . or perhaps you'll say you have to look at it on a per neighborhood basis.

Obviously yes, since that was the exact nature of my original claim (that different neighborhoods had done different things in DC). And again, both the link I originally gave and the link you then supplied confirm that you have to look at these issues on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis.

[Humanoid]

both the link I originally gave and the link you then supplied confirm that you have to look at these issues on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis.

You do, but the point of the link I gave was the difference in the behavior or low, med, high end homes. If you look at the map at LA you'll see that it isn't so much the the areas that are "closest to urban cores" are doing the best but rather areas with the most high end homes.

Applying this to Pittsburgh would imply areas like Lawrenceville, South side etc will be hardest hit as these are where the low end homes are in Pittsburgh. Of course there are worse areas in Pittsburgh, but they are pretty much Ghettos and home to many empty houses and haven't appreciated much over years.

Regardless, Lawrenceville isn't very nice as many people have suggested in this thread.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

You do, but the point of the link I gave was the difference in the behavior or low, med, high end homes. If you look at the map at LA you'll see that it isn't so much the the areas that are "closest to urban cores" are doing the best but rather areas with the most high end homes.

Again, from your own link, quoting David Stiff:

During the housing bubble, as home prices appreciated at record rates in many metro areas, housing market activity was pushed outward to distant suburbs and ex-urban areas. Many homebuyers, who could no longer afford to purchase homes close to urban centers, were forced to “drive until you qualify” – trading longer commutes for lower mortgage payments.
...
Because of the reversal in trends that boosted demand for housing in outlying suburbs, since they peaked in 2005 and 2006, home prices have generally fallen more in towns and neighborhoods located farther away from urban centers.

Now I don't know LA well enough to comment on how that pattern applies to LA, although the author of that piece seems to think it does apply to LA in some fashion ("This seems to fit with some new research from David Stiff . . . ."). But the link I gave goes into detail on several other cities besides LA, describing this geographic pattern. I think my link also suggests why you may be getting confused if you are relying solely on LA as an exemplar:

L.A. is an anomaly. No real urban core exists. The area is just a sprawling string of suburbs that run together.

And most of that sprawl is bathed in red ink. Median prices in communities throughout Riverside and San Bernardino counties -- the distant, inland suburbs that are at the epicenter of the region's subprime and foreclosure crises -- are down, often sharply.

Lower-priced homes in tony Palm Springs have lost about 24%, though more-expensive homes are up slightly. Less-affluent cities such as Ontario, Chino and Rancho Cucamonga are all down between 15% and 31%. Los Angeles County, Orange County to the south and Ventura County to the north are suffering equally.

The only notable area of strength: high-end real estate.

So I don't think you are necessarily wrong about LA specifically (meaning in the absence of a real urban core, it is just the higher end neighborhoods holding up), but because you are using an anomalous city as your exemplar, you are missing out on the actual pattern in cities with real urban cores. Again, you would have to ask the author of the article you linked why he thinks the pattern in LA is nonetheless consistent with this pattern in those other cities.

Applying this to Pittsburgh would imply areas like Lawrenceville, South side etc will be hardest hit as these are where the low end homes are in Pittsburgh.

Again, if you apply the actual geographic pattern as described by David Stiff, and as borne out in the examples in the link I provided, areas like Lawrenceville and the South Side are more likely to hold up because they are close to Pittsburgh's urban centers.

Regardless, Lawrenceville isn't very nice as many people have suggested in this thread.

Your personal opinion is duly noted.

[Humanoid]

Again, from your own link, quoting David Stiff:

The link I gave was not to David Stiff rather to someone that was quoting him, they didn't completely agree with him. I'm not so sure why you are so fixated on this one quote, when again I was citing a post by CR.

areas like Lawrenceville and the South Side are more likely to hold up because they are close to Pittsburgh's urban centers.

Again this wasn't the point of the post I cited. You seem to underestimate the scope of the credit bubble over the last 7 years, but its effects on the Pittsburgh area will become obvious in 1-2 years. Whether an area is or is next to an "urban core" isn't going to protect it, one just has to look at the Japanese housing bubble for a demonstration of this. But regardless, you are free to think these areas are going to appreciate or whatever else. Maybe you should buy a few rotting row houses in Lawrenceville, it ought to be a great investment!

Your personal opinion is duly noted.

The opinion was expressed by multiple people in this thread. Its truly fantastic that you puffed up the area as you did without mentioning the problems of the area, I mean that sort of positive image is exactly what helps people when they are moving to a new area! I'm sure they will find comfort in the fact the area is appreciating when people are dealing drugs in the alley to their apartment, or when someone offers themselves for $50 bucks.

[BrianTH]

Humanoid,

Your concerns are duly noted.

[Humanoid]

Your concerns are duly noted.

You're wasting database space with these sorts of comments. C'mon be green.

[AlyssaP]

Hi everyone,

I was also thinking about moving to Lawrenceville and researched the Liberty Green development that my husband and I like a lot. But while doing my research I stumbled upon the real estate listing that lists a brand new 2008 house at $299K. The address of the place is 12 J Russel Smith Road, Lawrenceville NJ 08648. Can someone tell me why this is so cheap? Is this a bad area?

[Copanut]

We're talking about the Lawrenceville area of the City of Pittsburgh.