moving to verona,pa (Pittsburgh, Penn Hills: middle-class, for sale, rental)

[Copanut]

All of Verona is in the Riverview SD.

[gg]

Originally Posted by Copanut

All of Verona is in the Riverview SD.

It is a little confusing, but yes, all of Verona is in the Riverview SD. What make it confusing is "Verona Hilltop" is in Penn Hills School and a part of Penn Hills uses the Verona Post Office, so it has a Verona mailing address. The border is on 4th Street. Kind of an odd set up.

Verona isn't as nice as it was years ago and that is directly due to all the section 8 housing that moved in. That little town shouldn't have had that happen to it, but it is there now.

[PreservationPioneer]

Verona seems fine to me. I was there just the other day. Cute business district and modest homes. The area seems very quiet.

Of course it was probably better decades ago. What place wasn't?

[gg]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

Verona seems fine to me. I was there just the other day. Cute business district and modest homes. The area seems very quiet.

Of course it was probably better decades ago. What place wasn't?

East Liberty wasn't better decades ago, unless you are talking about many decades. Many parts of the city are way better now than before. A lot of the people that brought East Liberty down as well as other parts of the city move out a little further and Verona got hit with some of that. It was never some great place, but it was okay. To be honest, Oakmont was never great, but it is still a pretty good place. Good for Oakmont that the real estate is priced high enough they don't get a bunch of section 8 going in. Verona was cheap enough to be hit hard.

[Uptown kid]

Verona has section 8 problems... Though it's really not unsafe... IMO it's in the category of Sharpsburg, McKees Rocks Bottoms, northern Brentwood, East Munhall, Port Vue, Dravosburg, Glassport, 10th Ward/Kirsty Park McKeesport, Esplen or Turtle Creek... In comparison neighborhoods like: the southern part of Pitcarn, Lower Spring Garden Valley, East Duetchtown, most of Elliott, East Pittsburgh and/or Crestas Terrace in the North Versailles are worse... IMO areas like: West End, Stowe, Spring Hill-City View Etna, Verona Hilltop in Penn Hills, Glenwood, Upper Polish Hill, Bon Air, East McKeesort, Green Valkey in the North Versailles, Wilmerding, Clairton north of the tracks, Duquesne north of the tracks & the poorest parts of West Mifflin are little better.
*non of these places are bad they all (including Verona still have a majorty white population)

[Tirade]

Originally Posted by Copanut

Section 8 kills an area, just check Crafton and Swissvale.

What is wrong with Crafton?

[PreservationPioneer]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

East Liberty wasn't better decades ago, unless you are talking about many decades. Many parts of the city are way better now than before.

I disagree. I have talked to enough old timers, and seen enough pictures of the glory days (pre-1970s) to know that pretty much every neighborhood was better mid-century than today. I think there has also been considerable decline in many neighborhoods since the 1980s and 1990s. Think about all of the urban renewal mistakes, urban prairie, abandoned and rotting homes that exist now that didn't exist a few decades ago. East Liberty is a mess outside of the improving business district. A lot of old people die off and their houses sit abandoned until they are torn down. This is an epidemic all around the city, except for the fashionable neighborhoods, where they have a chance of being renovated instead of torn down. The business districts are not what they were, either. Mom and pop stores are a thing of the past.

[BrianTH]

Section 8 doesn't create "the bad element", and those people are still going to live somewhere. And in fact a lot of "the bad element" in a distressed neighborhood may not be getting Section 8, and conversely a lot of "the good element" (people who are law-abiding and otherwise desirable neighbors) may be getting Section 8, and of course in the long run more families placed into deeper poverty because of housing costs would likely mean more of "the bad element" in total. But because it is a convenient scapegoat, you will continue to see Section 8 blamed for the problems of distressed neighborhoods, even though the fundamental causes of those issues usually go way, way beyond Section 8, and wouldn't disappear if Section 8 were eliminated.

[Uptown kid]

The bad element of Verona is the racial tension as expressed in the article in the first page... Other than that things currently aren't too bad.

[Clint.]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Section 8 doesn't create "the bad element", and those people are still going to live somewhere. And in fact a lot of "the bad element" in a distressed neighborhood may not be getting Section 8, and conversely a lot of "the good element" (people who are law-abiding and otherwise desirable neighbors) may be getting Section 8, and of course in the long run more families placed into deeper poverty because of housing costs would likely mean more of "the bad element" in total. But because it is a convenient scapegoat, you will continue to see Section 8 blamed for the problems of distressed neighborhoods, even though the fundamental causes of those issues usually go way, way beyond Section 8, and wouldn't disappear if Section 8 were eliminated.

I did qualify my "bad element" statement by saying that under the right circumstances Section 8 recipients could make fine neighbors and no one would even know they were receiving it. Of course poverty and associated features are the primary problems. Plus, there are nowhere near enough Section 8 vouchers to go around to everyone who wants one, so unless there is a public housing complex in the neighborhood it will be unlikely a majority of people are actually getting it. Most have no interest earning enough money to move beyond their subsidy and keep it for life, unless they are kicked off for breaking the rules.

The pattern is clear: when a neighborhood reaches a certain point and people who do not fit the traditional behavioral mold start moving in, then would-be residents avoid it, other residents move away or die, and the town goes downhill. But, who knows - maybe the neighborhood was already going downhill and subsidized welfare migration just hastened what was bound to happen. It's unfortunate either way. It happened to East Liberty and Homewood and the rest of the East End - now they are slowly being priced out and moving to the surrounding communities. Right or wrong, it's how places become ghettos. We don't need more ghettos. Plus, if there are enough subsidized renters they lower the school district test scores, and you know how people love to make a big deal about that and the negative consequences of low scores.

I have personally met dozens of Section 8 recipients and can remember only 2 or 3 I would want living on my street. I am aware of several landlords who own many Section 8 properties, and few of their properties are kept in acceptable outward condition. Of course, there can be slum lords and poor tenants who don't receive Section 8, but that does not make subsidized housing a good thing for communities.

Of course people need to live somewhere but they shouldn't be shipped from town to town causing collateral damage whever they decide to land. If they can blend in and be responsible residents, then fine, no one cares (or maybe even knows). But too many of them aren't. They should have to pass a personality and respectfulness test or something first before just being handed a voucher merely because they are poor.

Or, make the vouchers extra generous and let them move to Sewickley or Rosslyn Farms. Build a few large public housing complexes in Mt. Lebanon and Marshall Township. Why should working class areas, areas that are just getting by, get dragged down by purposely adding even poorer people - people who aren't even interested in trying to earn their own living or improve their lot - to the neighborhood?