dingurth1

dingurth1 t1_je8ctok wrote

I don't know if things have changed since then or if you were looking in the wrong place, but there's no permit requirement, and afaik, for zoning it only needs a 5ft setback. But you do need a minimum 2000sqft lot space (including the footprint of the home)

1

dingurth1 t1_j96zxj5 wrote

I moved here from LA last year, and while it is definitely cheaper overall, especially in the big area of housing, there are some things that are more expensive than I thought they'd be.

  • groceries: to my surprise, groceries here are noticeably higher than when I was in LA. Not crazy, maybe like 10-15% more, but enough to make a surprise dent in my budget.
  • utilities: the rates are about the same, but the utility companies here hit you with a lot more fees, be it account or weather related, where in CA I pretty much only paid usage and tax on utilities
  • car/gas: while gas is cheaper than it is in CA, I use more despite driving about the same. So my budget for gas is actually higher than in LA. This is because of all the hills here. Maybe I just need to learn to drive better, but my miles per gallon are a lot lower compared to when I was on flatter terrain. I also had to get winter tires and I'm sure the hills are putting more strain on my car, so all that adds to more upkeep expenses.

The big wins are in housing costs and restaurants in my experience so far. I'm paying almost 2/3 of the rent I paid in LA for 3x the space. PGH has some of the best housing/rental affordability in the country despite recent price increases. With restaurants I'm similarly paying about 2/3 of what I was used to in LA. My taxes are also lower, but not as dramatically as you'd think since Pittsburgh proper has the 3% on top of state.

Not sure how that compares to Maryland but just wanted to share my impressions. I do encourage you to visit and scope things out before you move.

9

dingurth1 t1_j6jiv1s wrote

The one thing that bothers me the most as a transplant myself is the account fees. $16.75 per bill for gas, and $17.50 for water. $400+/yr all just for the pleasure of doing business with these companies. My last gas company in CA, the account fee was $0.16/day.

That said, the water and gas don't look too out of line from what I've heard other people say and my own experience so far. I'm a single person in a slightly smaller space than yours, but mine were $28/mo with PAW (so just the account fee is over half the bill), and $200/mo gas with Columbia, but my electric with DLC was just $80/mo. I've replaced all my bulbs with LEDs, but otherwise I'm not particularly electric conscious. I have a computer that I'm on ~14hrs a day and pulls a lot, and I have a chest freezer in the basement.

2

dingurth1 t1_j5c5uwk wrote

for the record and some perspective regarding that chart, $9 is the US historical average. We didn't even touch that with the spike in prices this past year. People are so used to rock bottom energy prices we're complaining about something that's still under the average.

Meanwhile the rest of the world is paying 4-6x what we are. So in that regard we still have it quite good.

14

dingurth1 t1_j2cpm9n wrote

Reply to comment by imouttahereta in It is 65 degrees by MaryOutside

its pretty easy to link all of that to the weakening of the jet stream, which yes is climate change, and could lead to devastating consequences like the collapse of the ocean circulatory system, unpredictable weather events destroying crops, and more high impact weather in general

The dominos are starting to fall bro and its not so hard to put one and one together

9

dingurth1 OP t1_j2b4q7f wrote

I mean, yeah. Which I know sounds weird, how can you care too much about a good thing? So forgive the length of the following.

To start, air quality is important, Pittsburgh's is not the best, and it's always good to shoot for improvement. But the center of my argument is people do care too much because current numbers don't reflect the collective consensus that our air is so bad.

This is mostly driven by the fact that Pittsburgh had decades of toxic air, so it firmly lodged itself in people's minds (rightfully so at the time). It doesn't help that there are still industrial centers that cause high localized problems on a semi regular basis. But the overall trend is PGH air is miles better than it used to be and is getting better year over year. Even in the worst areas.

But instead of people being happy and positive about that improvement, you have undue negativity dragging and holding people down.

You still see so much genuine anxiety and stress over this issue on this sub. If people were more objective about it, being realistic with our current air quality rather than fixated on the past, it would have tangible benefits on the area's mental health.

I genuinely think this likely probably feeds a placebo effect for a lot of people, making their physical health worse because they hype it up in their head when they see the AQI pass 50.

When people freak out about AQIs in the 50s, 60s, or 70s, its laughable. It disenfranchises people who have to deal with real issues living next to the factories where the AQI is 150, 200, etc. Those same people then cite the AQIs of those marginalized communities as if they can claim they suffer to the same extent which is what pisses me off the most.

Pittsburgh is a great city and yet you have so many people making or not making financial, life altering decisions because of this hyperbolic mindset. I get that especially for some neighborhoods and some people with specific issues they need to consider these things more seriously. But then you have people on this sub telling others to not move here because the entire city has toxic air which is blatantly false. It's like these people want to keep the city as down and depressed as they are.

To wrap this up, I just want to be crystal clear. We should be doing everything we can to improve the air and hold these polluting companies responsible, potentially even to the point of shutting them down. But unless people live next to one of these factories, they should realize that AQIs in the moderate range are typical for almost every urban/suburban community in the country. Which reflects just how far PGH has come.

−6

dingurth1 OP t1_j2abcs7 wrote

If people framed the argument like this, I would be much more sympathetic. But you wind up instead having people in well off communities wearing the poor AQI of the marginalized ones like some twisted badge of honor saying "I can tell when the air is so bad because my throat closes up" when the AQI in Upper St Clair or Shadyside is 60. I have no sympathy for that, and want to encourage people to be objective about their good air quality while fighting to improve that of marginalized communities that do need our help. Shaming the people who want to complain about the little things is not mutually exclusive from wanting to help those that truly need it. I'll take your advice though and try to be more tactful in the future.

−9

dingurth1 t1_j27ayh0 wrote

I'm also new in town and was thinking of organizing a Lawrenceville brewery crawl on r/PittsburghTransplants for NYE

Would anyone be down for that?

2

dingurth1 t1_j0wyv7p wrote

It seems lawyers agree that PA landlord-tenant laws favor the landlord generally.

Specifically in this case, it should be easy for tenants to recoup rent when something as simple as habitability is jeopardized (ie: the law already states it). Instead it looks like it would have to go to court in almost all circumstances unless you had a great and generous landlord, in order to get compensation. Which is a high bar for most people, meaning by default it benefits the landlord.

3

dingurth1 t1_j0umbm6 wrote

damn, I hate landlord favoring states.

Looks like there may be a couple options. PA does mandate that heating be maintained. If they are unwilling or unable to fix it before next rent is due, definitely look into properly withholding rent, or suing for an appropriate amount since living standards weren't maintained.

I don't get why any landlord or manager would drag this out or play with this issue. If your FIL or another tenant got sick or heaven forbid died, they'd have a much bigger and expensive issue on their hands.

7

dingurth1 t1_j0tabax wrote

They 100% owe some sort of rental reimbursement regardless of what else happens. I'm pretty sure there are legal standards for what habitable means and this isn't it.

Please be aware that temperatures are going to go to the teens by day and hovering above zero at night by next Friday. There's also supposed to be major wind which best case is added wind chill, worst case power outages. Given the lack of action so far I would try to have a plan to get him out of there if necessary.

40

dingurth1 t1_j0j16xx wrote

I think a lot of people don't consider it up front just because many people don't know how money works or what questions to ask or things to consider/investigate. I don't blame them since financial literacy or navigating local laws isn't something we prioritize in our education system.

Like you see these posts about how people suddenly can't afford their homes because the school districts reassessed and now they're paying more in taxes. When people post the numbers though, the reassessment values still line up with the documented tax rates I've seen.

3

dingurth1 t1_j0j0l96 wrote

the metros should be relatively ok. Its the AZ farmers that are being put out of business (as they should be for trying to grow alfalfa and cotton in a desert using flood irrigation).

2