Suburbs still thrive as more choose urban life |

Suburbs still thrive as more choose urban life

Andrew Russell | Tribune-Review
A pedestrian is reflected in the glass at Traditions of Oakmont clothing store on Allegheny River Boulevard in Oakmont, Wednesday.
Andrew Russell | Tribune-Review
Bill Horvatin cleans the front yard at BelleVue Park Homes in Cranberry Township, Wednesday. Horvatin is retired and moved into the 5 year old development two years ago.
Andrew Russell | Tribune-Review
Pat Stadterman of Oakmont sweeps leaves from the sidewalk in front of her neighbors house, Wednesday. Stadterman moved to Oakmont eight years ago from Penn Hills.
Andrew Russell | Tribune-Review
Bob McElhose Sr. stands at a crosswalk on Allegheny River Boulevard in Oakmont, Wednesday. McElhose, who is 97, has lived in Oakmont his whole life.

Shane Culgan’s daily morning commute from Penn Hills to Downtown lasted more than 90 minutes.

Today, getting to work involves a short elevator ride and a stroll across the street.

“Takes about five minutes, depending on how many buses are coming down Stanwix,” Culgan said. “I love being so close to work. I don’t have to worry about gas or parking. I can come home and cook myself lunch now.”

Culgan is part of a growing group of Americans choosing urban life over suburban.

Leigh Gallagher, author of “The End of the Suburbs,” said a decades-long trend of people fleeing cities for suburbs appears to be over. Instead, they are leaving communities designed around car travel for urban centers that provide public transportation and other city amenities, Gallagher and other researchers said.

Pittsburgh and Philadelphia — two cities gaining residents after decades of bleeding population — are microcosms of this trend, she said.

“Pittsburgh is often cited as a city where the Downtown is resplendent and resurgent. It has a thriving arts scene, a robust health care system,” said Gallagher, an assistant managing editor at Fortune Magazine. “The city has really reinvented itself in many ways.”

Several factors drive people from suburbs, Gallagher said, including high gas costs, long commutes and a desire to be near entertainment venues and fine dining restaurants.

“A lot of people move to the suburbs thinking they’ll be able to spend more time with their families. But you’re spending so much time getting back and forth that your child doesn’t see you as much,” she said. “We now have 3.5 million people in the U.S. doing commutes of more than 90 minutes each way, and people are getting a little tired of that lifestyle.”

Not everyone is convinced, however.

Dale Walters, 50, is a software specialist for a Downtown firm. He drives from Murrysville, a commute that can last 50 minutes even though the distance is less than 20 miles.

He wouldn’t move to the city, “because of the noise and the lack of space,” Walters said. “In Murrysville, I can walk around. We have a lot of parks. In the city you’re either in an apartment or in a house that’s very close to other houses.”

It amounts to personal preference, said Bob Gradeck, a research specialist with the University of Pittsburgh’s University Center for Social and Urban Research.

“Some people make the tradeoff for a large lot; other people don’t want to cut the grass,” he said.

Despite the shift, the suburbs are not hurting, Gradeck said, and many towns continue to grow. Yet more and more, “a lot of people appreciate the things you find in cities versus suburban areas.”

The city’s population, about 306,000, is increasing for the first time in decades, census data show. Downtown, once primarily a business zone, is gaining residents.

Developers added more than 2,500 residential units Downtown over the past two decades, said Downtown Pittsburgh Partnership spokeswoman Leigh Ann White. The neighborhood’s residential population is estimated at 8,200 people, up from 6,425 two years ago.

John Wyke, 24, won’t soon join them.

He doesn’t mind his commute from Penn Hills to Downtown: “Just turn on the radio and go.”

Pittsburgh doesn’t offer enough to lure him from the suburbs, Wyke said.

“My sister lives in Hoboken and used to live in Manhattan, and it’s a whole different feeling there,” he said. “I’ve been to other big cities, and it’s just different. It’s not too lively here.”

Gallagher differentiates between old and new suburbs.

Old suburbs, she said, were designed as functional and pleasing communities with pedestrian-friendly business districts and quaint homes. She cited Oakmont and Dormont as examples and said such suburbs will survive.

New suburbs popped up after World War II and were designed around automobile use. They have strip malls, gas stations and cookie-cutter homes. Gallagher believes these areas will continue to lose people.

“They were designed when we thought cars were magic,” Gallagher said. “But society changes. Consumers want something different now. … Some have suggested that these new suburbs will be the slums of the future.”

A study released in June by TRIP, a Washington-based transportation research group, says congestion costs Pittsburgh-area motorists a combined $1 billion a year in lost time and wasted fuel.

Walters agrees that long commutes are a drag. “But I’d still prefer some place like Cranberry than Downtown,” he said. “It just comes down to space issues.”

A recent study by the Philadelphia nonprofit Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group shows that nationwide, people are driving fewer miles per year, an eight-year trend fueled in part by people moving to cities to take advantage of public transportation.

Ashley Afranie-Sakyi, a PennPIRG spokeswoman, said “new suburbs and cheap gas” are a thing of the past.

Gallagher, who grew up in the Philadelphia suburb of Media in Delaware County, said she is not anti-suburbs.

“I have nothing against the suburbs,” she said. “Some people like that. My argument is that fewer people like it today.”

Chris Togneri is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach him at 412-380-5632 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.