Pittsburgh became a majority renter city relatively recently, with the U.S. Census Bureau estimating that 52% of housing units in the city are renter-occupied. That’s slightly less than regional peer cities Cleveland (54%), Cincinnati (60%) and Buffalo (53%), and a bit more than Detroit (49%).
The Homeownership Wall
Here’s how homeownership became a fading dream, and what it means for young Pittsburgh.
It’s unlikely to decrease anytime soon, with more rental housing being built in the city than in decades and barriers to homeownership only increasing. A Public Source report showed rising student debt and home prices, stagnant wages, old homes and corporate investors are keeping people from buying across the country — including in the Pittsburgh area — until later in life.
Within the 48% of Pittsburgh housing units that are owner-occupied is a more complex picture of neighborhoods, change and disparity. Three maps show the changing geography of homeownership in Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh’s economic core — Downtown and Oakland — is largely renter-occupied. Census estimates show every tract including part of either neighborhood has an ownership rate below 33%, and the student-centric Central Oakland is at just 7%.
Additionally, some neighborhoods with working class, homeowner-friendly roots but younger, more transient present-day realities feature below-average owner occupancy. Bloomfield, Garfield, Friendship and East Liberty each have owner-occupancy rates below 40%.
The most owner-occupied neighborhoods are concentrated around the city’s edges.
Owner-occupancy rates decreased in many neighborhoods over a recent 10-year period, census estimates show. Downtown and Crawford Roberts (which share a census tract), Bluff, South Oakland and Perry North were among the biggest homeownership losers. Many southern neighborhoods, while still among the most owner-occupied, also saw decreases.
Owner-occupancy rates increased the most in Lincoln-Lemington-Belmar, East Liberty and Banksville.
Pittsburgh’s vacancy rate — the percentage of its housing units sitting empty — is near the national average, just above 10%. But at the neighborhood level, there is a world of disparity.
Vacancy can grow when owners, from corporations to heirs, don’t invest in or abandon homes. Whatever the reason, deteriorating properties subtract from quality of life and home values for neighbors.
Pittsburgh demolition crew ends Knoxville house’s slow, two-decade decline
Two in five housing units are vacant in Homewood South, per census estimates, along with 28% in Larimer and 30% in Homewood North and Homewood West. Bluff (known as Uptown), the target of ongoing renewal in the wake of Duquesne University expansion and the 2010 opening of PPG Paints Arena, remains stubbornly 30% vacant.
Relatively affordable residential communities of Beechview, Brookline and Greenfield each have below-average vacancy rates, as do pricier Highland Park and Point Breeze.
Charlie Wolfson is the local government reporter for Pittsburgh’s Public Source. He can be reached at charlie@publicsource.org.
This story was fact-checked by Ember Duke.






