Northeast Philly and the northwest neighborhoods: Should they still be part of city? (Philadelphia: theater, school)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OP, I don't understand the motivation for why you're selecting these two areas (Manayunk and the NE) for stripping off from philly? So what that Manayunk is close to lower merion. Are you saying that every border neighborhood should merge into its adjoining suburb? What's so special about these two? Why aren't you advocating for oak Lane and West oak lane to go to Cheltenham? Or the far Southwest to go to Chester?
When Manayunk was a just a working class dump and Roxborough was a racist "sundown town" back in the 70s and 80s, were you advocating for its split then? Lower Merion would have laughed in your face.
This just smacks of wanting to take the nice areas and get away from "those people."
It was consolidated( the city and county) in 1854. And, I don't know much about why it was other than it seemed the sensible thing to do at the time.
One of the major reasons was due to the enforcement of crime within the City of Philadelphia. Criminals were easily able to escape potential capture by the Philadelphia PD by escaping to Northern Liberties, Kensington, Blockley Township, etc. This was one of the major problems that drove the effort to consolidate Philadelphia County.
OP, I don't understand the motivation for why you're selecting these two areas (Manayunk and the NE) for stripping off from philly? So what that Manayunk is close to lower merion. Are you saying that every border neighborhood should merge into its adjoining suburb? What's so special about these two? Why aren't you advocating for oak Lane and West oak lane to go to Cheltenham? Or the far Southwest to go to Chester?
When Manayunk was a just a working class dump and Roxborough was a racist "sundown town" back in the 70s and 80s, were you advocating for its split then? Lower Merion would have laughed in your face.
This just smacks of wanting to take the nice areas and get away from "those people."
Um, no. Not in any way, shape, or form. I chose Manayunk/East Falls/Roxborough because of their geographic distance from Center City and, more importantly, because of their own sense of community outside of being part of the city. (Chestnut Hill qualifies too, IMO.) No one would say, for example, that Fairmount or Northern Liberties should not be part of the city, because then they would end up like, say, Vatican City, in that they would be a town within a city that is completely surrounded by the city but not part of it. That would be ludicrous on its face.
I don't think that every Philly neighborhood that borders a suburban town should become part of that suburban town. I'm simply wondering aloud if these areas, which are historically "removed" from the city, should still be part of Philadelphia proper.
The consolidation (thanks, kyb01) of the county and the city probably led to a lot of this. I wonder what areas, pre-consolidation, were part of Philadelphia County but not considered part of the City of Philadelphia.
Um, no. Not in any way, shape, or form. I chose Manayunk/East Falls/Roxborough because of their geographic distance from Center City and, more importantly, because of their own sense of community outside of being part of the city. (Chestnut Hill qualifies too, IMO.) No one would say, for example, that Fairmount or Northern Liberties should not be part of the city, because then they would end up like, say, Vatican City, in that they would be a town within a city that is completely surrounded by the city but not part of it. That would be ludicrous on its face.
I don't think that every Philly neighborhood that borders a suburban town should become part of that suburban town. I'm simply wondering aloud if these areas, which are historically "removed" from the city, should still be part of Philadelphia proper.
The consolidation (thanks, kyb01) of the county and the city probably led to a lot of this. I wonder what areas, pre-consolidation, were part of Philadelphia County but not considered part of the City of Philadelphia.
But they're really not "removed" from the city at all, especially East Falls-which is 13 Minutes/5.5 Miles to City Hall. Packer Park, in South Philly, for comparison is 14 Minutes/4 Miles to City Hall.
Edit: Nevermind, just read you said "historically removed".
What about Overbrook? Historically it is considered to be "The Main Line" and straddles City Ave which divides Philly from Montco. (Overbrook is 19 Minutes/6.6 Miles to City Hall)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElijahAstin
Fairmount was a District, and Passayunk was a Township. AFAIK, the Districts were, for the most part, developed much earlier than the Townships and therefore have a more cohesive infrastructural connection with Center City. Many Districts (Northern Liberties, Moyamensing, and Southwark immediately come to mind) were among the nation's largest "cities" pre-consolidation. On that note, I might agree with your analysis of Fairmount but probably disagree with your assessment of Passayunk. Regardless, I personally like the fact that there are significant variations in Philadelphia's built form (but of course, that's a normative question). If NYC can have five boroughs, why can't we have six Cardinal regions?
Yes, I agree 100%. Frankford too-was much it's own city similar to "German township"
Um, no. Not in any way, shape, or form. I chose Manayunk/East Falls/Roxborough because of their geographic distance from Center City and, more importantly, because of their own sense of community outside of being part of the city. (Chestnut Hill qualifies too, IMO.) No one would say, for example, that Fairmount or Northern Liberties should not be part of the city, because then they would end up like, say, Vatican City, in that they would be a town within a city that is completely surrounded by the city but not part of it. That would be ludicrous on its face.
I don't think that every Philly neighborhood that borders a suburban town should become part of that suburban town. I'm simply wondering aloud if these areas, which are historically "removed" from the city, should still be part of Philadelphia proper.
The consolidation (thanks, kyb01) of the county and the city probably led to a lot of this. I wonder what areas, pre-consolidation, were part of Philadelphia County but not considered part of the City of Philadelphia.
I wonder what areas, pre-consolidation, were part of Philadelphia County but not considered part of the City of Philadelphia.
Practically the entire modern city is not part of the original city of Philadelphia - see the map posted above.
It's not that uncommon with older cities - in fact all three cities I've lived in have had such an evolution. New York with the merging of the 5 counties into New York City (not to mention Queens County, whose consolidation alone is as complicated as Philadelphia, and where people still use the original pre-consolidation town names as their official mailing addresses) and Minneapolis which grew out of the consolidation of Minneapolis and Saint Anthony as well as much of the surrounding countryside over time.
You'd always have to draw the border somewhere. I don't think many people who live in NW Philadelphia anyway imagine themselves as being removed from the city - especially those of us who take that grueling 20 minute train ride to Center City everyday.
On the rare occasion I go to Northern Liberties I do feel like I'm somewhere different and weird though that might not actually be part of Philadelphia.
Interesting thoughts, thank you all. I have lived my whole life in the Philadelphia region and admittedly have never heard the term consolidation. I do know the history of the city insofar as when William Penn founded it, it was much much smaller (like, Old City), and has grown over time. So maybe that's the same thing, but I've not heard it referred to as consolidation before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyers Girl
Um, no. Not in any way, shape, or form. I chose Manayunk/East Falls/Roxborough because of their geographic distance from Center City and, more importantly, because of their own sense of community outside of being part of the city. (Chestnut Hill qualifies too, IMO.) No one would say, for example, that Fairmount or Northern Liberties should not be part of the city, because then they would end up like, say, Vatican City, in that they would be a town within a city that is completely surrounded by the city but not part of it. That would be ludicrous on its face.
I don't think that every Philly neighborhood that borders a suburban town should become part of that suburban town. I'm simply wondering aloud if these areas, which are historically "removed" from the city, should still be part of Philadelphia proper.
The consolidation (thanks, kyb01) of the county and the city probably led to a lot of this. I wonder what areas, pre-consolidation, were part of Philadelphia County but not considered part of the City of Philadelphia.
In the 19th century, cities up and down the East Coast were experiencing explosive population growth due largely to immigration from abroad, beginning roughly with the Irish potato famine of 1840, which led many Irish to emigrate in search of better and more stable life. (They experienced the same sort of hostility some Americans display towards Mexican immigrants now; "no Irish need apply" was a common phrase found on help-wanted signs.)
That same explosive growth brought with it problems like those alluded to above with crime. There were also other issues: often, the outlying communities beyond the city limits lacked adequate sewer or water service, something the cities (beginning with Philadelphia and its Fairmount Water Works) were able to provide.
Thus there were compelling reasons for outlying communities to consolidate with the richer and more powerful cities near them. In most cases, it took the form of annexation; in the cases of the first and last great expansions (Philadelphia, 1854; New York, 1898), it took the form of consolidation of multiple communities at once into a single jurisdiction (occupying the entire Philadelphia County in its case, combining two cities and five counties in New York's).
I've seen a map that shows the townships, districts and boroughs that existed in Philadelphia County on the eve of consolidation in 1854. Districts and boroughs had greater powers than townships, but most of the boroughs and districts in Philadelphia County could not raise the revenues needed to maintain essential services. A bunch of improvements were the result of consolidation, including Fairmount Park, the streetcar network, unified police and fire departments and City Hall. Here's the map; you will notice that Manayunk was its own borough and Germantown had been split into a township and a borough:
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,678,989 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl
In the 19th century, cities up and down the East Coast were experiencing explosive population growth due largely to immigration from abroad, beginning roughly with the Irish potato famine of 1840, which led many Irish to emigrate in search of better and more stable life. (They experienced the same sort of hostility some Americans display towards Mexican immigrants now; "no Irish need apply" was a common phrase found on help-wanted signs.)
That same explosive growth brought with it problems like those alluded to above with crime. There were also other issues: often, the outlying communities beyond the city limits lacked adequate sewer or water service, something the cities (beginning with Philadelphia and its Fairmount Water Works) were able to provide.
Thus there were compelling reasons for outlying communities to consolidate with the richer and more powerful cities near them. In most cases, it took the form of annexation; in the cases of the first and last great expansions (Philadelphia, 1854; New York, 1898), it took the form of consolidation of multiple communities at once into a single jurisdiction (occupying the entire Philadelphia County in its case, combining two cities and five counties in New York's).
I've seen a map that shows the townships, districts and boroughs that existed in Philadelphia County on the eve of consolidation in 1854. Districts and boroughs had greater powers than townships, but most of the boroughs and districts in Philadelphia County could not raise the revenues needed to maintain essential services. A bunch of improvements were the result of consolidation, including Fairmount Park, the streetcar network, unified police and fire departments and City Hall. Here's the map; you will notice that Manayunk was its own borough and Germantown had been split into a township and a borough:
It's my understanding that, leading up to the consolidation, N.Y. & Philadelphia were flip-flopping as the largest city. Consolidation put Philadelphia, squarely, on top. The consolidation meant that there were rural areas within the city limits. During the Civil War, the Anderson Cavalry, later the 15th Pennsylvania Cavalry, served in the western theater. That unit was raised in Philadelphia. At the Battle of Stones River an officer from the Philadelphia cavalry unit captured a Confederate officer who had gone to school in Philadelphia. Accounts of that battle sometimes include accounts of their conversation.
It's not that uncommon with older cities - in fact all three cities I've lived in have had such an evolution. New York with the merging of the 5 counties into New York City (not to mention Queens County, whose consolidation alone is as complicated as Philadelphia, and where people still use the original pre-consolidation town names as their official mailing addresses) and Minneapolis which grew out of the consolidation of Minneapolis and Saint Anthony as well as much of the surrounding countryside over time.
You'd always have to draw the border somewhere. I don't think many people who live in NW Philadelphia anyway imagine themselves as being removed from the city - especially those of us who take that grueling 20 minute train ride to Center City everyday.
On the rare occasion I go to Northern Liberties I do feel like I'm somewhere different and weird though that might not actually be part of Philadelphia.
Quibble: I thought St. Anthony, Minn., renamed itself Minneapolis rather than merged with an adjacent community. Most of Hennepin County remains outside that city's limits.
As for Northwest Philly regarding itself as separate: Nobody I'm aware of used the term "Northwest Philadelphia" to refer to that part of the city prior to about 10 years ago, in contrast to the widespread use of "Northeast Philadelphia" (or simply "the Northeast"). That phrase seems to me far more common now. And there's a distinct split in the urban fabric up that way thanks to the Wissahickon Creek; the valley separates Roxborough and Manayunk from Germantown, Mt. Airy and Chestnut Hill.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
