What makes a "great" city? (Philadelphia, Scranton: apartment, rent)

[trover]

Hi all,

I'm actually from SF, and not contemplating moving to Philadelphia any time soon. American cities are kind of a hobby of mine (one of my favorite books is Richard Florida's Who's Your City). At long last I've decided what I think makes a great city: how many "non-locals" there are. Think of some the traditional "greats": NYC, Chicago, SF, LA, Boston & DC. All places with large, transient populations. Places where people really don't care which high school you went to or what your accent's like. Places where most people were born somewhere else. Compare these to a place like, say, Providence, RI or Milwaukee, WI or even Cleveland, OH. Arguably wonderful cities in their own ways, but not really destinations.

So I'm curious if Philadelphia is the same way- if it's mainly professionals from around the country who don't care if you're a townie or not, or it's mainly people born and raised around the area. I'm asking the same question in a few other cities' forums.

[serpent_of_old]

it matters here. not readily though, in downtown (maybe 30%). alot in the burbs though [rolls eyes]. financially and institutionally, yes, but its more pronounced the futher you get from downtown.
at the POS, at most typical street level encounters, it doesnt or probably wont come up, BUT it is something that arises in terms of accents and expectations, but its subtle....i.e. what part of the city you are from. but THAT is a big deal in SF and certainly Boston too

[solibs]

I'd say that about 45% of the people I know grew up in a 40 mile radius of here. Another 20% are from 40-100 miles. The rest are from somewhere else.

I've never met anyone who cared where I went to high school (I think I may have been asked that 3 times in 9 years)or, for that matter, where I grew up, beyond trying to get to know me better.

Anyway, you're basic premise, that a transient population makes a city "better" is fatally flawed before it gets a chance to be subjective. Phoenix, Houston, Orlando and a whole bunch of other sunbelt cities are full of people from somewhere else . . . and they all suck.

Chicago, Boston and NYC are also full of folks born and raised there. Just because certain neighborhoods are too expensive for the average joe to live in nowadays doesn't mean they've left the area.

[trover]

Originally Posted by solibs

Anyway, you're basic premise, that a transient population makes a city "better" is fatally flawed before it gets a chance to be subjective. Phoenix, Houston, Orlando and a whole bunch of other sunbelt cities are full of people from somewhere else . . . and they all suck.

That's true- perhaps I should refine it a bit. The cities you mentioned are good examples of places where people have settled looking for job opportunities and, yeah, I don't think Phoenix or Orlando will ever be international destinations (a lot of people make that argument for Houston, but seeing will be believing).

There's a lot of other things you need to throw in the mix: universities and cultural institutions (certainly Philadelphia has a lot of those), diversity, social attitudes, etc... What I'm talking about when I mean transient is a basic openess to talented people who want to settle and make a name for themselves there, rather than regarding them with a certain mixture of fear and suspicion.

BUT it is something that arises in terms of accents and expectations, but its subtle....i.e. what part of the city you are from. but THAT is a big deal in SF and certainly Boston too

Yeah, you do get some people doing that in SF. But if you work for some place like Apple in the Silicon Valley, or Morrison Foerster most of the people you work and socialize with won't be that way. Also, alot of those "locals" you run into here aren't really all that "local" themselves. ;-)

[solibs]

Originally Posted by trover

a basic openess to talented people who want to settle and make a name for themselves there, rather than regarding them with a certain mixture of fear and suspicion.

This is a large metro. People move in and out all the time. We have large pharmaceutical companies, large research institutions, Fortune 500 companies, prestigious hospitals, etc, etc. Outside of certain neighborhoods I don't think someone moving here from Sweden gets people anymore excited than someone moving from Seattle or Scranton.

There are people who are petty and provincial but I don't think they constitute a majority of people and, when they do exist, it's more on a macro/neighborhood level. It's not like the bumper stickers in North Carolina that read we don't care how you did it up north.

[john_starks]

Outside of certain neighborhoods I don't think someone moving here from Sweden gets people anymore excited than someone moving from Seattle or Scranton.

exactly. that's what i love about Philly. its a city that's kinda "been there, done that". it's had/has a rich history and doesn't feel need to prove anything on a national or international level (could be our achille's heel though.) its smack in the middle of the northeast corridor and there's a constant influx of the best and brightest from DC, NYC & Boston. so, outside of certain neighborhoods, i don't see any fear or suspicion. nobody cared that i moved here from NYC, nor should they. its got its own character.

and we can't forget that a good % of our daily workforce is from NJ. it all adds to the fabric.

[serpent_of_old]

Originally Posted by trover

That's true- perhaps I should refine it a bit. The cities you mentioned are good examples of places where people have settled looking for job opportunities and, yeah, I don't think Phoenix or Orlando will ever be international destinations (a lot of people make that argument for Houston, but seeing will be believing).

There's a lot of other things you need to throw in the mix: universities and cultural institutions (certainly Philadelphia has a lot of those), diversity, social attitudes, etc... What I'm talking about when I mean transient is a basic openess to talented people who want to settle and make a name for themselves there, rather than regarding them with a certain mixture of fear and suspicion.



Yeah, you do get some people doing that in SF. But if you work for some place like Apple in the Silicon Valley, or Morrison Foerster most of the people you work and socialize with won't be that way. Also, alot of those "locals" you run into here aren't really all that "local" themselves. ;-)

whether they are local or not, they are funny about the area in SF that they identify with. THAT was my point ;-)

[solibs]

Originally Posted by serpent_of_old

whether they are local or not, they are funny about the area in SF that they identify with. THAT was my point ;-)

In that regard people in New York are a lot worse than they are here. When I last worked there in the late '90s half of my coworkers were from the midwest or west and use to talk about "oh, i'm from Park Slope" or "i'm from NoLIta" and make fun of me for taking the train in from NJ. I would remind them that "no, you're not from Brooklyn. you're from Iowa. you just rent an apartment in B'klyn."

[Unstable]

Rather than saying Philadelphia is a "great" city, I would drag out this quote from 1945:

"One has a feeling, even at one's most despairing, that at any moment the city can do exactly what it wants, if it only wants to do so; that at any time it may decide once more to be great."

Point being that all the pieces are here, but for some reason they just haven't quite come together. Blame the tax structure and a lack of vision among leaders (although Rendell is pretty good).

[solibs]

The taxes are what they are. It's a problem but I don't it's the bogeyman that suburbanites make it out to be. I think it's really only a major issue for large corporations and for suburban businesses that want to start up in the city.

For the former, I say if they don't want to invest in the city then we're better off with them in the suburbs. One should be able to look nor further than Detroit, Seattle or NYC to see what happens when a city or region puts too many of it's chips in one mega-corporation or in one industry.

One of the reasons that the Philly metro has a very steady economy is because we're highly diversified and because even within that diversity we don't have a lot of employers that, if they went under, would devastate the local economy. The few that are in that position, UPenn, SEPTA, the City, etc, aren't going anywhere in good times or bad. Even Comcast and Verizon aren't likely to fail or to skip town and, even if they did, it's more likely that they would just be restructured and much of the workforce would keep on working, just for different bosses.

Rendell does have a vision, he's a forward thinker even if he does take things slowly. Nutter is another one, although, at this point he's kinda screwed for the next 18-24 months with the budget mess. Just the decline in the real-estate transfer tax was enough to put a damper on anything he wanted to do. As long as he can continue his reform of city services in the meantime I think he's doing a good job.

Keep in mind that Nutter won a 5-way primary race. He won the primary because the city's middle and upper-middle class came out in full force for him. I'm talking about the Center City, Mt. Airy, Queen Village, University City types. Otherwise we'd be stuck with Fatah as mayor right now . . . and that would've been a John Street redux if I could think of one.

Things are changing in the politics department. The new blood and the old, fed-up-with-business-as-usual crowd have joined forces and are now large enough and organized enough to start to shape city politics on the state and city level. Some council districts will take more time than others but, then again, the rise of civic associations is limiting the effectiveness of the quid pro quo system of ward leaders so it may happen faster than expected.

I don't know, amidst this crisis I see a lot of opportunity here. Our regional economy won't dive as deep or for as long as the country as a whole and while I don't think anything is going to happen here in the next 2 years I think 2012-2017 are going to be an exciting time for Philly.