White in Kensington?? (Philadelphia, Levittown, Norristown: rent, tenant, new construction)

[FamousBlueRaincoat]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

Philly's population was the same in 1910 as it is now and almost twice as large from 1950-60 then now too. Its as low now as its been in over 100 years.. In the same time the suburban and rural populations have exploded in those 100 years.

Also, I don't think you looked at the link I gave you or took anything I said serious. The growth for the sake of growth is exactly what the problem is.

[RightonWalnut]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

LOLOL OMG I am killing the country for wanting a safe, clean neighborhood with excellent schools for my family. I must force my family to live in a dirty, crime ridden, poor public schools city to save the country!
They teach you wonderful things at Temple!! lol and the worst part is that people like you actually believe this crap!

You do know that most of the population in all the states live outside the cities, don't you? Did Temple teach you that fact too?

Frank, I in no way meant that I don't respect you. I respect you for wanting a better life for your family, a safe place with good schools. I respect you for leaving an area that looked like it was on a downturn to find a better place with a brighter future for your kids.

I did not study this while at Temple and my studies on all things Urban has nothing to do with Temple. This is something I am personally interested in and studying on my own time.

Originally Posted by frankgn87

Exactly. You would have to raze a city block and put up new 3k ft sq homes to achieve those types of numbers. And gentrification only happens when a city is at rock bottom which Port Richmond is not and won't be for many years.

A working class neighborhood can be gentrified, becoming a middle class or upper class neihgborhood. An area does not have to be at "rock bottom" in order for it to gentrify. Gentrification simply happens when a new (usually higher) income bracket moves into an area. This can happen for a number of reasons and can happen over any amount of time be it 10 or 40 years, it doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by frankgn87

Philly's population was the same in 1910 as it is now and almost twice as large from 1950-60 then now too. Its as low now as its been in over 100 years.. In the same time the suburban and rural populations have exploded in those 100 years.

Philadelphia went through an era of decline due to mass suburbanization that mainly started after WWII but really took off in the 1960's... this is essentially what killed many American cities. Philadelphia declined up until the 2010 census. Now it finally looks like it is rebounding to an era of growth. Hopefully it is not just a blip and is actual sustained growth.

Suburban growth came about for many reasons, none of which I feel like talking with you about because you obviously don't care and shoot down the matter like it's completely false.

If you are ever interested in the subject however and learning about why cities like Philadelphia declined, a good book on the subject is "Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream."

Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream: Andres Duany,Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk,Jeff Speck: 9780865477506: Amazon.com: Books

[frankgn87]

Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat

In 1910 the population of Manhattan was 2,300,000. Today it's 1,600,000.

You're picking random statistics and not giving any context for what they mean. Are they supposed to mean anything? Or are you just playing random fact generator?

what do you mean? We are talking about Philly and its suburbs aren't we? Thats where we all live

[frankgn87]

Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat

Also, I don't think you looked at the link I gave you or took anything I said serious. The growth for the sake of growth is exactly what the problem is.

I took it very serious. You are incorrect. The city has lost population over the last 100 years and the burbs have had huge growth in those same years.

[frankgn87]

I am not disrespecting you either.. We are just discussing what we are passionate about .

Anyway. ANYONE can write a story and post it on the net. It does not mean its facial. The FACTS are this... The city has lost almost 1/2 of its population in the last 60 years and the burb rings have gone out further and further over the same time frame. Why do you think that is? Ill tell you. Everyone wants a higher quality of life.. That is achieved leaving the city and moving to areas where streets are clean, crime is low, homes are plentiful and education is quality. Its really that simple., And until the city reforms its education program, rids itself of crime and has clean streets, this trend will continue.

Originally Posted by Summersm343

Suburban growth came about for many reasons, none of which I feel like talking with you about because you obviously don't care and shoot down the matter like it's completely false.

If you are ever interested in the subject however and learning about why cities like Philadelphia declined, a good book on the subject is "Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream."

Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream: Andres Duany,Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk,Jeff Speck: 9780865477506: Amazon.com: Books

[FamousBlueRaincoat]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

I took it very serious. You are incorrect. The city has lost population over the last 100 years and the burbs have had huge growth in those same years.

Growth doesn't indicate health. Growth for the sake of growth only occurs in cancer cells: and at some point, the cancer either needs to be treated and surgically removed, or the host (in this case, American civilization) will die.

There are other factors, besides growth, which indicate health. Perhaps you would be interested in providing numbers for that? It could be that you're right. But growth in and of itself is never the same as health.

[frankgn87]

Then why are there a huge thread on the slight population growth this year in Philly?? And you were posting how great this is in those threads?

It's Official, Philadelphia gains population for the first time in 60 years!

Here is your post..

"It's pretty exciting. They didn't count me either, as I lived in Minneapolis when they census went down. Or my wife. Last census, I lived in Berks County too - just spent a couple of years in Minneapolis, so Pennsylvania lost a resident that they didn't need to."

and..

Philadelphia Reverses Population Trend

and..

Philadelphia growing faster than its suburbs!

So. population growth in Philly is awesome and population growth in the burbs is a cancer? wow..

Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat

Growth doesn't indicate health. Growth for the sake of growth only occurs in cancer cells: and at some point, the cancer either needs to be treated and surgically removed, or the host (in this case, American civilization) will die.

There are other factors, besides growth, which indicate health. Perhaps you would be interested in providing numbers for that? It could be that you're right. But growth in and of itself is never the same as health.

[RightonWalnut]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

So. population growth in Philly is awesome and population growth in the burbs is a cancer? wow..

No. In my opinion, growth in the surburbs is fine and is a healthy balance to growth in the city. The problem is OUTWARD growth. Suburban Sprawl... sprawling outwards for miles and miles for no rhyme or reason. That needs to be stopped. We need to "densify" and build upon what we currently have. Fix our aging infrastructure. Build to critical mass in the footprint of development we have now and then build outward, expanding the footprint of development only when absolutely necessary.

[Jerseykids2011]

Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat

Growth doesn't indicate health. Growth for the sake of growth only occurs in cancer cells: and at some point, the cancer either needs to be treated and surgically removed, or the host (in this case, American civilization) will die.

There are other factors, besides growth, which indicate health. Perhaps you would be interested in providing numbers for that? It could be that you're right. But growth in and of itself is never the same as health.

Well stated, FamousBlueRaincoat. btw- great SN name, Leonard Cohen ?

[FindingZen]

Originally Posted by Marius Pontmercy

Agreed. I honestly don't think you can get enough square footage in Fishtown to push those kinds of numbers. You'd have to charge Center City rates per square foot.

Definitely not in our lifetime, and I kind of like that. We shouldn't want all our neighborhoods to turn into NoLibs where the average family can't afford to live. You can still get a good working class wage, save some money, and buy a house in Fishtown if you're willing to put in some sweat equity fixing it up.

I'm somewhere in the middle of you and Summers343 on this one. $800K in Fishtown might be a stretch in the next generation...but it does appear inevitable that housing values will rise. It would be a nice change if this attracted middle-class families rather than young professionals and empty nesters.