Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-09-2014, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Auburn, New York
1,772 posts, read 3,494,456 times
Reputation: 3076

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
Dang, MOST neighborhoods in Syracuse.....I bet the crime is still on par in North Minneapolis as it is on Syracuse's South Side and while there is some blight, there are still quite a few solid-very nice neighborhoods there. So, it isn't much different than similar cities.

Like others said, deindustrialization and affordable housing in other areas nearby in such areas play a part in this. Weatherization is another factor as well.
Crime in North Minneapolis is worse than anywhere in Syracuse--for sure, but it doesn't look burnt out or dangerous. As depressing as Syracuse is, I felt it to be a pretty safe city. North Minneapolis looks similar to the Eastwood Neighborhood in Syracuse: mostly residential with a lot of two-story, wooden, single-family homes and two-flats built in the early 20th Century with modest lawns. There are no abandoned buildings, no vacant houses, the sidewalks are all in good condition, there's no trash on the side of the road, the streets are freshly paved, and there's usually a corner store, a barber shop, and a small restaurant at all the intersections.

North Minneapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/aL2aX (keep in mind this is probably the worst part of the city)

Syracuse: https://goo.gl/maps/WJb4n (this is on Syracuse's Northside, which is not even as bad at the city's South and Westsides).

Despite the visual differences, North Minneapolis is more dangerous.

Last edited by Dawn.Davenport; 12-09-2014 at 09:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-09-2014, 09:56 AM
 
92,062 posts, read 122,262,393 times
Reputation: 18141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn.Davenport View Post
Crime in North Minneapolis is worse than anywhere in Syracuse--for sure, but it doesn't look burnt out or dangerous. As depressing as Syracuse is, I felt it to be a pretty safe city. North Minneapolis looks similar to the Eastwood Neighborhood in Syracuse: mostly residential with a lot of two-story, wooden, single-family homes and two-flats built in the early 20th Century with modest lawns. There are no abandoned buildings, no vacant houses, the sidewalks are all in good condition, there's no trash on the side of the road, the streets are freshly paved, and there's usually a corner store, a barber shop, and a small restaurant at all the intersections.

North Minneapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/aL2aX (keep in mind this is probably the worst part of the city)

Syracuse: https://goo.gl/maps/WJb4n (this is on Syracuse's Northside, which is not even as bad at the city's South and Westsides).

Despite the visual differences, North Minneapolis is more dangerous.
That is probably in the worst part of Syracuse's North Side too. If you go further north, you would find something like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0771...PteTK-_70g!2e0

Same with Syracuse's South Side, like this neighborhood in the South Valley neighborhood: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9960...l-q56EZ0-w!2e0

Or this Elmwood(up the hill) neighborhood on the city's SW corner: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0160...uU7itkHq0Q!2e0

Or this West Side neighborhood: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0439...u7HyOcWy8g!2e0

So, even the same side of town can vary greatly, just like most American cities.

Last edited by ckhthankgod; 12-09-2014 at 10:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,360 posts, read 16,875,553 times
Reputation: 12390
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
New York City has much less than most Midwestern cities. Though gritty looking. Decay to the abandonment is not that common in New England.
I'd say immigrants make a big difference. Most Northeastern cities which have not insubstantial Latino and/or Asian populations today (even smaller ones) are close to or have passed their mid-20th century peak. The worst neighborhoods in places like Newark and Camden are 50% demolished, but even most bad neighborhoods are reasonably to entirely intact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Auburn, New York
1,772 posts, read 3,494,456 times
Reputation: 3076
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
That is probably in the worst part of Syracuse's North Side too. If you go further north, you would find something like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0771...PteTK-_70g!2e0

Same with Syracuse's South Side, like this neighborhood in the South Valley neighborhood: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9960...l-q56EZ0-w!2e0

Or this Elmwood(up the hill) neighborhood on the city's SW corner: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0160...uU7itkHq0Q!2e0

So, even the same side of town can vary greatly, just like most American cities.
There are lots of worse places on the Northside:

Like Hawley and Oak: https://goo.gl/maps/QEtwb

The area by the all the strip clubs: https://goo.gl/maps/DR5YD

North Butternut: https://goo.gl/maps/k0hUY
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 10:34 AM
 
92,062 posts, read 122,262,393 times
Reputation: 18141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn.Davenport View Post
There are lots of worse places on the Northside:

Like Hawley and Oak: https://goo.gl/maps/QEtwb

The area by the all the strip clubs: https://goo.gl/maps/DR5YD

North Butternut: https://goo.gl/maps/k0hUY
Basically, all of that is the inner North Side. These are on the North Side as well:
http://goo.gl/maps/z2j6Y

http://goo.gl/maps/Wc8RX

http://goo.gl/maps/UhCND
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 11:08 AM
 
2,438 posts, read 3,313,374 times
Reputation: 2649
dear Syracuse...

The Midwest would like to thank you for running a complex defense...

Go Orange renovators....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 11:38 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
46,011 posts, read 53,177,863 times
Reputation: 15174
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
I'd say immigrants make a big difference. Most Northeastern cities which have not insubstantial Latino and/or Asian populations today (even smaller ones) are close to or have passed their mid-20th century peak. The worst neighborhoods in places like Newark and Camden are 50% demolished, but even most bad neighborhoods are reasonably to entirely intact.
Think that's right. The most declined city in New England is actually North Adams, unless I missed somewhere.

North Adams, Massachusetts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lost 43% of its population from its peak, in 1900. Hoboken lost 53% of its population from its 1910 peak to its low point in 1990 but it has experienced recent regrowth. From peak to low point, it lost more people by % than any other city in New Jersey has, more than Camden. Camden is 47% hispanic, mostly Puerto Rican. If it hadn't had a hispanic influx, it wouldn't had much more decay, similar to Rust Belt cities.

Note western NY and western PA has similar decay patterns to the Midwestern cities mentioned, Minnesotan cities don't. Neither do Iowan cities and perhaps Wisconsin ones. It doesn't follow exact "Midwest boundaries".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 11:42 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
46,011 posts, read 53,177,863 times
Reputation: 15174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn.Davenport View Post
Crime in North Minneapolis is worse than anywhere in Syracuse--for sure, but it doesn't look burnt out or dangerous.
From its descriptions (perhaps Minneapolis residents would disagree) Minneapolis always seemed more western than most of the Midwest in its built form and population history (though not culture). Similarly, Oakland and some high crime Bay Area cities don't appear dangerous.

30 years ago, the Midwest wouldn't have been singled out as much. In Manhattan, 2 miles northeast of the Financial District:

http://atlmalcontent.typepad.com/atl...rban_dk2_2.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,360 posts, read 16,875,553 times
Reputation: 12390
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Think that's right. The most declined city in New England is actually North Adams, unless I missed somewhere.

North Adams, Massachusetts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lost 43% of its population from its peak, in 1900. Hoboken lost 53% of its population from its 1910 peak to its low point in 1990 but it has experienced recent regrowth. From peak to low point, it lost more people by % than any other city in New Jersey has, more than Camden. Camden is 47% hispanic, mostly Puerto Rican. If it hadn't had a hispanic influx, it wouldn't had much more decay, similar to Rust Belt cities.

Note western NY and western PA has similar decay patterns to the Midwestern cities mentioned, Minnesotan cities don't. Neither do Iowan cities and perhaps Wisconsin ones. It doesn't follow exact "Midwest boundaries".
I think I knew that about North Adams. It's crazy that Hoboken had such a steep decline though. I mean, looking at it there isn't much evidence of abandonment or widespread demolition. the northwestern portion has lots of new apartments (and some vacant lots which are still being infilled) but my understanding is this was an old industrial area, not a place slums were cleared out. I'm guessing declining household size during the time period played a big role. After World War 1 it became a predominantly Italian area, so presumably there were initially quite large families which steadily decreased in size over the 20th century.

In Pennsylvania, the line between urban growth/blight is pretty stark, basically following the foothills of the Appalachians. Harrisburg is the main exception, but it's only 18% Latino. Possibly Chester as well, although these days it's too small to be considered a second-tier city even, and the Latino population is even smaller (9%). Reading and York are growing now, but not strongly. Lancaster and Bethlehem are close to all-time highs, and Allentown is currently at peak population. Not bad considering with the exception of small parts of Lancaster and Bethlehem these towns have nothing resembling gentrification.

Once you ascend into the mountains, however, it all changes. The Wyoming Valley cities (Scranton and Wilkes-Barre) are overwhelmingly anglo white and way off peak population. The same is true of the various small boroughs in the Coal Region. Once you hit rural Western Pennsylvania, the really deep levels of "borough blight" can be seen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 12:28 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
46,011 posts, read 53,177,863 times
Reputation: 15174
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
I think I knew that about North Adams. It's crazy that Hoboken had such a steep decline though. I mean, looking at it there isn't much evidence of abandonment or widespread demolition. the northwestern portion has lots of new apartments (and some vacant lots which are still being infilled) but my understanding is this was an old industrial area, not a place slums were cleared out. I'm guessing declining household size during the time period played a big role. After World War 1 it became a predominantly Italian area, so presumably there were initially quite large families which steadily decreased in size over the 20th century.
I'm guessing those left in Hoboken might have been childless descendants of the former population, plus some living in rather large spaces (say, a couple living in an entire brownstone). The rent must have been really cheap in the 70s. I wonder how much of the new growth is using existing housing or new housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top