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.
How can cities in our state improve, if people are always advising others to not live within the city limits?
Most of the cities in our state, even distressed cities, have some stable neighborhoods. However, nine times out of ten, people who are moving to a certain city are advised to live in the suburbs. Why not do some research, and also suggest specific stable neighborhoods within the city, instead of just directing people to the suburbs?
We have beautiful cities in this state - Reading, York, Harrisburg, Allentown, etc., that are suffering from perception as much as any other issue. I assume others would like to see this cities improve in the future, so perhaps this is one step we can take.
How can cities in our state improve, if people are always advising others to not live within the city limits?
Most of the cities in our state, even distressed cities, have some stable neighborhoods. However, nine times out of ten, people who are moving to a certain city are advised to live in the suburbs. Why not do some research, and also suggest specific stable neighborhoods within the city, instead of just directing people to the suburbs?
We have beautiful cities in this state - Reading, York, Harrisburg, Allentown, etc., that are suffering from perception as much as any other issue. I assume others would like to see this cities improve in the future, so perhaps this is one step we can take.
Overall, the cities really aren't that good. The city isn't going to be for everyone, and why paint a picture better than it really is to someone who knows nothing of the area? Be honest, and let them decide. Typically, you're going to get better schools, better overall quality of life, and more bang for your buck in the suburbs.
Why should someone be duped into living in an area? why should it be on them to make it better? Especially if it's clear the locals don't care. Why would you expect people to take on that responsibility / enter that experiment? I lived in Philly for 15 years, it's really easy to say "improve".... it's something completely different to take action about it. In a lot of situations, it can be like a second job. Picking up litter, washing Graffiti, block patrol, etc. are DAILY activities in order to make a neighborhood better.
Also a city is a city, it's all the parts. I can't stand the common belief on these boards that a neighborhood boundary or a street is somehow magically going to keep crime in check. All the safety maps you see in these forums are useless nonsense, if for no other reason than "safe" is a relative term. Crime moves, most areas have crimes committed by people who do not live there. Telling someone (or thinking) that one area is safer than another when referring to a city is either ignorant or out right lying.
How can cities in our state improve, if people are always advising others to not live within the city limits?
Most of the cities in our state, even distressed cities, have some stable neighborhoods. However, nine times out of ten, people who are moving to a certain city are advised to live in the suburbs. Why not do some research, and also suggest specific stable neighborhoods within the city, instead of just directing people to the suburbs?
We have beautiful cities in this state - Reading, York, Harrisburg, Allentown, etc., that are suffering from perception as much as any other issue. I assume others would like to see this cities improve in the future, so perhaps this is one step we can take.
And yet you live in the suburb of McKeesport instead of the city of Pittsburgh.
Location: The Flagship City and Vacation in the Paris of Appalachia
2,773 posts, read 3,855,823 times
Reputation: 2067
PP
Good question as usual and I have often wondered the same thing myself. I can think of two main reasons:
1) Taxes- In Erie we pay a higher income tax to live in the city vs. other areas of the county and we also pay much higher property and school taxes. Much of this seems to be related to manufacturing decline, expiring corporate tax breaks, fragmented urban development, etc. As many of the companies have left the city they have been replaced by non-profit businesses so the increased cost has been passed along to residential property owners or indirectly to renters.
2) Schools- As people have fled the city and newcomers have moved to the suburbs for many years the schools have declined and the school taxes have increased significantly. This is a vicious cycle and at least in Erie most of the better schools in the city are private or public with admission requirements. This definitely influences people's decisions about where to rent or buy. Of course home schooling would also be an option, but many people don't have the time to home school.
I am not sure I have the solutions to either of these problems, but more tax breaks for new residents and new residential developers of dense housing could be a start. Obviously increasing the number of residents would really help with the revenue issues and service businesses could be created if there are more residents. The school situation is even more tricky and the only solution I can think of is to have small, neighborhood high schools in various parts of these cities so the already gentrified neighborhoods might start sending their kids back to the local public schools. Also, as other neighborhoods start to gentrify the same thing could happen.
And yet you live in the suburb of McKeesport instead of the city of Pittsburgh.
I don't know if that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek or not, but McKeesport (and McKees Rocks, Millvale, Homestead, Braddock, etc.) are hardly "suburbs" in the traditional sense. McKeesport was a satellite city in its own right in its heyday, with a population pushing 50,000 (bigger than Wilkes-Barre), and has only now diminished to the point of barely being viable. I wouldn't call Greensburg, Latrobe, Jeannette, Washington, Canonsburg, Ambridge, New Kensington, Aliquippa, or New Castle "suburbs" either. These are all former primary industrial cities and "company towns" that have fallen on hard times (well, maybe not Canonsburg so much these days).
When I think "suburb" I think of Cranberry Township, Pine Township, Peters Township, South Fayette Township, Indiana Township, Moon Township, Robinson Township, and all of these other areas that feature racially and socioeconomically homogeneous low-density upper-middle-class residential subdivisions, parking lots, strip malls, big-box stores, chain restaurants, office parks, etc. I take no issue with someone wanting to restore a house in McKeesport, Braddock, Ambridge, or New Kensington, as all of these places are "cities" more than they are "suburbs".
Good question as usual and I have often wondered the same thing myself. I can think of two main reasons:
1) Taxes- In Erie we pay a higher income tax to live in the city vs. other areas of the county and we also pay much higher property and school taxes. Much of this seems to be related to manufacturing decline, expiring corporate tax breaks, fragmented urban development, etc. As many of the companies have left the city they have been replaced by non-profit businesses so the increased cost has been passed along to residential property owners or indirectly to renters.
2) Schools- As people have fled the city and newcomers have moved to the suburbs for many years the schools have declined and the school taxes have increased significantly. This is a vicious cycle and at least in Erie most of the better schools in the city are private or public with admission requirements. This definitely influences people's decisions about where to rent or buy. Of course home schooling would also be an option, but many people don't have the time to home school.
I am not sure I have the solutions to either of these problems, but more tax breaks for new residents and new residential developers of dense housing could be a start. Obviously increasing the number of residents would really help with the revenue issues and service businesses could be created if there are more residents. The school situation is even more tricky and the only solution I can think of is to have small, neighborhood high schools in various parts of these cities so the already gentrified neighborhoods might start sending their kids back to the local public schools. Also, as other neighborhoods start to gentrify the same thing could happen.
fwiw, a large chunk of the philadelphia area's population growth has been occurring within city boundaries in recent years, a big change from the past when the suburbs were growing and the city shrinking. while schools are still mostly terrible, the introduction of charter schools has given people a choice other than moving and likely contributed to a slowing of population loss. there is still a lot of room for improvement. Property taxes in Philly are generally lower than the suburbs but theere is a wage tax. Transit is much better in the city but not non-existent in the suburbs. one thing that has changed dramatically is that building in the city is now much more straightfoward in the city...so much so that it is often easier to build in the city than the suburbs. Prior to mayor nutter it was the opposite. convoluted and outdated zoning code, corrupt neighborhood ward leaders and groups, and union issues. today you can build profitably on lots and often without union labor. dealing with the zba is a straightfoward process now that the board is staffed with professionals rather than cronies. as a result there has been an explosion in development. of course, some of it is just that there has been a relative shift back to the city which means lots with no value now have value. that isn't something unique to Philly either.
it can be frustrating to hear people uniformly trash cities and certainly that doesn't help the issue. as can be seen in detroit, if you don't fix your city, it will be an anchor on your region or state. anyway, one thing cities can control is building. cities are meant to be places to build things. make it easier to build, even if it has requirements that keep it urban. I hear things like greensburg is insane to deal with to get anything built. well, if you're low margin and difficult to deal with, then people won't deal with you at all. time is money.
Location: The Flagship City and Vacation in the Paris of Appalachia
2,773 posts, read 3,855,823 times
Reputation: 2067
Pman
I see what you are saying and Philadelphia or Pittsburgh for that matter are much different situations than places like Erie, York, or Reading. In Erie commuting really is not an issue so people have no problem living in the suburbs and spreading out as far as possible. Also, the largest population growth in Erie has been in the suburbs. In fact the city continues to bleed population and the areas in immediate proximity like Millcreek and Summit Townships have experienced huge population growth. Here is some information about this:
ive noticed in the acs surveys. just trying to relay what has worked in philly. used to be a law would have to be passed to have outdoor seating legalized at a location. 220 outdoor restaurants? 220 laws. of xourse the effect was chilling and there almost none. rendell legalized them downtown and now theyre everywhere. overnight running a bar or restaurant became more profitable and they exploded in number.making cities easy places to open businesses, be a small time builder, even large vuuldings with relaxed parking requirements is key. suburbs are the provence of chains , big developers , and often fight developmemt once theyre established. lancaster has its struggles but its faring much better than harrisburg. all municipalities suffer from state laws that force municipalities into maintaining police , fire , etc whereas townships are allowed to have volunteers or consolidate police forces. municipalities are also bound by act 111.
Location: The Flagship City and Vacation in the Paris of Appalachia
2,773 posts, read 3,855,823 times
Reputation: 2067
pman
Currently, all of the charter schools except Northwest Collegiate Academy in the city of Erie are under-performing according to their test scores and when speaking to other families we have not heard anything good about them. Philadelphia is a different situation and if charter schools are the answer for cities, the real question is how to establish an effective charter school system in a city that can compare with suburban schools or private schools, while at the same time does not further denigrate the already struggling public schools? Also, Collegiate is a great school, but it takes many of the top students out of the city high schools and creates a void and a sense of hopelessness among those students who are stuck in the "bad" school because they were not accepted. So in Erie we have basically created one amazing charter high school and damaged the other public high schools in the process.
in philly the problem with charters is the same as with locals...no one shuts down failing schools and builds on the successful ones. test scores asise parental satisfaction is much higher at philly charters which is a good indicatiom theyre doing a better job. they are part of the solution if done right. presumably collegiate is a magnet like masterman. masterman sucks kids out of the system in fifth grade. its the best hs in the state and virtually impossible to get into if you dont go to the middle school. the district has also been a train wreck from a mgmt point of view . like i said, charters have been enough to slow but not stop the bleeding. that said, families make up a smaller chunk of the population than they used to..and as the city improves people want to live there for other reasons. the easiest things to fix are the things i mentiones. make it easy and cheap to build densely. make things easier than the burbs. its hard not to notice that the regions with shrinking cities are the ones thay seem to be struggling regionally
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.
