U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [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 08-04-2013, 08:57 AM
 
Location: The Left Toast
1,230 posts, read 1,520,201 times
Reputation: 902

Advertisements

Failure to Adapt
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2013, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,567 posts, read 2,662,851 times
Reputation: 1658
Stupid article. The author talks about a "clear cut" approach to neighborhoods as if they were populated by Oak trees and not human beings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 10:23 AM
 
Location: Midwest
1,283 posts, read 1,880,905 times
Reputation: 970
Quote:
Originally Posted by mancat100 View Post
Stupid article. The author talks about a "clear cut" approach to neighborhoods as if they were populated by Oak trees and not human beings.
He's not entirely off. Things aren't quite as extreme here as in Detroit. But there are some real land-use problems. One thing mentioned in the article is that despite Philadelphia's population height being 2,000,000 people, that it is actually a city built for 2,500,000, as big parts of NE, NW, and SW Philadelphia were undeveloped at the population height. I don't know how that compares to Detroit, if they had any big post-war development inside city limits that put a band-aid on abandonment. But one thing I do know from visiting Detroit is that it's not an entirely dead city. Some people get that impression from media accounts. Except for coming into the city and leaving it, it seems like it would probably be pretty easy to live your life there without really even being confronted by the blight.

The abandonment issue in Philadelphia is not something that should be ignored. Let's even make the argument that Philadelphia can be financially stable even with all the deactivated commercial and industrial land (and anybody who takes the regional rail in through North Philadelphia knows there's a lot of it, it struck me as a path of destruction the first time I saw it myself). And let's say the city can even continue to capture a fraction of what they lost by converting former industrial sites into suburban style strip malls. It still comes down to trying to make the numbers add up. “If vacancy were a land use, it would be the third largest use in the district”.

I'm not trying to be a downer - but sometimes it seems like a lot of people are so fully entrenched on the "Philadelphia is great" and "Philadelphia is terrible" sides of the story that they lose perspective. Really, as a transplant here, I knew Philadelphia had a lot of great things going on and a lot of problems, and living here for a couple of years now has only made that much clearer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,166 posts, read 1,297,133 times
Reputation: 442
I'm from Detroit and I will tell you that it is not possible to live in Detroit and not be confronted by blight. Take a trip west only a few blocks and you'll see blight. The main artery is filled with blocks of abandoned buildings with broken windows/doors so the homeless could get in and make it their own. Not to mention that Detroit is infamously lacking in things like grocery stores (there are more than people make out) so that one is required to venture away from the area that you show on the map.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Philly
10,026 posts, read 14,472,347 times
Reputation: 2774
while land use is a problem the authors recomendations are myopic at best. clear cutting neighborhoods so land can be put in politically controlled land bank is the same sort of backwards thinking that gave us philadelphia today. while i agree there needs to be some park land, the bigger problem is there is no clear , easy , and transparent way to purchase much of the vacant land thats owned by various agencies and the city does a poor job of moving properties to sherfiffs sale. detroit is as big as philadelphia landwise and has less than half the population...it also stands to reason it would have had room for postwar development....thiugh it would have had far less 18&19th century development obviously. phuladelphias problems are mostly related to crime and schools, lower crime and better schools and the land has value. heck, even without those things larfe swaths of blighted philadelphia is already being redeveloped. by the end of the decade it stands to reason northern liberties will have quadrupled its population in 20 years and things are happening in kensington as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,520 posts, read 10,847,100 times
Reputation: 5441
Quote:
Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat View Post
I'm not trying to be a downer - but sometimes it seems like a lot of people are so fully entrenched on the "Philadelphia is great" and "Philadelphia is terrible" sides of the story that they lose perspective. Really, as a transplant here, I knew Philadelphia had a lot of great things going on and a lot of problems, and living here for a couple of years now has only made that much clearer.
I see what you mean but the city does need more people with a positive outlook as oppose to always being negative all the time. We already have enough of that perspective in the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Midwest
1,283 posts, read 1,880,905 times
Reputation: 970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11 View Post
I'm from Detroit and I will tell you that it is not possible to live in Detroit and not be confronted by blight. Take a trip west only a few blocks and you'll see blight. The main artery is filled with blocks of abandoned buildings with broken windows/doors so the homeless could get in and make it their own. Not to mention that Detroit is infamously lacking in things like grocery stores (there are more than people make out) so that one is required to venture away from the area that you show on the map.
I don't know. I've met some people, particularly people around my age who live in Center City, who don't seem too confronted by the blight here either. It's admittedly pretty easy to avoid if you live your life in certain neighborhoods, and my only point was that it can probably work out that way for people in Detroit too. For sure Market Street and Broad Street aren't total disasters, and the problem surely isn't on the same scale as Detroit - but there are lots of former main streets which while not totally empty, have a lot of vacant lots, a lot of abandoned buildings, a lot of squatters, and are virtually unrecognizable as places of importance for commerce, industry, and community.

Quote:
while land use is a problem the authors recomendations are myopic at best. clear cutting neighborhoods so land can be put in politically controlled land bank is the same sort of backwards thinking that gave us philadelphia today.
Probably should have highlighted one of the links I posted better. But a planner with the Philadelphia Planning Commission said "Some blocks in North Philadelphia...have so few people living in them that it may make more sense for the city to buy out the few remaining residents and use the land for something else, such as farming". I don't particularly know what the author of the OP's piece background is, or what is agenda is. But I'm guessing that his piece was based on this pretty recent statement from a member of the planning commission.

What's happening in the parts of North Philly bordering Center City, the riverwards, south philly, and NW Philly is great. Don't get me wrong. Yet, everyday as I make my way down from the NW into Center City I try to picture the future for this vast area that used to be where Philadelphia generated its wealth. And I have a hard time figuring out how universities and hip bars and restaurants can possibly fill this incredibly hole. I'm totally willing to be proven wrong.

Quote:
I see what you mean but the city does need more people with a positive outlook as oppose to always being negative all the time. We already have enough of that perspective in the city.
Yeah, but unlike the negadelphians I'd be interested in a conversation based in reality about how to deal problems. Which is what I think the author of this column was trying to get at.


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,166 posts, read 1,297,133 times
Reputation: 442
Well, I live in Center City and I stick myself in the blight, but I can say that if I didn't want to I could easily avoid it here in Philadelphia. I honestly do not feel this is true about Detroit, as the commercial aspect of Detroit is not as well developed due to its inability to thrive. For goods and services, one is essentially forced to confront the blight. The blight is heavily woven into the downtown/midtown area and I wouldn't say the same thing about Center City.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 02:55 PM
 
177 posts, read 306,156 times
Reputation: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by FamousBlueRaincoat View Post
The abandonment issue in Philadelphia is not something that should be ignored. Let's even make the argument that Philadelphia can be financially stable even with all the deactivated commercial and industrial land (and anybody who takes the regional rail in through North Philadelphia knows there's a lot of it, it struck me as a path of destruction the first time I saw it myself). And let's say the city can even continue to capture a fraction of what they lost by converting former industrial sites into suburban style strip malls.
It's people like the author of these "articles" that put those suburban style strip malls and other suburban things in the city and call it "urban".

By the way, the Airport line ain't great either until you get towards University City. The El around the late 40s-early 50s gets pretty bad, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
while land use is a problem the authors recomendations are myopic at best. clear cutting neighborhoods so land can be put in politically controlled land bank is the same sort of backwards thinking that gave us philadelphia today. while i agree there needs to be some park land, the bigger problem is there is no clear , easy , and transparent way to purchase much of the vacant land thats owned by various agencies and the city does a poor job of moving properties to sherfiffs sale. detroit is as big as philadelphia landwise and has less than half the population...it also stands to reason it would have had room for postwar development....thiugh it would have had far less 18&19th century development obviously. phuladelphias problems are mostly related to crime and schools, lower crime and better schools and the land has value. heck, even without those things larfe swaths of blighted philadelphia is already being redeveloped. by the end of the decade it stands to reason northern liberties will have quadrupled its population in 20 years and things are happening in kensington as well.
Exactly. That's exactly the problem, is that the people coming up with these "solutions" are all looking at it as outsiders from the suburbs who don't even remotely understand how urban areas function or the differences between different types of urban areas.

The suggestion to turn Lower North Philadelphia into farmland really turns my stomach.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 03:04 PM
 
177 posts, read 306,156 times
Reputation: 40
Philadelphia and Detroit are really not all that much alike for the most part. In some ways they definitely are but the difference is that Detroit grew because of some huge companies and Philadelphia's industrial areas grew because of a bunch of smaller, very innovative companies that grew but never to the size of the major companies in Detroit. Philadelphia had just a ton of factors come together just the right way in order to cause its decline, whereas Detroit was built around heavy manufacturing, and grew more similarly to the way Baltimore did. There really wasn't an industry that Philadelphia didn't have at one point. Philadelphia was a big city before it was even incredibly industrial. That's not the case with Detroit.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top