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.
Gentrification is not redevelopment, it is not revitalization. It's not about the built character of a neighborhood changing at all. It's also not a real-estate driven process (I'm not sure why you talk about "job" as there is no initial agenda - real estate folks follow, they don't lead). It's the displacement of a working class population by a college-educated, upper-middle class one.
Even once a neighborhood reaches the point where yuppies are moving in, it's entirely possible gentrification can stall out, or even reverse. I seem to recall there was a neighborhood very similar to the South Side which failed in Cleveland around ten years ago.
I don't care about what is "proper". I know what gentrification is. I know how it is measured. I deal with it as a matter of career. However, I appreciate your take on the matter. We understand gentrification in different ways. So, we see Pittsburgh neighborhoods in different ways. You've got the proper, official view of things. I take a pragmatic approach. To each his or her own.
As for the school thing, it seems a strange aside, and probably isn't applicable here anyway. Shaler might be better school district than the city as a whole, but the elementary school which Millvale/Etna feed into has very low scores . I met a woman who teaches second grade there and she said half of her class cannot read, and most of them move around so frequently they don't spend the school year in one place. Admittedly, the low scores are probably a result of the social background of the families, not the school being bad itself, but it doesn't seem like the sort of place you'd want to relocate to go to a good school cheaply.
Not all parent homebuyers are interested in elementary schools. Believe it or not, people search for housing when their children aren't elementary school age. It's very common for people to live in the city for the elementary school years (because they can afford Catholic schools) and then they bail to the suburbs because they can't afford private high school.
Shaler isn't the best school district. It's average. For many parents, average is good enough. If it weren't, homes in Shaler school district wouldn't be in high demand. It's not like everyone is trying or wishing to live in the best school districts. Most just want the safest they can afford.
Shaler's elementary schools only go from K-3. Grades 4-6 are all in one building on Scott Avenue in the Shaler Area Elementary School. Etna and Millvale go to different elementary schools. Millvale mostly attends Reserve (which includes many Reserve Township students) and some attending Marzolf. Etna is divided among elementary schools with most attending Marzolf and Burchfield and some attending Jeffery and Rogers.
This is a wise approach. A family can find great school value with such a perspective. The best predictor of a child's academic success is the educational attainment level of the parents. A good home is much more important than a school with great test scores.
Last edited by globalburgh; 08-22-2012 at 09:06 PM..
Reason: Typo
Even though there are still many people in Lawrenceville who are not part of "the gentry", the neighborhood is essentially off limits to newcomers that are not of the gentry (mostly talking about buyers here, not renters). The same can be said of the War Streets and South Side Flats. So there will be some inevitable increase in gentry-related stats such as college degrees as the old residents die off or move out for whatever reason. So I think it's fair to say that the gentrification process is complete in the sense that it is now past the point of no return, but there's still some predictable effects of it that have yet to play out.
Also, it's concerning to me to see gentrification referred to as the "right direction" for a neighborhood. Gentrification is better than decay, but I don't think it's really the optimal outcome. I would rather see neighborhoods end up safe and stable without the side effect of segregating the classes into different areas. I know that's not how a lot of people feel, and lots of people do want to self-segregate...which is why the money and people both flow the way they do into gentrified and gentrifying neighborhoods. I'd rather see a bunch of Brooklines than a mix of Shadysides and Hazelwoods.
Also, it's concerning to me to see gentrification referred to as the "right direction" for a neighborhood. Gentrification is better than decay, but I don't think it's really the optimal outcome. I would rather see neighborhoods end up safe and stable without the side effect of segregating the classes into different areas. I know that's not how a lot of people feel, and lots of people do want to self-segregate...which is why the money and people both flow the way they do into gentrified and gentrifying neighborhoods. I'd rather see a bunch of Brooklines than a mix of Shadysides and Hazelwoods.
This. I find gentrification to be a result of conformity, and I have always seen myself as a free-thinker. Perhaps that is why I found Shadyside so stifling, and the decaying neighborhoods so liberating. I especially love the look of awe or disbelief or just plain contempt when I am at a bar in the East End, and somebody asks me where I live, and I tell them. As if everybody who looks and acts like me has to live within one of three or four accepted neighborhoods!
I don't care about what is "proper". I know what gentrification is. I know how it is measured. I deal with it as a matter of career. However, I appreciate your take on the matter. We understand gentrification in different ways. So, we see Pittsburgh neighborhoods in different ways. You've got the proper, official view of things. I take a pragmatic approach. To each his or her own.
It seems like you're approaching it from the perspective of a real estate investor. I'm approaching it from the perspective of a social scientist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes
Shaler's elementary schools only go from K-3. Grades 4-6 are all in one building on Scott Avenue in the Shaler Area Elementary School. Etna and Millvale go to different elementary schools. Millvale mostly attends Reserve (which includes many Reserve Township students) and some attending Marzolf. Etna is divided among elementary schools with most attending Marzolf and Burchfield and some attending Jeffery and Rogers.
I suppose the woman I know teaches at Marzolf. She didn't paint a pretty picture of what she sees happening in her classrooms the last few years, but then, it's just one isolated opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by globalburgh
This is a wise approach. A family can find great school value with such a perspective. The best predictor of a child's academic success is the educational attainment level of the parents. A good home is much more important than a school with great test scores.
Agreed to an extent. As I've said numerous times however, although home environment appears to matter far more than school quality in terms of student performance, the same correlation isn't seen for adopted children, which means its unclear how much of being a good student is due to genetics rather than environment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday
Even though there are still many people in Lawrenceville who are not part of "the gentry", the neighborhood is essentially off limits to newcomers that are not of the gentry (mostly talking about buyers here, not renters). The same can be said of the War Streets and South Side Flats. So there will be some inevitable increase in gentry-related stats such as college degrees as the old residents die off or move out for whatever reason. So I think it's fair to say that the gentrification process is complete in the sense that it is now past the point of no return, but there's still some predictable effects of it that have yet to play out.
I think things have changed less than you think. Historically, many houses in Lawrenceville, like a lot of the working-class white neighborhoods, changed hands within families, often with no money involved. When houses went on the market in the past, they were often snatched up by landlords who turned them into rentals. The difference now is there are both newer homeowners willing to buy, along with a market for landlords besides slumlords in the neighborhood. However, houses are still passed down within families - I know many people who have moved here within the last 10 years because they got a house from their grandparents, or because a more distant relative sold it to them on the cheap. They don't fit the SWPL stereotype, although they do tend to be younger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday
Also, it's concerning to me to see gentrification referred to as the "right direction" for a neighborhood. Gentrification is better than decay, but I don't think it's really the optimal outcome. I would rather see neighborhoods end up safe and stable without the side effect of segregating the classes into different areas. I know that's not how a lot of people feel, and lots of people do want to self-segregate...which is why the money and people both flow the way they do into gentrified and gentrifying neighborhoods. I'd rather see a bunch of Brooklines than a mix of Shadysides and Hazelwoods.
I think gentrification is a morally neutral process. If it's not wrong for upper-middle class neighborhoods to become poor neighborhoods, it's not wrong for poor ones to become upper-middle class ones either. The character of neighborhoods changes over time, and that's okay. The broader concern shouldn't be what's happening to any one neighborhood, but making sure an entire city doesn't become unaffordable to those of more modest incomes. Pittsburgh is far away from that point yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes
Shayside was a cool neighborhood back in the 70s and 80s with privately owned shops. Then chain stores moved into the area.
One of my co-workers moved to Shadyside in the 1980s, and laments what happened to it. I remember him complaining when the last hardware store on Walnut closed. My wife also told me there were punk clubs in Shadyside when she was in college.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alleghenyangel
This. I find gentrification to be a result of conformity, and I have always seen myself as a free-thinker. Perhaps that is why I found Shadyside so stifling, and the decaying neighborhoods so liberating. I especially love the look of awe or disbelief or just plain contempt when I am at a bar in the East End, and somebody asks me where I live, and I tell them. As if everybody who looks and acts like me has to live within one of three or four accepted neighborhoods!
I don't think I was aware of Lawrenceville being trendy yet when I moved here, as aside from going dancing at 80s night at Belvideres, I didn't spend much time in the neighborhood. I bought after three years of living in Bloomfield/Friendship for two reasons.
1. I could get a brick rowhouse on the cheap. Owning an ugly siding house didn't appeal to me.
2. I commute by bike, and I was sick of riding up the hill on Penn Avenue, and looking forward to a nice, flat ride into downtown.
It seems like you're approaching it from the perspective of a real estate investor. I'm approaching it from the perspective of a social scientist.
I'm approaching it from the perspective of a social scientist. I'm an economic geographer. It's applied social science in the economic development field. I've served on a city planning and zoning commission, stuff like that.
I seem to recall there was a neighborhood very similar to the South Side which failed in Cleveland around ten years ago.
Other than once having a large collection of bars, I wouldn't characterize The Flats as being "very similar" to the South Side. The South Side is a fully functioning and densely populated neighborhood. Cleveland's Flats was just bars in a Scooby Doo ghost town. Cleveland's Flats of the 90s was certainly not on any type of gentrification track.
Other than once having a large collection of bars, I wouldn't characterize The Flats as being "very similar" to the South Side. The South Side is a fully functioning and densely populated neighborhood. Cleveland's Flats was just bars in a Scooby Doo ghost town. Cleveland's Flats of the 90s was certainly not on any type of gentrification track.
Recently, I toured Cleveland with a staff member of the Case Western Center on Urban Poverty and Community Development. The Flats isn't a neighborhood. Perhaps it was at some point. But that would be long in the past. Ohio City and Tremont are the neighborhoods everyone was talking about in the 90s as gentrifying. Both seemed to fizzle. I think "stall" is more apt. Today, I consider Ohio City to be baked a la the South Side in Pittsburgh. Tremont is just about there. Detroit Shoreway (fantastic location) is on the come.
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.
