PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by 1487

seems and reality are 2 different things. I don't think there is a single crime category in Philly that hasn't declined significantly over the past decade. Homicides are the only measure that gets covered even though its a poor barometer of overall crime rates. Violent crime, car thefts, robberies, etc. are all down significantly.

He's taking about the northeast specifically, where contrary to the vast majority of the city, has in fact seen a dramatic increase in crime over the past couple of decades.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

I am a small business owner (and know many others), and I disagree. The Philadelphia taxes and overall business climate are a big problem and big driver out to the suburbs. Of course, it is and must be balanced against various business advantages to being in the city that exist for many (if not most) types of business. Also, I'm not sure why you are talking about relocation rather than choosing a location as between the city and burbs to initially set up shop (many companies initially start in the suburbs and finally move into the city once they've become big and profitable enough that they determine business advantages are great enough to outweigh the higher cost of operating here). Admittedly, this is just one of many factors. But I believe that people that don't acknowledge the problems with taxes and the Philly business climate simply aren't talking to enough business owners in the city and suburbs and what drives their decisions. Of course, there's also been no systematic study or survey that I'm aware of. Not really worth having an argument, though.

There's a difference between acknowledging that taxes are a factor (I do) and need to be reformed (I do) and overstating their impact. And there have been systematic studies about how taxes effect business growth and location decisions. They have shown there is some effect but that the effect is small and is counteracted by many other variables. That's the point I was getting at.

[ScreamShatter]

Originally Posted by 1487

There is no magic bullet on taxes or business attraction. The momentum is in the positive direction but this is a long battle, not something that can be fixed with a miracle working mayor. The change in state law they are pushing for seems significant and hopefully that will accelerate the job growth if it becomes reality.

I think gas prices are a small part of why many of tiring of suburban living. The need to drive everywhere, the necessity of car ownership, aging housing stock, high property taxes, the lawn and yard care that many young people could care less about, etc are all factors.

Recently, my company (one of the larger more innovative companies in the region) has been looking to expand and/or open another office. Many people brought up opening an office in Philly, but the company wouldn’t even consider it because of taxes. So instead, they are looking at expanding into San Antonio or Kansas City. Taxes remain a big barrier keeping many companies from being in Philly.

Energy prices don’t just effect cars – they effect everything from construction costs, food prices, etc. In the long run, that gives people incentive to downsize. It also makes city living a little more appealing – especially when Philly is still pretty affordable. When the cost to own a car and use it is so expensive, it makes it where people want to live where they have options to live and have a good quality of life / be able to get around easily.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by 1487

I think Philly is already doing great in terms of claiming marketshare of post college age adults. What many claim is happening or will happen is that people currently in their 20s will move when their kids hit school age. I don't know how much evidence there is that this is happening. CCD produced a document showing that many families were leaving the city even as population increases in and around CC- but they didn't really establish where the outflow was most concentrated.

Just speaking from my experience as an 'older millennial', the people my age that I know who bought in the city and now have very young kids (1-3 years old) are quite certain that they will be leaving in the next few years.

On the flip side, those who don't have kids or have no interest in kids are perfectly content with staying put.

Then there's people like me who loved living in the city but never want to move ever again and bought in the burbs' for the 'long run' scenario.

Originally Posted by MikeNigh

Actually the school issue isn't that big. They really only need to a fix ONE school or two that parents can guaranteed get their children in to by living in the neighborhood. Then once that school is filled fix the next one over..

Sounds like you've got it all planned out to a tee...get to it mayor.

[cafeguy]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Just speaking from my experience as an 'older millennial', the people my age that I know who bought in the city and now have very young kids (1-3 years old) are quite certain that they will be leaving in the next few years.

On the flip side, those who don't have kids or have no interest in kids are perfectly content with staying put.

Then there's people like me who loved living in the city but never want to move ever again and bought in the burbs' for the 'long run' scenario.




Sounds like you've got it all planned out to a tee...get to it mayor.

For any of us "old millenials", we don't even matter. There is waaaaaaay more to come...

http://cityobservatory.org/not-peak-millennial-the-coming-millennial-wave/#

Philly reversed the brain drain, and it reversed the population decline. We definitely need to convince more parents to stay, but its not a concern that will destroy our growth. Its something EVERY city has to deal with...parents moving to the burbs.

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

For any of us "old millenials", we don't even matter. There is waaaaaaay more to come...

http://cityobservatory.org/not-peak-millennial-the-coming-millennial-wave/#

Philly reversed the brain drain, and it reversed the population decline. We definitely need to convince more parents to stay, but its not a concern that will destroy our growth. Its something EVERY city has to deal with...parents moving to the burbs.

We don't need to keep 100% or even 50% of educated middle to upper class couples w kids, just more than we have in the past which looks like it's certainly happening. Great thing about Philly is we have Temple, Drexel and Penn bringing thousands of new ambitious young people to the city every year, we keep more and more as city gradually improves - snowball effect.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

For any of us "old millenials", we don't even matter. There is waaaaaaay more to come...

http://cityobservatory.org/not-peak-millennial-the-coming-millennial-wave/#

Damn kids and their 'brunch'

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Damn kids and their 'brunch'

Mmmm brunch, the most fattening meal of the day ...

[Insoluble]

Originally Posted by MikeNigh

Actually the school issue isn't that big. They really only need to a fix ONE school or two that parents can guaranteed get their children in to by living in the neighborhood. Then once that school is filled fix the next one over..

That's actually what we've already done. There are several public elementary schools in the city that are quite solid and schools that parents actively chose to send their kids to. Schools like Penn Alexander, Merrideth, McCall, etc. Probably at least 5 or 6 of them at this point. The problem is that the schools typically only turn over well after the neighborhood has improved, so it's a long and slow process. If you want to accelerate population growth of middle and upper middle class families, you need something more across the board.

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Just speaking from my experience as an 'older millennial', the people my age that I know who bought in the city and now have very young kids (1-3 years old) are quite certain that they will be leaving in the next few years.

On the flip side, those who don't have kids or have no interest in kids are perfectly content with staying put.

Eh, I'll counter your anecdotal evidence with my anecdotal evidence. As the father of a school age kid in the city who knows plenty of other middle class families with school age kids, I'd say that it's probably closer to a 50/50 split. About half the families I know moved once the kids got close to school age. About half stayed. Most who stayed, lived in the catchment for one of the better public schools, though some of them elected to go private. Still, agree that the school system on the whole is probably the number one thing driving middle class families to leave the city.

[MikeNigh]

Originally Posted by Insoluble

If you want to accelerate population growth of middle and upper middle class families, you need something more across the board.

I dunno that's like saying to solve the schooling problems in the burbs all the schools in the burbs need to be good. I feel like anything urban in the US is always held to hypocritical standards from suburban view points.

[1487]

Originally Posted by allovertown

He's taking about the northeast specifically, where contrary to the vast majority of the city, has in fact seen a dramatic increase in crime over the past couple of decades.

I doubt it. Unless you are talking about drug addict related thefts. for the record, you can likely go into any neighborhood in Philly and long timers will tell you it was safer and better "back in the day". Statistics and reality don't always line up. It is true that the 15th district is the busiest based on what i read and that does cover Mayfair and frankford, but that's just one part of the NE.

[1487]

Originally Posted by MikeNigh

I dunno that's like saying to solve the schooling problems in the burbs all the schools in the burbs need to be good. I feel like anything urban in the US is always held to hypocritical standards from suburban view points.

Very true. The entire district will never be "good" by suburban standards. Not here, not in any city. One reason? You are dealing with a lot more demographic and funding challenges here than in the best suburban districts. Many suburban districts with working class demographics aren't even that great. Considering the hostility of the state towards Philly and the PSD and funding I think the universities need to do more. There was an article about people pressuring Penn to parnter with another school but they won't. I hope Kenney pressures them further, there is no excuse for that. Drexel wants to eventually create a school at UC Square, but they should do more in the short term. Penn, Drexel and Temple should all have strong partnerships with the schools in their immediate areas similar to Penn Alexander. I see minimal evidence Penn has any concern about the city as a whole and I think Gutman has been virtually invisible on city wide issues. They can afford to create 5 P-A type schools in West Philly and doing so would be huge.

[Larry King]

Can't we have charter middle/high schools with tough admission standards? That should work right?

[mja]

Originally Posted by 1487

Very true. The entire district will never be "good" by suburban standards. Not here, not in any city. One reason? You are dealing with a lot more demographic and funding challenges here than in the best suburban districts. Many suburban districts with working class demographics aren't even that great. Considering the hostility of the state towards Philly and the PSD and funding I think the universities need to do more. There was an article about people pressuring Penn to parnter with another school but they won't. I hope Kenney pressures them further, there is no excuse for that. Drexel wants to eventually create a school at UC Square, but they should do more in the short term. Penn, Drexel and Temple should all have strong partnerships with the schools in their immediate areas similar to Penn Alexander. I see minimal evidence Penn has any concern about the city as a whole and I think Gutman has been virtually invisible on city wide issues. They can afford to create 5 P-A type schools in West Philly and doing so would be huge.

Drexel is indeed partnering with SDP to create an SLA middle school & a new building for Powel at UC Square. Powel will feed into the new middle school, which actually opens next year at a temporary location in a Drexel-owned building on Spring Garden & 36th, I think.

I'm also a parent that stayed in the city and I have two children at an SDP public school in Center City, and I've been extremely happy with my children's schooling. Given that the biggest predictors of educational success for a child are their parents' level of education and level of income, the district's problem is primarily one of marketing. There's nothing really earth-shattering that happens at Penn Alexander, for example. They've just been able to sell the idea that they're a "good" school to lawyers, doctors, and other professionals, who then in turn feel good about sending their kids there, who then in turn do well in school because they come from economically-stable, well-educated households, which then in turn reinforces the narrative that Penn Alexander is a "good" school.

[mja]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Can't we have charter middle/high schools with tough admission standards? That should work right?

People have to watch with charters. String Theory bought themselves a damned Center City office building and then had to start cutting all types of services because they bought themselves a damned Center City office building. Charter law is very lax in the oversight department, with even straight up embezzlement happening at some schools, only some of which has come out in the press. I personally know of some things that have happened at some charter schools that would make you all sick.

There's nothing magical about charters. The successful ones white people want to send their kids to benefit from the same Penn Alexander effect I described above. The ones that get to take over failing neighborhood schools in black neighborhoods are nowhere I would want to send my children to, not because of safety concerns or anything like that, but because the educational model they use is the opposite of what I would want my children to experience.

In the end, this is partly an unsolvable problem. The strategy that we know works - a clean slate school in a gentrified neighborhood - is not scaleable at the level we would need to scale it at in order to solve the problem. This is going to take time. Adequate funding for education would also help.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by 1487

I doubt it. Unless you are talking about drug addict related thefts. for the record, you can likely go into any neighborhood in Philly and long timers will tell you it was safer and better "back in the day". Statistics and reality don't always line up. It is true that the 15th district is the busiest based on what i read and that does cover Mayfair and frankford, but that's just one part of the NE.

Statistics and reality always line up. What in the world are you talking about? What kind of crime statistics are concerned with imaginary crimes?

Statistics and PERCEPTION may not be aligned, but that's an entirely different matter. In any event, you're incorrect. Basically every part of Philadelphia has seen a reduction violent crime since the 1980s. The exceptions being NE Philadelphia and SW Philly.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Flyers2001

Their not trying to escape the taxes by leaving the northeast. They are trying to escape the crime that seems to be occurring much more frequently in many Northeast Neighborhoods than it was 10 years ago.

They're not escaping crime. They're following the same pre-packaged dream that the generations of white working class people who fled before them have been chasing for years (especially from the NE): the suburbs. With their faux estate homes, "space", vaulted ceilings, and 3 builders grade bathrooms, vinyl windows, and wall to wall carpeting.

[Hrytsyu]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Just speaking from my experience as an 'older millennial', the people my age that I know who bought in the city and now have very young kids (1-3 years old) are quite certain that they will be leaving in the next few years.

On the flip side, those who don't have kids or have no interest in kids are perfectly content with staying put.

Then there's people like me who loved living in the city but never want to move ever again and bought in the burbs' for the 'long run' scenario.




Sounds like you've got it all planned out to a tee...get to it mayor.

Ugh. I almost regret responding to this sentiment because apparently people who are determined to move to the suburbs for supposed sake of their children's educations never listen and most certainly aren't capable of learning. However, I shall repeat myself.

There are many fine competitive public schools in the city. If you believe your child isn't capable of attending those schools, perhaps you should consider the suburbs. Don't believe all schools in the suburbs are great. They're not at all. Many people move to the suburbs for the supposedly superior education opportunities , only to send their kids to parochial schools.

Furthermore, I've noticed that in rebounding areas, such as South Philadelphia near Center City, the young parents are determined to influence and change the local schools. That also reflects the will they have to direct their own children. They will certainly prosper.

My own child is a beneficiary of that approach. We would have chosen no other path.

[1487]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

Recently, my company (one of the larger more innovative companies in the region) has been looking to expand and/or open another office. Many people brought up opening an office in Philly, but the company wouldn’t even consider it because of taxes. So instead, they are looking at expanding into San Antonio or Kansas City. Taxes remain a big barrier keeping many companies from being in Philly.

Energy prices don’t just effect cars – they effect everything from construction costs, food prices, etc. In the long run, that gives people incentive to downsize. It also makes city living a little more appealing – especially when Philly is still pretty affordable. When the cost to own a car and use it is so expensive, it makes it where people want to live where they have options to live and have a good quality of life / be able to get around easily.

for people who drive modest amounts the cost of gas is actually one of the least significant costs associated with having a car. Many spend nearly as much on insurance (or more depending on age, where you live) as gas. I spend more to insure my car than to fuel it and that's not even counting the car payment. Unless your car is paid for owning a car isn't cheap, even when gas prices are low. In the suburbs the reality is you need to have one car per adult in your house. Having 3-4 vehicles per home is commonplace and that's a serious expense.

[1487]

Originally Posted by allovertown

Statistics and reality always line up. What in the world are you talking about? What kind of crime statistics are concerned with imaginary crimes?

Statistics and PERCEPTION may not be aligned, but that's an entirely different matter. In any event, you're incorrect. Basically every part of Philadelphia has seen a reduction violent crime since the 1980s. The exceptions being NE Philadelphia and SW Philly.

That's what I meant obviously. People's perception of reality and statistics don't always line up. Sort of like long time Philly residents who swear that the city was safer when Rizzo was in charge when in fact it was worse than it is now statistically speaking.