Does Philadelphia have a problem with its economy (taxes, jobs, economy, etc)?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by mja

You have no idea of what you're talking about and NYC prices have not one iota of relevance in this discussion.

Google Point Breeze gentrification. You'll have hours worth of reading material.

The mindless, fact-averse SSP city-boosters are apparently loose, trying to convince everyone else that professionals are buying dirt-cheap crackhouses in the ghetto. Sad.

If you actually read the thread, instead of resorting to absurd reflexive city-boosting, you would see that I am very pro-Philly, and think it has (arguably) the second best core in the U.S. But high income professionals aren't buying tumbledown homes in the ghetto, anywhere, unless you're talking investment purposes.

The fact that prices are rising in some dumpy locale doesn't mean a bunch of doctors and lawyers and investment bankers are abandoning Center City and the Main Line for the hood.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by 10023

We may have different standards.

I would not consider this (as an example) to be great housing stock:
https://goo.gl/maps/tC99sWu4Rjz

You may disagree.

I'm not sure of the standard by which you're comparing, but I'd presume that one has very particular "1%-er" tastes to not consider the block you've referred to--which is currently a very solid and higher-end neighborhood in Philly--as "great housing stock." It's not the most luxurious or ornate housing you'll ever see, but it's still objectively charming and extremely livable.

The fact of the matter is that many people find neighborhoods such as those very attractive and desirable, to the extent that they're in quite high-demand by the urban affluent/young-professional class.

[mja]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The mindless, fact-averse SSP city-boosters are apparently loose, trying to convince everyone else that professionals are buying dirt-cheap crackhouses in the ghetto. Sad.

If you actually read the thread, instead of resorting to absurd reflexive city-boosting, you would see that I am very pro-Philly, and think it has (arguably) the second best core in the U.S. But high income professionals aren't buying tumbledown homes in the ghetto, anywhere.

Dude, I have 244 posts (now 245) in over a DECADE of being on this site, and probably check it about once a day on average. I'm not a fact-averse city-booster, I'm rebutting you because you're just wrong and don't know what you're talking about, and whether or not you're pro-Philly has nothing to do with anything. You're just wrong about this.

Point Breeze is without a doubt gentrifying. There have literally been organized anti-gentrification actions, including the arson of newly built houses, and there was a whole city council campaign centered specifically on the gentrification of that hood that saw the primary developer of the area (incidentally, it was houses he was developing that got torched) challenge the African-American incumbent (with the latter winning). Housing values in that hood (and many others) have skyrocketed.

Here: https://philly.curbed.com/2017/1/6/1...ghborhood-2017

Now, if you're definition of gentrification is the SanFran / NYC pushing out of nearly everyone who doesn't make mid 6 figures and up, then nowhere in Philly is gentrifying, because Philly real estate just isn't that expensive. But the neighborhoods we're talking about have absolutely seen professionals move there. Don't take my word for it, just freaking google it.

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The mindless, fact-averse SSP city-boosters are apparently loose, trying to convince everyone else that professionals are buying dirt-cheap crackhouses in the ghetto. Sad.

If you actually read the thread, instead of resorting to absurd reflexive city-boosting, you would see that I am very pro-Philly, and think it has (arguably) the second best core in the U.S. But high income professionals aren't buying tumbledown homes in the ghetto, anywhere, unless you're talking investment purposes.

The fact that prices are rising in some dumpy locale doesn't mean a bunch of doctors and lawyers and investment bankers are abandoning Center City and the Main Line for the hood.

There are very few investment bankers on the main line, whereas there should be a lot.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by Crawford

That isn't gentrification. That's a previously worthless neighborhood coming back to semi-normality.

We're talking about professionals and gentrification. 295k asking prices in a near-ghetto aren't attracting professionals.

I mean, Bensonhurst, Brooklyn has zero gentrification, will never, ever have gentrification, and I don't think you can get a rowhouse for less than 900k.

The terminology isn't important. Regardless of whether it's technically "gentrification," it's significant re-investment in previously poverty-stricken and destitute neighborhoods. And the new residents of these neighborhoods are clearly of a much higher income bracket, regardless of whether they are of a traditionally white-collar profession.

That's what this all comes down to. Many neighborhood outside of Center City are now seeing a re-establishment of middle-class families/residents vis-a-vis the creation/drastic up-scaling of housing to modern luxury standards. Regardless of the professions of residents, and whether these neighborhoods conform to the strict standards for "desirable" (again, apparently by those who will "only" accept places like the Upper East Side or Chelsea as the standard for "good" urban living), these places are seeing widespread investment and solid middle-class demand.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The mindless, fact-averse SSP city-boosters are apparently loose, trying to convince everyone else that professionals are buying dirt-cheap crackhouses in the ghetto. Sad.

If you actually read the thread, instead of resorting to absurd reflexive city-boosting, you would see that I am very pro-Philly, and think it has (arguably) the second best core in the U.S. But high income professionals aren't buying tumbledown homes in the ghetto, anywhere, unless you're talking investment purposes.

The fact that prices are rising in some dumpy locale doesn't mean a bunch of doctors and lawyers and investment bankers are abandoning Center City and the Main Line for the hood.

What on earth are you talking about? So a neighborhood is only considered to have started gentrifying if doctors, lawyers and investment bankers are buying there?

A neighborhood can start gentrifying if young families, young professionals, students, etc. start moving in.

Point Breeze is not only increasing in home values, but in Median Household Income, and there is new construction everywhere.

People are actually buying dilapidated homes and completely renovating them. So yes, they are buying "crack dens" in the "ghettos."

That's 100% the definition of gentrification.

Graduate Hospital and Northern Liberties could have been considered ghetto 10 years ago... now look at them.

The same thing is happening in the next rung of neighborhoods like Point Breeze, Brewerytown and Kensington.

[dc_denizen]

20 years ago u street in dc was all crack houses. Now, you can’t buy a closet for 500k. So it can happen.

[mja]

Originally Posted by summersm343

What on earth are you talking about? So a neighborhood is only considered to have started gentrifying if doctors, lawyers and investment bankers are buying there?

While I imagine the influx of residents to the Point Breeze area is mostly younger creative class types, there are absolutely, say, lawyers as well. In fact, here's an article (albeit behind a damn paywall) on gentrification in Point Breeze that partly centers on a lawyer who moved into the area: http://www.philly.com/philly/columni...meowners-.html

Meanwhile, some of the other neighborhoods we're talking about - Passyunk Square, for example - are absolutely lousy with doctors and lawyers. I know this because I personally know doctors and lawyers who freaking live there.

[mja]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

20 years ago u street in dc was all crack houses. Now, you can’t buy a closet for 500k. So it can happen.

Graduate Hospital, the neighborhood that was incredulously used as an example of substandard housing stock, is a perfect example of this. At the turn of this century, it was a rough-edged impoverished neighborhood with more than it's fair share of drug dens. Less than 20 years later, it's an expensive family-oriented neighborhood that currently has no less than 5 listings over 900K, two of which are asking for over a million.

[10023]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

There are very few investment bankers on the main line, whereas there should be a lot.

Umm, why?

[10023]

Originally Posted by mja

I mean, his whole contention was that sections of the city are gentrification-proof because of substandard housing stock. As his example of this, he then literally picks a block in Graduate Hospital, a neighborhood that has gentrified over the last 15 years to the point where it's not even touchable for those with household incomes under 6 figures and as-is sight-unseen shells are asking 500K.

The fact that you find it surprising that people on sub-$100k incomes can't afford to buy, or think that $500k is a lot for a whole house (even with a renovation on top of that), confirms that we are not talking about the same type of "gentrification".

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by 10023

Because those young professionals would need to renovate that working class housing stock to make it livable (even for young professionals), and they're not going to do that if they're rentals.

In the UK it works, because the average house size for the whole country is about 1300 square feet. There are lots of working class "cottages" built for factory workers in London that are worth lots of money (like the Hillgate Village area near me).

But these South Philly neighborhoods need LOTS of investment to make them places that young professionals want to live.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

I've bought plenty of crappy, substandard housing in Chicago, gut rehabbed it until it's of very solid quality, and rented it out. It works. Lots of money to be made here. What matters most is location and space. Money can fix the rest.

[mja]

Originally Posted by 10023

The fact that you find it surprising that people on sub-$100k incomes can't afford to buy, or think that $500k is a lot for a whole house (even with a renovation on top of that), confirms that we are not talking about the same type of "gentrification".

Indeed.

But what's your actual point then?

[Shawn]

I thought this thread was about whether or not Philly is having trouble winning new big companies and retaining the ones that are still around.

PA not being as business or city friendly compared to NY and MA seems more relevant than South Philadelphia gentrification.

Whenever this thread gets made (seems to pop up once a year or so), I also add that Philly needs to do a better job branding itself. Comes back to not really having that clearly articulated hook. Own something, or at least cultivate the perception that you do!

[mhays]

Agreed. The brand probably has more to do with drunk louts at football games than with great urbanity.

Regarding those row houses...gentrification happens gradually and in phases. Artists, then hipsters, people who work nearby, etc....the rich bankers come later. They don't move into the hood but they certainly move into already-gentrifying areas.

[Shawn]

I'm biased given what I do for a living, but I cannot stress enough just how important branding is, for everything. The perceptions you have in your head about a company, a product, a person, a location, they consciously and more importantly subconsciously inform nearly every decision you make. Corporate leadership looks at the bottom line, but their decisions are still just as informed by brand perceptions as anyone else's.

Somebody send the Philly CoC a copy of The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding.

[mja]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I thought this thread was about whether or not Philly is having trouble winning new big companies and retaining the ones that are still around.

PA not being as business or city friendly compared to NY and MA seems more relevant than South Philadelphia gentrification.

Whenever this thread gets made (seems to pop up once a year or so), I also add that Philly needs to do a better job branding itself. Comes back to not really having that clearly articulated hook. Own something, or at least cultivate the perception that you do!

It's definitely been hard to break free from the old perceptions about what Philadelphia is or isn't. Which is perhaps why people who don't live in the city feel like they have any ability to argue with people who do about where young professionals are or aren't living these days. I mean, that's comically presumptuous.

But to your point, I agree, Philly has to sell itself as something more than Rocky & cheesesteaks. It's been a slow uphill journey since Rendell was mayor in the 90's, but there's been definite progress. The biggest single problem is with older Philadelphians, who are shit salesmen for the city.

Originally Posted by mhays

Agreed. The brand probably has more to do with drunk louts at football games than with great urbanity.

Regarding those row houses...gentrification happens gradually and in phases. Artists, then hipsters, people who work nearby, etc....the rich bankers come later. They don't move into the hood but they certainly move into already-gentrifying areas.

Exactly. People priced out of Rittenhouse Square went to Graduate Hospital and now people priced out of Graduate Hospital are crossing Washington Ave to Point Breeze, and so on and so forth. First are younger creative types who start bringing in some amenities, the neighborhood starts to go from sketchy to edgy to cool to downright trendy, and then come in the younger professionals, etc. The playbook is well-known. Graduate Hospital is now well-established and is filled with lawyers, doctors, college professors, architects, businessmen & women, engineers, and bankers. A mere 15 years ago it was a rather sketchy poor-working class neighborhood. The idea that a neighborhood having thousands of housing starts / renos in a 15 year period and median house values quadrupling over that same period of time somehow isn't 'gentrifying' because it hasn't become a ghetto for the rich is completely absurd.

Anyway the whole gentrification thing came up because someone claimed that Philly was struggling / going to struggle economically in part because young professionals wouldn't move into South & North Philly, despite the fact this is what is actually already happening (and has been for the last ~5 years, or longer in several cases), and they'd know that if they were on the ground in Philly.

Originally Posted by Shawn

I'm biased given what I do for a living, but I cannot stress enough just how important branding is, for everything. The perceptions you have in your head about a company, a product, a person, a location, they consciously and more importantly subconsciously inform nearly every decision you make. Corporate leadership looks at the bottom line, but their decisions are still just as informed by brand perceptions as anyone else's.

Somebody send the Philly CoC a copy of The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding.

As someone who works in education, the single biggest problem with Philadelphia public schools (and urban public schools in general) is branding, or the lackthereof. Public schools that have managed to successfully brand themselves are seen as "good" schools and people go nuts trying to get their kids into them. Two of the top public K-8 schools in Philly - Meredith (technically in South Philly!) and Penn Alexander (in West Philly) have had to move to a lottery system. There aren't simply enough seats for all of those who now live in the catchment and want to go there.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Loft District - area is being transformed. Rail line if the foreground is being turned into a park similar to the Highline in Manhattan

Wow, that's quite nice!

[lio45]

Out of curiosity, is there a big difference between "Gray's Ferry" and "Point Breeze"?

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by mja

As someone who works in education, the single biggest problem with Philadelphia public schools (and urban public schools in general) is branding, or the lackthereof. Public schools that have managed to successfully brand themselves are seen as "good" schools and people go nuts trying to get their kids into them. Two of the top public K-8 schools in Philly - Meredith (technically in South Philly!) and Penn Alexander (in West Philly) have had to move to a lottery system. There aren't simply enough seats for all of those who now live in the catchment and want to go there.

I would love to work on a Philly CoC Branding / Comms brief. There is so much amazing base material to work with. My guess is that most of the negative associations are soft ("boorish pro sports fans") or dated ("unhealthy economy", "bad schools"), and both soft and dated negatives are the easiest to change. What we need to ultimately work towards is making Philly top of mind among multiple audiences for two-three categories, with one of these categories being seen as cutting-edge. Then relentlessly target these audiences with niche messaging across the whole communications funnel.

In a lot of ways, Philly is lucky that it's rebirth is happening right now and not 10-15 years ago, when Digital media was still in its infancy. Running a sustained, holistic Branding / Comms campaign using mostly Traditional media is super expensive in a fractured market like the US and lacks the messaging effectiveness you can reach at scale using Digital nowadays.

As a side note, my company has a ton of Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Board clients. A relevant one to this thread: Illinois Chamber of Commerce, who pumps a lot of money into branding Chicago to the Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese business communities. Pennsylvania needs to step up its game on the state level.