The neighborhood that used to be next to downtown (Pittsburgh: living, store)

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by jay5835

I thought Moses' crosstown expressway was supposed to supplant Canal Street, about a mile south of Greenwich Village, not the Village itself. This might have meant razing Little Italy, Soho, the Lower East Side, and/or what is now called NOLIta (North of Little Italy), but not Greenwich Village.

FWIW, there were nice parts of Greenwich Village and not so nice parts. There are few neighborhoods finer to live in than the one between Broadway and the Hudson River, east to west, and from about Houston Street to 14th, north to south, and this has been true generally since the original construction of large sections of the Village. The part south of Washington Square may have been mostly walkups, but the rest of the Village was rather upscale.

I didn't live in that era, I am given to understand that very little in Greenwich Village, i.e., not the East Village or the Lower East Side, was built as tenement housing.

Greenwich Village was largely built up before the tenement era, which really didn't get rolling until after the Civil War. That's when the classic 5-6 story walk-ups began to sprout in certain parts of NYC. The Village definitely declined after it's heyday, but it never became a festering slum like the Lower East Side.

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Lets take a look a this part of your post.

Why is it that if a population goes "black", it declines? Does Black = Decline?

I don't understand why they need to equate to each other? They shouldn't! Please Wilkinsburg show everyone what can be done. I think Pittsburgh is one of the few places that so many equate "black" to decline. IT SHOULDN'T!!! Is it a white perception? Do black people look at it the same way? I don't know that and am asking the question.

Is there a way to make this perception go away??? YES! Wilkinsburg can be the place to show all. I thought Obama was showing all, but it seems to have no effect in our area.

My post is about perception and isn't MY personal view as you can see from this whole thread. I would like "black" not to equate to "decline". Can it?

The problem is not "Blacks" in general, but the "Black underclass". This is a population rife with various social and economic problems. Unfortunately, they tend to follow the black middle class wherever they "run" to, effectively cancelling out any gains the black middle class achieves by moving to better areas.

[pman]

Originally Posted by jay5835

I thought Moses' crosstown expressway was supposed to supplant Canal Street, about a mile south of Greenwich Village, not the Village itself. This might have meant razing Little Italy, Soho, the Lower East Side, and/or what is now called NOLIta (North of Little Italy), but not Greenwich Village.
FWIW, there were nice parts of Greenwich Village and not so nice parts. There are few neighborhoods finer to live in than the one between Broadway and the Hudson River, east to west, and from about Houston Street to 14th, north to south, and this has been true generally since the original construction of large sections of the Village. The part south of Washington Square may have been mostly walkups, but the rest of the Village was rather upscale.
I didn't live in that era, I am given to understand that very little in Greenwich Village, i.e., not the East Village or the Lower East Side, was built as tenement housing.

The opposition reached a crescendo over the demolition of Penn Station, which many attributed to the "development scheme" mentality cultivated by Moses[16] although the impoverished Pennsylvania Railroad was actually responsible for the demolition.[17] The casual destruction of one of New York's greatest architectural landmarks helped prompt many city residents to turn against Moses's plans to build a Lower Manhattan Expressway, which would have gone through Greenwich Village and what is now SoHo. [18] This plan and the Mid-Manhattan Expressway both failed politically; to this day no superhighway goes through the heart of Manhattan. One of his most vocal critics during this time was the urban activist Jane Jacobs, whose book The Death and Life of Great American Cities was instrumental in turning opinion against Moses's plans; the city government rejected the expressway in 1964

Robert Moses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

as you can imagine, this was an older area largely made up of immigrants. whether it was all tenements or partly tenements and, basically, older "substandard" housing is qutie irrelevant really. let's face it, we know more about the area that might have been the mid-manhattan expressway than we do about the lower hill largely because it's still there. I tend to doubt that this area was always, since its original construction, a high end neighborhood. if it had been, it seems highly unlikely that it would have become home to counterculture or bohemianism. interestingly, in philadelphia, a similar stretch of south st also became home to counter culture as a result of a successful revolt to stop demolish of a neighborhood for the south st expressway there. interestingly, revitalization of philadelphia's downtown pushed rapidly south in the last decade but has been slow to cross the vine st expressway. while I'm not arguing that we don't need highways, it seems foolish to think that leveling an entire neighborhood for institutionalized parking provided a long term benefit to the city.
anyyay, the fact remains, the two share similarities. both projects were to displace older immgirant areas where people are most easily pushed around by the powers that be. it's the exact same scenario here.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by pman

anyway, the fact remains, the two share similarities. both projects were to displace older immigrant areas where people are most easily pushed around by the powers that be. it's the exact same scenario here.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhkay, if you want to think of Greenwich Village as comparable to the Lower Hill and Lawrenceville, you go right ahead. I've lived in both L'ville and GV, and the two places had little in common. I really have no idea about the Lower Hill.

[PreservationPioneer]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

My post is about perception and isn't MY personal view as you can see from this whole thread. I would like "black" not to equate to "decline". Can it?

I think the War Streets, Deutschtown, and Manchester are still mostly black neighborhoods, and look how beautiful those neighborhoods are becoming.

[pman]

Originally Posted by jay5835

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhkay, if you want to think of Greenwich Village as comparable to the Lower Hill and Lawrenceville, you go right ahead. I've lived in both L'ville and GV, and the two places had little in common. I really have no idea about the Lower Hill.

you're completely missing the point. at the time, people viewed the areas that would be displaced by the manhattan expressway the same as they did the lower hill and yes, the affected areas did share some things in common including "outdated" housing and immigrants. did you live in GV during this time period or are you going by what it is today"? I don't think anyone said the two were identical but the two scenarios are clearly similar despite your protestations which have a basis in living in GV in the 1950's right? or are you comparing GV today to the lower hill in the 50's? the point is, the same kind of folks that wanted to get rid of parts of GV, soho, and little italy were the ones who eliminated the lower hill, and for similar reasons. replace substandard living conditions with some public project of benefit. by the 1950's some people had begun to realize that these policies actually worsened affordable housing problems and often stuck people in public housing, which was even worse. over the long haul, these older neighborhoods that remained intact did better. the lower hill has the most important thing in real estate, location, location, location. rather than a bunch of smaller plots that could be bought and sold over time you were left with tax free surface parking used 41+ nights a year.

[gg]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

I think the War Streets, Deutschtown, and Manchester are still mostly black neighborhoods, and look how beautiful those neighborhoods are becoming.

Yes, I wonder what the percentage is? I think the War Streets are so cool. I love Allegheny West. The Northside is great. Thanks for pointing that out. I really need to focus more on the areas that are doing better. The War Streets have come a long way and are a joy to walk around. Like that little bar in the middle of town there.

[BrianTH]

When I graduated from college in 1993 and moved to Pittsburgh, it was still possible for recent graduates to afford places in the East Village. So I was there a lot to visit college friends (I couldn't begin to quantify how much I drank at McSorley's). At the time, Alphabet City was considered highly dangerous, and my friends all stayed west of Avenue A. Then, within a relatively short period of time, Alphabet City became one of the hottest neighborhoods in Manhattan.

Regardless of the exact details of the architecture, that is the sort of lesson I absorbed about urban gentrification. The worst neighborhoods can turn around extremely quickly provided the location is right and the fundamentals are solid given rising demand. And I really do think that regardless of what the Lower Hill might have looked like in prior decades, by now it would be a very cool neighborhood, and Pittsburgh would be better off for it.

[Mr. Humble]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

When I graduated from college in 1993, it was still possible for recent graduates to afford places in the East Village. So I was there a lot to visit (I couldn't begin to quantify how much I drank at McSorley's). At the time, Alphabet City was considered highly dangerous. Then, within a relatively short period of time, Alphabet City became one of the hottest neighborhoods in Manhattan.

Regardless of the exact details of the architecture, that is the sort of lesson I absorbed about urban gentrification. The worst neighborhoods can turn around extremely quickly provided the location is right and the fundamentals are solid. And I really do think that regardless of what the Lower Hill might have looked like in prior decades, by now it would be a very cool neighborhood, and Pittsburgh would be better off for it.

I agree that the Lower Hill had a future, but New York has such an influx of people and money that gentrification is often automatic. I think Pittsburgh like most other smaller, rustier cities has a tougher time in this regard.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by pman

did you live in GV during this time period or are you going by what it is today?

I lived in the Village in the 1970s, in two different places, Fifth Avenue at 11th Street, and 10th Street west of Broadway. I grew up 20 miles away, and went to NY a lot in my youth.

I was a resident of Lawrenceville from 2009 to 2010. The house was the worst-constructed building I ever lived in. I could smell cat pi$$ emanating through the walls from my next door neighbor's house constantly.