On Thursday, November 7, 2002, at 10:20 AM, R a y R o r k e wrote:
Now you need an overlay showing the proposed(?)new zoning map.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:The boundaries in the "nomination" and Spruce Hill in general comprise more than one census tract.
. . .
This is one of the reasons why I believe the boundaries were chosen not for reasons of historic preservation but of social engineering of a particularly insidious kind.
see http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~rrorke/WestPhilly
to get a rough idea of what's what: the boundaries of the proposed historic district, how this area overlaps with the catchment area, how these two areas cover what is called spruce hill, and how all this falls for the most part in census tract 87 (with the area south of baltimore falling into the top part of tract 77?). then, a link to census 2000 data for tract 87 lets us view things like the percentage of owner-occupied vs renter-occupied units (owner: 10.6%; renter: 89.4%), as well as the percentage of households likely to have school-aged kids (family: 29.4%; non-family: 75.1%)
just to get a rough idea, mind. have fun!
I lost track. Is the new zoning map now in effect or still in progress of adoption?
Note that I believe the revised zoning map was drawn up before the Historical District issues were resolved by the courts. In any case, with a few notable exceptions, the revised zoning was done based upon current usage more than desired outcome.
Don't forget that the developers of the Catchment area (The Board of Education) had their own political agenda, completely independent of the community's. But that's another debate.
T.T.F.N.
William H. Magill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
