It's no secret that Philadelphia has more than a few problems stemming from its tens of thousands of abandoned properties.  The consequences are disastrous on... 

• economics:

  • Proximity to a vacant parcel reduces home values by an average of 6.5%

  • Vacant parcels reduce surrounding property values by an aggregate of $3.6 billion

  • Vacant parcels have cost the city over $20 million annually in maintenance

  • Vacant parcels have contributed to upwards of $100 million in delinquent property taxes 

• health:

  • Abandoned homes are strongly associated with increased rates of firearms and gang activity

  • Violent crimes within 250 feet of a vacant, foreclosed home are approximately 19%  higher than in areas further away

  • Areas surrounding remediated abandoned houses experienced a substantial drop in weapons violence, including a 39% decline in firearm violence, an 8% decline in weapons violations, 13% decline in gun assaults, and a 7% decline in shootings

  • Those living near treated vacant lots reported significantly reduced perceptions and actual rates of crime, vandalism, and safety concerns

  • Structural issues of leaky roofs, plumbing problems, cracks, and poor ventilation facilitate indoor asthma triggers like mold, dust mites, and pests

• environment:

  • Old homes have outdated energy systems that average both high emissions and operating costs that are conducive to additional environmental damage

  • Philadelphians near blighted properties face disproportionate exposure to toxins like lead

  • Those living near restored vacant lots enjoy increased use of outside spaces for relaxing and socializing

  • The $20 million annually in deferred maintenance does not even include costs of mowing overgrown lots, removing trash/debris, and homes’ increased risk of fire damage

With blight also comes opportunity. That is, for new and more sustainable development. The green transition is both a necessary and inevitable one: coal production for energy use would ‘nearly end’ worldwide by 2050, utility-scale generation costs have dropped ~85% between 2010 and 2020, and renewables now supply about 50% of US energy. Though hopeful from an environmental lens, this transition is expensive. Despite contributing to more beautiful and safer neighborhoods, an influx in development has the potential to price out existing residents. 

This project asks: how can we balance the trade-off between green development and affordability?

I start to look at this question at a local level in my city of Philadelphia. After learning about how a homeowner lost his home through private developers' action using state law Act 135, I started to dig into the costs and effects of green development. These are not only some of the city's most blighted properties, but also the ones that developers choose to remediate.

First, I look at the empirical data: 

• Where is Act 135 most used?

• Who uses Act 135, and to what extent?

• How do actors use Act 135, and what impact does this have on affected homes? Neighborhoods?

The short answer is that Act 135 properties tend to concentrate (where?) in poor, vacant, appreciating neighborhoods (that is, poor tracts that border far wealthier ones) - primed for gentrification - in contrast to the poorest, vacant, inner-city neighborhoods... this is only rational! With a flat conservator's fee for each property, Act 135 incentivizes volume-driven development in neighborhoods where it pays to develop.

The longer, spatially substantiated answers are on the Information tab.

Second, I pair these quantitative findings with qualitative stories (Interviews) as to why these patterns are what they are... this doesn't just mean residents who have benefited from blight restoration or those who have experienced displacement (though both of those sides are central). This also includes the perspectives of developers, lawyers, and politicians who each have a stake in making Philadelphia a bit more beautiful.

Finally, I propose a few policies (see Intervention) that can be enacted at the Philadelphia local government level, as well as guides/next steps for coalition building: actively informed by interactions with my local government reps, but also in active conversation with City Council members and adjacent Philadelphia organizations.

Even if I as a constituent/college student can't pass policy or rebuild blighted properties with my own hands, I can enable those who can; I can at least help those affected best prepare for any risks by understanding and evaluating this law.