Experimental Grounds
A story of urban renewal in Mill Creek's Sub-Area 4
Mill Creek’s story of renewal has always been in flux. Since the actual Mill Creek and its adjacent floodplain was filled in and converted into a sewer in the 1870s, unpredictable subsidence and flooding have devastated residents and caused it to become a target for redlining and subsequent urban renewal. Walking through the neighborhood today, one can’t help but notice stark differences in housing from block to block. Most sections appear similar to adjacent West Philadelphia housing – densely packed row homes, some with gates around their porches. Other sections have low rise public housing or mysteriously vacant land. The Southeast corner of Mill Creek is particularly bizarre, however, as it looks entirely polished and suburban. What led to this strange enclave of suburban style housing in the middle of West Philadelphia’s urbanity?
Densely packed row homes on Funston St have varied conditions and are painted in different colors
The suburban style Blackwell Homes in Sub-Area 4 are comparatively more spacious, homogenous, and surrounded by open space
Through historical analysis, this story will show that Mill Creek’s disunified physical makeup today is a long-term symptom of sewer deterioration which led the Philadelphia Housing Authority to redevelop Mill Creek’s Southeast corner. Through multiple generations of renewal, this corner, also known as Sub-Area 4, was transformed into a public housing project and later a suburban style public-private project called the Blackwell homes.
In the 1950s, Mill Creek was chosen as an urban renewal site amongst many other sections of Philadelphia in an effort to “directly eliminate or prevent urban blight” (A Citizens Guide, 1). As Provost Wendell Pritchett argues, the rhetorical use of the term “blight” enabled renewal advocates to reorganize property ownership by declaring certain real estate dangerous to the future of cities (Pritchett, 3). Unexpectedly though, the Philadelphia Housing Authority described Mill Creek and much of its property in a highly positive light in their 1949 Housing Quality Survey (The Mill Creek Area Report):
“In addition to the generally good quality of the housing, the Area has other desirable characteristics. There are excellent transportation facilities to the central city; several charitable and philanthropic establishments, in addition to schools and churches, are located within the Area; numerous civic, religious, and other organizations, as well, are active in the Mill Creek Area” - The Mill Creek Area Report (1949)
Also in the report, only one out of every eight homes are graded as substandard. Given this positive portrayal, why would Mill Creek be chosen for renewal?
Sub-Area 4 is outlined in red (The Mill Creek Area Report, 9).
Looking through the survey, the Southeastern corner is distinguished as being substandard multiple times due to the impact of the Mill Creek sewer which runs underneath:
“The section over and adjacent to the southeastern end of the sewer, however, contains homes which are structurally unsound because of the collapse of the sewer and the resulting undermining” (2)
“The sewer collapse and the resulting undermining, coupled in many cases with inadequate building foundation, appear to have exerted a deteriorating influence” (28)
“In the southeastern corner (Sub-Area 4), the high incidence of penalties for deterioration is related to the presence of the Mill Creek sewer; therefore, the prevention of further collapses and proper maintenance of the sewer are vital” (6)
The sewer damage mentioned in the survey is referencing subsidence that occurred throughout the 1940s, particularly in Sub-Area 4. Shown bellow, newspaper clippings and text from the Mill Creek renewal plan (Kahn) describe some of these incidents of cave-ins.
A 1950 Philadelphia Inquirer article illustrates sewer renovations that became necessary due to "frequent collapses". (“W. Phila. Hit By Fear Of Cave-Ins.”)
The same Philadelphia Inquirer article (left) describes how collapses culminated in the condemnation and vacation of 55 Sub-Area 4 homes. The 1954 Mill Creek Redevelopment Area Plan (right) mentions a significant collapse that occurred in Sub-Area 4 in 1945 (Kahn, 5).
These sources confirm that there were sewer collapses in Mill Creek throughout the 1940s. The devastating impacts of the sewer became an opportunity for the City Planning Commission to bring aid through a new public housing site, which was designed by Louis Kahn and seemed to have much promise at the time. The Redevelopment Plan of 1954 claims “The eastern and southeastern portions of the Mill Creek Area show signs of advanced blight. It is the purpose of the Mill Creek Redevelopment to prevent the spread of this blight into the predominantly sound western portion and to bring new life to the entire Area” (Kahn, 7). Once again, the trope of blight is used to support redevelopment and one can't help but ask what do they mean by "new life"?
By comparing pre-renewal maps to that of the Redevelopment Area Plan of 1954 it becomes evident how the entire Southeastern section, once filled with hundreds of townhomes, became a proposed site of demolition for public housing.
The red square outlines the same southeast corner of Mill Creek in a 1942 atlas (left) and in the 1954 Redevelopment Plan (right). ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ , 1942) (Kahn, 26)
An intriguing aspect of the public housing plan, also known as the Mill Creek Homes, is its mix of scattered low-rise and high-rise buildings. Rothstein writes, “In the 1950s some housing authorities built scatter-site rather than concentrated units, having recognized that high-rise ghettos for the poor aggravated residents’ desperation” (Rothstein, 33). It’s odd that Louis Kahn and the Philadelphia Planning Commission chose to build with both scattered and concentrated designs. The Mill Creek Homes are an outcome, perhaps, of the design transition in the 1950s which Rothstein mentions.
The finished public housing site contained both scattered low rise structures (front) and high rises (back) ("Mill Creek Homes").
Renewal Extensions
In 1961, the sewer collapsed beneath Funston St near 50th, killing three people and collapsing four homes. According to Anne Spirn, “ultimately 111 homes were condemned and demolished, leaving hundreds homeless and many others fearful of further collapse” (Spirn, 398). This fear was widespread, as collapses and condemnation had very serious implications in people’s personal lives and finances. An article from The Afro-American in 1961 highlights this widespread fear and some personal accounts of being in the sewer's proximity.
An African American newspaper illustrates Death lurking behind the 1961 collapse beneath Funston St. Mill Creek's negative image was widespread and not limited to planners' imaginations. (O'Neill)
“Morris, who owns his home, said that before he buys another [home] he will find out exactly where the sewer runs” - The Afro-American, 1961
"Wilson did not know that his house was condemned until he read it in a daily newspaper. Wilson spent over $3,000 recently on hardwood floors, bathroom tiling, carpeting, and air-conditioning” - The Afro-American, 1961
The area of the 1961 collapse continues to have vacant land today
Using the sewer malfunctions as justification, the Housing Authority and local government used eminent domain to extend the original renewal plan in the 1960s through amendments to vacate more than a dozen acres of land, some beyond the original plan ("Mill Creek's Storm") ("Legal Notices").
The legal notices section in the Philadelphia Daily News (1964, left) mentions the city's use of eminent domain in acquiring land that was not meant to be renewed originally ("Legal Notices"). Also, an article from the Philadelphia Tribune (1966, right) highlights amendments to the renewal plan (“Mill Creek’s Storm Sewer Reconstruction Complete”).
Underlined in the Philadelphia Tribune article, amendments passed by Mayer Tate in 1966 allocated 10.5 acres in Sub-Area 4 to the Redevelopment Authority for new public housing. Additionally, the Philadelphia Daily News clipping illustrates one example of the local government using eminent domain to acquire the Northeastern corner of Mill Creek, which was not supposed to be redeveloped in the original 1954 plan. These findings are illustrated in the map bellow.
An interactive map highlighting major redeveloped areas that were acquired as a part of the original plan (green) and as extensions in the 1960s (red). The Mill Creek Sewer is shown in blue and significant collapse areas are marked with symbols.
Samuel Zipp writes that across the United States, “Public housing was charged with solving the whole host of social ills that reformers, social workers, and their allies in the government believed plagued life in the slums” (Zipp, 255). As the 1949 Area Report mentioned, social ills were not an issue in Mill Creek at the time, however. As the mentioned newspaper articles have shown, the underlying driver of fear and repulsion towards Mill Creek was the sewer, and a public housing project would not solve that.
2nd Generation Renewal
Former politician and Mill Creek native Lucien Blackwell is commemorated for his work. The houses that replaced the Mill Creek Homes in the 2000s are named after him.
An uproar of crime and deterioration of public housing became a common phenomenon across the United States in the 1980s and 90s – Philadelphia was no exception. In 2000, a traumatizing mass shooting known as the Lex St Massacre led to a radical reconceptualization of public housing and urban redevelopment (Puckett). According to John Puckett, an author of West Philadelphia Collaborative History, “Designated for major redevelopment in the aftermath of the killings were the blocks bounded by Markoe and 44th streets, Aspen and Fairmount avenues.” The Mill Creek Homes were to be demolished to make way for the suburban-style Lucien Blackwell Homes. The demolition was met with much ambivalence by residents, however.
A 2001 Philadelphia Tribune article highlights the mixed feelings of Mill Creek Home residents on their buildings' proposed demolition (Edmonds).
While some residents were hesitant to relocate, others expressed negativity towards their conditions in the towers. According to Philadelphia Inquirer reporter Inga Saffron, “Residents of the old towers hated that the buildings looked different from the rest of Philadelphia. You could tell at a glance that the towers were public housing, and that made residents feel stigmatized” (Saffron). In 2000, Vincent Thompson, the communications director of the Philadelphia Housing Authority (PHA) said that “What the federal government has found is that high rise buildings don’t work… Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is no longer willing to pour monies into refurbishing the towers” (Edmonds). And so, despite protests, the Mill Creek Homes met the same fate as countless other public housing projects across Philadelphia and the rest of the country in 2002.
Footage of the 2002 demolition of the Mill Creek high-rises (Controlled Demolition, Inc).
Sub-Area 4 was razed once again and replaced with the publicly subsidized single-family Blackwell Homes that exist today. Once again, the purpose of renewal was to rid the neighborhood of blight. According to a PHA community newspaper from 2003, the PHA Executive Director, Carl Greene, called the project “the latest and largest step in the agency’s drive to overhaul the city’s most blighted neighborhoods” (“PHA Begins Sweeping Overhaul"). Fifty years after renewal began, the charged label of “blight” persisted. The first generation of renewal was not enough to bring “new life”, as hoped for in the original renewal plan, back into Mill Creek.
Ironically, the layout of the area reverted back to the pre-renewal street grid. According to Saffron, “…the housing authority insists on designs that are virtually indistinguishable from the surrounding homes… Despite all the historical details and street grid, it’s unlikely anyone will mistake Blackwell for old Philadelphia. Their layouts are just too suburban”; so suburban that “Owners who want to change the color of their front door or add a sunroom will need permission from an owners' association” (Saffron Inquirer). As discussed in class, homeowners’ associations were established by real estate developers in suburban contexts. Such stylistic restrictions, which are meant to maintain property values, can consequently alienate the homes from the rest of the neighborhood. According to current resident Scott Beibin there are mixed feelings toward the Blackwell Homes. He mentioned that some older residents who live in the less developed parts of Mill Creek see the Blackwell Homes as foreign and antithetical to their homes which have more character and humility. On the other hand, Scott also mentioned that “A lot of people in the neighborhood find that the urbanity triggers bad memories. The suburban style is like a step up for them” (Beibin).
Local resident and activist Scott Beibin with his dog whose full name is 20 words long
As we’ve seen, Sub-Area 4 has undergone multiple generations of redevelopment, all of which was initially influenced by the sewer collapses of the 1940s. The images bellow illustrate transformations in Sub-Area 4 throughout the generations. Notice the most change has occurred in the blocks bounded by 44th, 46th, Fairmount, and Aspen St.
1942 ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ )
1962 ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ )
1996 ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ )
2004 ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ )
2017 ( https://atlas.phila.gov/ )
Given its positive grading by the Housing Authority in 1949 amongst other renewal projects of the time, it’s odd that Mill Creek was chosen for renewal in the first place. Of course, the sewer was in desperate need for renovation, but not the entire neighborhood. In the end, the literal underlying problem of the neighborhood’s structural decay was never fully resolved. As Spirn writes, "Land immediately over the sewer pipe was maintained as open lawn or parking lots, but much of the new public housing was built on the buried floodplain. There have been no major cave-ins in recent years, but sinking streets, playgrounds and parking lots and shifting building foundations continue to plague the area" (Spirn, 399).
One of the great consequences of sewer collapses was the loss of homeownership, particularly in Sub-Area 4. Public housing only exacerbated this issue. The census tracts that contain Sub-Area 4 (0044B in 1950 and 105 in 1970) became significantly less owner occupied since the projects replaced private homes, about half of which were owner occupied.
Owner Occupancy 1950 vs 1970 in Mill Creek ( https://www.socialexplorer.com/14356cdb85/view )
As illustrated in the map above, the census tracts that contain Sub-Area 4 decreased in owner occupation from 50% to 28% between 1950-70, the decades of first-generation renewal. Additionally, the population of the neighborhood declined 27% and the white population declined from 27% to 4% (Spirn, 399). These major demographic shifts follow trends in Philadelphia of white flight and general population retreat from the city into suburbs; however, the dramatic decline in homeownership is more peculiar to Sub-Area 4 within the rest of the Mill Creek development. The Redevelopment Plan had proposed that “Building of the proposed apartment group on the site bounded by 46th Street, Fairmount Avenue, 48th Street, and Haverford Avenue (the area affected by the collapse of the Mill Creek Sewer) would provide an additional net gain of 289 family units. This will help in the relocation of displaced families” (Kahn, 27). Although the high-rise apartments aided in relocation needs, they were not just compensation to families who were previously homeowners.
Through decades of physical deterioration, demolition, and reconstruction, Mill Creek stands today as a fragmented landscape; each contrasting section symbolizing a different time period and policy. Like other Philadelphia renewal sites such as Eastwick, underlying environmental issues were overlooked and so they continue plague their residents today. Who knows what the neighborhood would be like today if the overwhelmed Mill Creek had never been constricted and transformed into a sewer? As Jane Jacobs would argue through the lens of her book, The Life and Death of American Cities, the constant transformations of Sub-Area 4 are another example of planners’ ignorance; both of the environment and of the complexities of urban societies (Jacobs, 25). A devastated neighborhood that could have been repaired was instead transformed into Louis Kahn's vision that ended in failure. In all its ambivalence, renewal planning has left Mill Creek divided. It's an experimental ground that the City Government may never leave alone.