Had to read for grad school in conjunction with Judith Rodin's book.
Etienne is clearly biased against Penn, but seems to have a hard time putting her argument into words. He bounces back and forth between arguments without any actual force behind those arguments. There is also the issue of not trying to gather interviews with people actually involved in the process. The use of the word "informant" to describe the interviewees is also really problematic. I think it just didn't make a valid and well thought out argument.
This wasn't a page turner, and is quite academic; the intended audience seems to me to be more academics than the general public (probably a wise move for the author). I found a lot of the history of UPenn and West Philadelphia personally interesting - we've spent a decent amount of time in West Philly and had picked up bits and pieces of the ups and downs of the neighborhood (if it can be called that...it is actually a large section of the city) - but it was helpful to have a more comprehensive history/context for the area (and Penn's involvement in "redeveloping" it). Etienne touches on questions of gentrification and the goals/aims of redevelopment, which provide some food for thought. I would have been interested to see more of the qualitative data (quotes from neighborhood residents, etc.) Basically, a good starting place for learning about West Philly, but left me wanting more.