History King and Dufferin area located in the Parkdale neighbourhood surrounded by Dufferin on the East , south by Lake Ontario ,west by Roncesvalles avenue and north by the Canadian Pacific railway. This area used to be an industrial area with many factories and the main reason for this was the presence of the Canadian Pacific railway which was used and is still used for transportation of the manufactured goods. There were homes built around for families that worked in the factories. According to Tom Slater (2008) , by 1884 there were two main factories the Inglis and Massey-Harris(2). These companies during the world war two produced armaments and afterwards that most factories were demolished after factories started …show more content…
According to statistics canada Toronto in 2001, around 70% of the buildings in the area are high rise rental apartments but during the industrial era (1940’s ) most were private homes. Immigrants from countries such as the Philippines , Vietnam , Tamil, Chinese , Tibetan , Caribbeans and Hungarian have occupied parkdale since the 1980’s to present leading to the construction of these apartments with high storeys as seen in the census done in 2001. With high number of immigrants in the area increasing,Parkdale area soon developed a bad reputation as a neighbourhood of poverty, crime , drugs and homelessness These reputations led to segregation of neighbourhoods where the rich separated themselves, this happened on the basis of both of income and ethnicity.These is currently mainly occupied by minorities.Looking at the statistics in 2001 the top ten ethnicity living in this area were all immigrants with 20% arriving in Canada between 1980-1991 and other 25% arriving by 1991-2000 according to Ontario immigration data. 51% of these immigrants were born outside canada. Since it cost more to live in nicer neighbourhoods most immigrants end up in areas like parkdale where rent is cheap and other …show more content…
This is what has been happening around King and Dufferin ; the buying and renovating of these old building by wealthier individuals which in effect has improved property values but pushed out those who could not afford it .According to statistics Canada 2011, this area has lost much lower rent housing after the process of gentrification started without replacement of subsidized housing. Between 1996 to 2006 development increased by 126 %, mostly the building of condominium and during this period rent has increased by 93 % . We can see how the expensive condos being built are pushing out people who can't afford the rent; for example when I was doing the neighborhood profile It was easy to note the change. King and Dufferin area is no longer occupied by immigrants but young professionals and I can see the how gentrification is continuing to push all the way west side of king
Gentrification is defined as the process by which the wealthy or upper middle class uproot poorer individuals through the renovation and rebuilding of poor neighborhoods. Many long-term residents find themselves no longer able to afford to live in an area, where the rent and property values are increasing. Gentrification is a very controversial topic, revealing both the positive and negative aspects of the process. Some of the more desirable outcomes include reduced crime rate, increased economic activity, and the building of new infrastructures. However, it is debated whether the negatives overwhelm the positive. An increase in the number of evictions of low-income families, often racial minorities can lead to a decline of diversity
Many of these ethnic groups still reside where their relatives first lived when they arrived many years ago, whereas a majority of the ethnic groups have dispersed all over the Chicago land area, creating many culturally mixed neighborhoods. Ultimately, all of these ethnic groups found their rightful area in which they belong in Chicago. To this day, the areas in Chicago that the different ethnic immigrants moved to back in the 1920s are very much so the same. These immigrants have a deep impact on the development of neighborhoods in today’s society. Without the immigrants’ hard work and their ambition to establish a life for their families and their future, Chicago would not be as developed and defined as it is now.
Lance Freeman tackles the issue of gentrification from the perspectives of residents in the gentrified neighborhood. He criticizes the literature for overlooking the experiences of the victims of gentrification. The author argues that people’s conceptions on the issue are somewhat misinformed in that most people consider it as completely deplorable, whereas in reality, it benefits the community by promoting businesses, different types of stores, and cleaner streets. These benefits are even acknowledged by many residents in the gentrified neighborhood. However, the author admits that gentrification indeed does harm. Although gentrification does not equate to displacement per se, it serves to benefit primarily homeowners and harm the poor. Additionally,
Another noteworthy urban sociologist that’s invested significant research and time into gentrification is Saskia Sassen, among other topical analysis including globalization. “Gentrification was initially understood as the rehabilitation of decaying and low-income housing by middle-class outsiders in central cities. In the late 1970s a broader conceptualization of the process began to emerge, and by the early 1980s new scholarship had developed a far broader meaning of gentrification, linking it with processes of spatial, economic and social restructuring.” (Sassen 1991: 255). This account is an extract from an influential book that extended beyond the field of gentrification and summarizes its basis proficiently. In more recent and localized media, the release the documentary-film ‘In Jackson Heights’ portrayed the devastation that gentrification is causing as it plagues through Jackson Heights, Queens. One of the local businessmen interviewed is shop owner Don Tobon, stating "We live in a
According to Lehrer, U., & Wieditz, T. (2009), Toronto saw a massive population growth in a period of thirty years due to the extensive construction of high-rise condominium towers which led to the city being divided into three distinct cities: “city of the rich, the shrinking city of middle-income households, and the growing city of concentrated poverty.” According to the article the division is caused by the development of condominiums as the new form of gentrification which displaces the poor people and focuses to attract the higher-income people to the area.
the cost of living in Toronto has come to a record high, we need to start doing something about it now before no one can afford to live at all. There are more than 30,000 women, men and children in the city's homeless shelters annually. Many of thousands more sleep on the streets or considered the “hidden homeless”. About 70,000 households are on Toronto’s social housing waiting list and on the brink of becoming homeless because of the skyrocketing prices of owning a home in Toronto. The Federal Government and the province have begun a slow reinvestment in housing in past years, the number of affordable housing being built now doesn’t even compare near the levels of the early 1980’s. Habitat for Humanity has been building houses for low income
This investigation is based on the assumption that gentrification with all its troubles can’t be prevented and is an inherent part of every city. What are the negative impacts of gentrification? What are the underlying mechanisms that feed these impacts? What drives these mechanisms? What would be an alternative scenario?
One major example of the help that was put into areas of Toronto is prominent is Regent Park, Toronto before gentrification. Regent Park showed that there are 65% apartments and houses that are market price but then there are 35% of the properties that are rent geared to income (Williams, 2009). Even though this was not a high percentage and was still beneficial to people who worked near the location of Regent Park in Toronto. Making it easier to access everyday necessities can make a lot of other expenses in life go down as well, when you do not have to worry about paying more than 30% of your income. Regent Park had a revitalization project to help turn this area from an area with high poverty rates to a nicer area by demolishing most of the public housing pushing the poorer people out of the area.
Herbert Gans piece on the mass production of suburban styled homes like Levittown with its homes on the outskirts of the city and mixed land uses closer within the core “ analyzes the suburbs and makes it evident that they are not a utopia” no matter the societal segregation they represent (Herbert Gans). These areas have their burdens resulting in physical and social isolation, no access to transportation, the start of gender roles, and inadequate decision making. In comparison, Pleasantville was a society of segregation due to the land constraints and urban planning of the society. Its visible that there is an increase in segregation between the suburban population and inner city. The higher class living in the suburbs would remain in that area unless it was for work.
When their neighborhood starts changing and all these luxury homes are being built for the wealthier residents, you can have a lot of racial tension. Although the Upper class residents do occupy these newly renovated places, they are not to blame for it. Policy makers encourage gentrification more than they oppose it. To the Government it increases property taxes, and boost the economy. Ronnie Flores states; “[…] Success is measured not by how well people are accommodated, but how much profit can be made’’. It can be discouraging when Policy makers seem to be on the opposite side of what these longtime residents want to prevent or at least co-exist with. Investors and developers are always on the lookout for areas where they can buy cheap and reap the profits. Not once keeping in the mind the effects it can have on the current residents who built this city life that draws so much attention to it.
Gentrification is designed to improve the quality of life for the residents, but the fact is that it pushes out old residents to welcome in young and wealthy citizens. To analyze the demographic even further, gentrified neighborhoods in New York City have seen an increase in white population despite a city wide decrease. As Kate Abbey-Lamertz of the Huffington Post states, “The report notes that change is driven by educated people moving in, rather than by existing residents becoming more educated.” These changes are being driven by a millennial demographic who can afford the changed aesthetic. The influx of millennials are pushing out families whose lifestyle can’t keep up with the changing demographic. Even though these changes have been occurring for almost thirty years, and the city hasn’t made the changes needed for people who need low income housing. New York City’s gentrification must be slowed in order for people in low income housing to catch
There are many examples of cities reforming itself over time, one significant example is Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. More than a hundred years after the discovery of gold that drew thousands of migrants to Vancouver, the city has changed a lot, and so does one of its oldest community: Downtown Eastside. Began as a small town for workers that migrants frequently, after these workers moved away with all the money they have made, Downtown Eastside faced many hardships and changes. As a city, Vancouver gave much support to improve the area’s living quality and economics, known as a process called gentrification. But is this process really benefiting everyone living in Downtown Eastside? The answer is no. Gentrification towards DTES(Downtown Eastside) did not benefit the all the inhabitants of the area. Reasons are the new rent price of the area is much higher than before the gentrification, new businesses are not community-minded, and the old culture and lifestyle of the DTES is getting erased by the new residents.
“The Deeper Problems We Miss When We Attack ‘Gentrification’”exhibit their opinion on the positives of gentrification and the potential of “revitalization” in low-income urban communities. Badger argues that gentrification brings nothing more than further opportunities for urban communities while integrating citizens of different social classes.Furthermore , she continues to question if gentrification is in fact the monster that brings the prior expressions against gentrification where she says “If poor neighborhoods have historically suffered from dire disinvestment, how can the remedy to that evil — outside money finally flowing in — be the problem, too?”(Badger) Stating that the funds generated from sources external that are brought into these communities can’t be problematic. This concept is further elaborated in the article “Does Gentrification Harm the Poor” where Vigdoor list the potential positive enhancements gentrification can have on an urban area in America ,stating that gentrification can
In discussions of Gentrification, one controversial issue has been with displacement. Gentrification is the process of renovating and repairing a house or district so that it complies to wealthier residents (Biro, 2007, p. 42). Displacement is a result of gentrification, and is a major issue for lower income families. Gentrification is causing lower-income residents to move out of their apartments because they’re being displaced by upper class residents who can afford high rent prices and more successful businesses. Throughout out the essay, I will discuss how gentrification affects lower income residents and how it results in displacement. Then I will follow on by discussing some positive and negative effects that take place because of Gentrification.
Gentrification is a highly important topic that has not only been occurring all over the United States, but especially closer than we may have thought. San Francisco is home to hundreds of thousands of people who have been a part of how amazing this city has become. San Francisco is one of the most visited places in the world with many of its famous landmarks, endless opportunities not only for daytime fun but also has an amazing nightlife that people cannot get enough of. People come for a great time and could not be done without the help of the people who have grown up to experience and love this city for what it truly is. The cost of living in such an important city has definitely had its affect of lower income San Francisco residents. For decades we have seen changes occurring in parts of San Francisco where minorities live. We have seen this in Chinatown, SOMA, Fillmore district, and especially the Mission district.