Harlem, a historic capital of African-American culture, sadly appears to be losing its everlastingly rich black culture and sense of community. This is due to the uproar of the unfavorable and unaffordable “luxury” housing that has been invested into the community over the past decade. According to Merriam Webster, gentrification is “the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of middle-class or affluent people into deteriorating areas that often displaces poorer residents”. Coined by British sociologist, Ruth Glass in the 1960s, gentrification materialized following the implementation of post-World War II reconstruction programs where, in London, working-class residences were invaded by the influx of lower and upper middle-classes.
Gentrification is generally a sign of growth in economics. As money flows into a neighborhood, many characteristics of everyday life are transformed for the “better”. Buildings and parks are modernized and revamped. Jobs become available with the increased construction activity and new service and retail businesses. The funding for local public schools will increase as the property tax base increases. There are many benefits of gentrification. However, the questions posed by critics of gentrification are, "Do new and old residents alike equally share the benefits of economic growth?" and "Socially, what is the cost of economic growth?" These two questions provoke a host of others, such as: Who benefits the most from this growth? What will be the damage to the cultural and social fabric of the neighborhood with the arrival of new expectations, tastes, and demographics?
How did Harlem become the “Black Mecca”?
Initially, the end of the Civil War brought about improved economic condi...
... middle of paper ...
..., residents. The new residents obtain “affordable”, stylish housing and all of the pricey accommodations of life in a trendy urban neighborhood (coffee shops, bookstores, boutiques, club, etc.). Although long-time residents may benefit initially from safer, cleaner streets and better schools, they are eventually priced out of buying or renting. In addition, as the new residents impose their culture on the neighborhood, lower-income residents become socially and economically marginalized. Even if the economic discrepancies aren't as severe as they may appear, a persistent complaint about gentrification is that it damages the "soul" of a neighborhood. The tough character, eclectic spirit, and ethnic diversity that attracted the initial urban pioneers is overhauled by overpriced brunch menus, iPad-tapping hipsters, chain stores, and stroller parking at the corner bar.
“Gentrification is a general term for the arrival of wealthier people in an existing urban district, a related increase in rents and property values, and changes in the district's character and culture.” (Grant) In layman’s terms, gentrification is when white people move to a black neighborhood for the sake of cheaper living, and in turn, raise up property values and force black neighbors to leave because of a higher price of living. Commonly, the government supports gentrification with the demolition of public housing in areas that are developing with more white neighbors. This is causing a decreasing amount of African Americans to be able to afford to live in the neighborhood as their homes are taken away from them, forcing them to relocate. Whilst gentrification normally has negative connotations, there are several people who believe gentrification brings about “an upward trend in property values in previously neglected neighborhoods.” (Jerzyk) On the other hand, this new trend in property value and business causes those...
Jackson Heights is a neighborhood with a plethora of diversity and multiculturalism, hence there’s wide coverage of Gentrification in the media and literature. Jackson Heights is skyrocketing economically like many other local neighborhoods, with the looming possibility of becoming out of reach for the average American family. Redevelopments of infrastructure have rapidly progressed causing a rise in house price and rent, this ultimately resulting in the neighborhood to become financially unreachable for most. This is an example of the term that was first coined in 1964 by German-British sociologist Ruth Glass as ‘gentrification’. Ruth Glass wrote, "Once this process of 'gentrification' starts in a district, it goes on rapidly
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.
Older gentrification is issued onto poor black communities to increase white supremacy in the area and improve living conditions in the so called “hood.” After Older proposed his thoughts on Gentrification being an issue in colored low-income neighborhoods, he then turns to criticizing another writer with a different point of view on the issue. The author of “Is Gentrification All Bad?” in an article in the New York Times explains his views on gentrification. Older places emphasis on one of Davidson’s claim on “sweet spots” in the community saying “Davidson talks of a “sweet spot”: some mythical moment of racial, economic harmony where the neighborhood stays perfectly diverse and balanced.” (Older 358) The author does not support this claim as to being logical in his sense. Older’s views represents an opposite approach on the same issue of gentrification. In another quote “The gears are all already in place, the mechanisms of white supremacy and capitalism poised to make their moves.” (Older 358) the author speaks on how white people are over taking the poor colored communities to improve their lives, but not thinking about the consequences of the affected
“gentrification as an ugly product of greed. Yet these perspectives miss the point. Gentrification is a byproduct of mankind 's continuing interest in advancing the notion that one group is more superior to another and worthy of capitalistic consumption with little regard to social consciousness. It is elitism of the utmost and exclusionary politics to the core. This has been a constant theme of mankind to take or deplete a space for personal gain. In other words, it 's very similar to the "great advantage" of European powers over Native Americans and westward expansion”(Wharton).
Vancouver is not affordable to live for the young professionals due to gentrification problems. The economy requires gentrification to develop the city. In order for a city to flow better, more people have to spend and sell. Furthermore, for people to spend or sell more, it requires more people to live. However, gentrification is pushing people away from their homes, and makes it difficult for the young professionals to move in. Therefore, a lot of young professionals and working class would move out and live outside the city.
... motivation for wealthy individuals to return to the inner-city core but it also provides impetus for commercial and retail mixed-use to follow, increasing local revenue for cities (Duany, 2001). Proponents of gentrification profess that this increase in municipal revenue from sales and property taxes allows for the funding of city improvements, in the form of job opportunities, improved schools and parks, retail markets and increased sense of security and safety ((Davidson (2009), Ellen & O’Reagan (2007), Formoso et. al (2010)). Due to the increase in housing and private rental prices and the general decrease of the affordable housing stock in gentrifying areas, financially-precarious communities such as the elderly, female-headed households, and blue-collar workers can no longer afford to live in newly developed spaces ((Schill & Nathan (1983), Atkinson, (2000)).
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
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.
“One by one, many of the working class quarters of London have been invaded by the middle-classes—upper and lower. Shabby, modest mews and cottages—two rooms up and two down—have been taken over, when their leases have expired, and have become elegant, expensive residences .... Once this process of ‘gentrification’ starts in a district it goes on rapidly until all or most of the original working-class occupiers are displaced and the whole social character of the district is changed.”
Gentrification is described as the renovation of certain neighborhoods in order to accommodate to young workers and the middle-class. For an area to be considered gentrified, a neighborhood must meet a certain median home value and hold a percentage of adults earning Bachelor’s degree. Philadelphia’s gentrification rate is among the top in the nation; different neighborhoods have pushed for gentrification and have seen immense changes as a result. However, deciding on whether or not gentrification is a beneficial process can become complicated. Various groups of people believe that cities should implementing policy on advancing gentrification, and others believe that this process shouldn’t executed. Both sides are impacted by the decision to progress gentrification; it is unclear of the true implications of completely renovating impoverished urban areas; gentrification surely doesn’t solve all of a community’s issues. I personally believe that gentrification is not necessarily a good or bad process; gentrification should occur as a natural progression of innovative economies and novel lifestyles collide within certain areas. Policy involving gentrification should not support the removal of people out of their neighborhood for the sake of advancement.
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.
Prior to this, I had never heard of any benefit of gentrification; rather, I had the typical preconceived notion that Freeman discusses: gentrification is a demonic force that inflicts suffering in all poor people in a gentrified neighborhood. However, reading excerpts from “There Goes the ‘Hood” encourages me to rethink my position. One of my questions from the reading pertains to the “race” part of the author’s argument. Although Clinton Hill and Harlem are both predominantly comprised of African Americans, I wonder how low-income white residents feel about gentrification. I am curious about this because a friend of mine, a white Irish, was displaced from her home in Sunnyside, Queens last summer because of increasing rent. From this experience, I think that seeing low-income whites’ outlooks on white gentry would be interesting. Furthermore, I question the validity of the author’s selection on some of the participants for his interview, particularly those whom he recruited in a conference on gentrification (page 12). One could imagine that community members who attend such a conference would hold strong opinions about gentrification. However, would not this contradict his earlier point that “the most active and vocal residents are not necessarily representative of the entire neighborhood and are likely different” (page 7) and thus undermining the integrity of some of his
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
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.