More handpicked essays just for you.
The positive or negative effects of gentrification
The positive or negative effects of gentrification
The positive or negative effects of gentrification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The positive or negative effects of gentrification
According to Carnegie's Community Action project in Woodward’s Arena in 1995, there were alot of of low-income businesses, restaurants, abandoned, closed and vacant places. Due to the low-income a lot of businesses wasn’t making enough money so the restaurants were being shut down. (Doc.A) However, being in a low-income neighborhood the less fortunate had places to live and was somewhat happy. In 2012, there were still some low-income housing but majority of them were closed down. Due to majority of the low-income housing being closed the area was satisfying for the people that was more wealthy and financially stable. People didn't want to build their Businesses on Downtown Eastside at first because of the “Crumbling buildings, a crack- cocaine epidemic, and mentally ill people living on the streets”. Nobody wanted their hard working business in a high-crime neighborhood where they would easily get robbed or a crack cocaine problem where there business could easily get damaged. Due to Gentrification, Doughnuts, condos, and local delis were starting to move in. “There are new businesses in our area then last year”. (Doc. B) Downtown Eastside neighborhood is changing for the better and getting a more positive aspect. …show more content…
The population increased by 9.8% corroborating that gentrification has a good influence on bringing people to the new and improve Eastside (Doc C). Also, five hundred businesses were established, making it easier for eastside to make a profit. However,still violent crimes were growing by 36% which is to high due to gentrification and the improve Eastside. Nevertheless, not all low-income housing are awful especially for the people that's on a strict
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 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...
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.
In the year 2000 the Englewood community had high hopes community reinvestment was on the upswing. Kennedy King College was being relocated and the housing business was booming, but all of the toxic loans came into effect interest rates ballooned and residents could not make their payments. This left the community with high foreclosures and empty buildings. Therefore investors pulled out of the neighborhoods and residents fled; as a result the numbers of abandoned buildings and vacant lots on many streets outnumbers occupied buildings. Drug dealers use the abandoned houses to store their drugs; addicts break in to shoot up, and get high. Sexual predators drag victims into empty houses, and prostitutes find decrepit ruins convenient for doing business. (Chicago Tribune, 2011) Englewood is bordered by 55th Street on the north, 75th Street on the south, Racine Avenue on the west, and State Street on the east. The total area is approximately 3.1 square miles.
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
Furthermore, he attempts to dispel the negative aspects of gentrification by pointing out how some of them are nonexistent. To accomplish this, Turman exemplifies how gentrification could positively impact neighborhoods like Third Ward (a ‘dangerous’ neighborhood in Houston, Texas). Throughout the article, Turman provides copious examples of how gentrification can positively change urban communities, expressing that “gentrification can produce desirable effects upon a community such as a reduced crime rate, investment in the infrastructure of an area and increased economic activity in neighborhoods which gentrify”. Furthermore, he opportunistically uses the Third Ward as an example, which he describes as “the 15th most dangerous neighborhood in the country” and “synonymous with crime”, as an example of an area that could “need the change that gentrification provides”.
Inner City Communities are often areas which are both densely populated and deteriorating(quote). The areas and its residents have strongly been correlated with social and economical disparity. Residents of inner city communities have been plagued with problems including: “high unemployment, poor health care, inadequate educational opportunities, dilapidated housing, high infant mortality, and extreme poverty” (Attitudes and Perceptions, n.d). Though the inner city communities have been stricken with
The last big effect that comes from the urban housing reform is that it makes it difficult for people to get out of those areas. Living in urban projects is not a place where many people wish to be but they have no choice if they can’t afford to get out of the area. Some people re only able to afford living in those areas or cannot get a job that pays high enough to move to someplace else. This has created a vicious circle of the areas becoming more run down and more
... 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)).
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?
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.
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,
Harvey, Todd, and et al. Gentrification and West Oakland: Causes, Effects, and Best Practices 1999. 22 Nov. 2003.
Gentrification is the keystone for the progression of the basic standards of living in urban environments. A prerequisite for the advancement of urban areas is an improvement of housing, dining, and general social services. One of the most revered and illustrious examples of gentrification in an urban setting is New York City. New York City’s gentrification projects are seen as a model for gentrification for not only America, but also the rest of the world. Gentrification in an urban setting is much more complex and has deeper ramifications than seen at face value. With changes in housing, modifications to the quality of life in the surrounding area must be considered as well. Constant lifestyle changes in a community can push out life-time
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.