The Junction Triangle
The evolution of land use patterns can determine many aspects of a given region. In the example of the Junction Triangle (JT) - a sector of Toronto that came into existence by industrial land use - there have been three major aspects affected by industrial land use: economic, social, and political (Knox, p444). Land use in the JT has neglected these three aspects of residential life - and thus, has compromised the quality of life (QOL) of the citizens - in exchange for industrial development.
The original zoning of the JT was solely industrial; however, due to functional clustering, residential and commercial buildings were created to support the industrial labourers (Knox, p443; Toronto Neighbourhoods). At this time, the JT's population was predominantly Anglo-Saxon Britons; over time, however, due to the poor living conditions, the residential pattern changed: poor immigrants moved into the JT from Macedonia, Poland, Italy, and the Ukraine to work for the local industry (Knox, p444; IDWCN). These poor living conditions were the result of industrial pollution - a problem the government ignored despite local protest (Toronto Neighbourhoods). These protests incorporated demands that some of the factories be relocated, or at the very least, that pollution control programs be legislated (Toronto Neighbourhoods). Eventually, the residents had both these demands granted; however, the former was only mere coincidence. Free trade, more specifically NAFTA, encouraged many local industries to relocate abroad; this action was due to lower production costs, not government intervention (VIDEO; IDWCN). Free trade, coupled with the recession in the 1980s, led to a rapid deindustrialisation process in the JT (VIDEO). To compensate for the lost industrial revenues, many parts of the JT were rezoned to residential neighbourhoods - neighbourhoods composed of subsidised housing projects (IDWCN). Although residential areas were being built, there was still a government bias for industry as evidenced by the reservation of specific zoning locations for business technology centres (IDWCN).
Government preference for industry in the JT has generated economic, social and political issues. The economic aspect is what originally led to the government's bias. This statement is exemplified by the government's provision of rail sidings, cheap water, and a tax-free status to initially encourage industry into the JT (WTJHS). On the other hand, the only investment by the government for the residential areas was to construct subsidised housing; however, this investment only degraded the neighbourhood.
By replacing industries with subsidised housing projects and not creating a proportionate amount of social programs, the government also neglected the social interests of the residents of the JT.
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
Deepening economic inequality is fundamentally associated with the spatial polarization between central cities and sprawling suburbs, and between wealthy regions and poorer ones. Government policies have promoted economic and racial segregation, encouraged businesses and the wealthy to move to outer suburbs, and effectively limited the poor and minorities to central cities or troubled inner-ring suburbs.
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.
Hiebert, D. (1995). The Social Geography of Toronto in 1931: A Study of Residential Differentiation and Social Structure. Journal of Historical Geography, 21(1), 55-74.
Toledo has changed one hundred folds in the last fifty years. Although Toledo still constitutes the majority of Lucas County and is still Ohio's fourth largest city, it's dominance has plummeted just as many cites that lye in the Rust Belt on the national level. Since most everything besides the city government has left the downtown area, it fits perfectly in to the move to outskirts of town to settle down. There has been no push towards gentrification in Toledo, since one the downtown has no jobs to offer, and two the inner city neighborhoods are just not suited for the gentrification process. So Toledo is just another one of the dying breed of cities in which downtown manufacturing had died and service upper-class suburbia has taken the drivers seat in the expansion of the city.
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.
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
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.
Creation of highway networks outside the city and subsequent growth of suburban communities transformed the way citizens worked lived and spent their leisure time. Downtown businesses closed or moved to malls inducing a reduction in downtown shopping and overall downtown commercial traffic.
...by preventing access to potential places of employment and to positive network influences. Therefore, to solve the growing problem of jobless poverty the government should look towards developing mixed-use developments without strict zoning laws and increasing the public transportation infrastructures in cities.
There’s town, farmland, plains, woods and waterways. All of these features serve a good amount of benefits as well. For example, the wooded area is ideal for hunting, as well as gathering firewood. Because most people that live in North Annville have fireplaces, the wooded areas serve a great purpose The towns are good for being able to visit friends easily by just walking over. The developments are putting up houses quickly, and more parents and children are filling them up. Lastly, the farmlands help the environment in our town, and gives us local-grown fruits and vegetables. The different landforms and features really help make Annville a great place to
Although the inner city areas have been identified as having problems for many years, it was not until 1988 that Margaret Thatcher put forward the “Action for Cities'; campaign. She realised that something had to be done to improve the conditions, and took the problems found in the inner cities as the reasons why the re-development schemes were necessary. When launching the scheme Thatcher said “In partnership with the people and the private sector, we intend to step up the pace of renewal and regeneration to make our inner cities much better places to live, work, and invest';. The inner city programme specified 6 aims:
Beginning in the 1960s, middle and upper class populations began moving out of the suburbs and back into urban areas. At first, this revitalization of urban areas was 'treated as a 'back to the city' movement of suburbanites, but recent research has shown it to be a much more complicated phenomenon' (Schwirian 96). This phenomenon was coined 'gentrification' by researcher Ruth Glass in 1964 to describe the residential movement of middle-class people into low-income areas of London (Zukin 131). More specifically, gentrification is the renovation of previously poor urban dwellings, typically into condominiums, aimed at upper and middle class professionals. Since the 1960s, gentrification has appeared in large cities such as Washington D.C., San Francisco, and New York. This trend among typically young, white, upper-middle class working professionals back into the city has caused much controversy (Schwirian 96). The arguments for and against gentrification will be examined in this paper.
Cities together lacks the social and strains moving from the core. Regions develop communities based off “income, race and fascial conditions” (Ameregis 3). One community has problems, including weak tax bases, poverty and lack of resources. Another community fully developed may have a low poverty rate, weak tax bases and suffering from social needs. Only a select percentage according to the Revenue Study have strong tax bases, expensive housing and great investment development.