More handpicked essays just for you.
Positive and negative consequences of gentrification
Positive and negative consequences of gentrification
Positive and negative consequences of gentrification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Gentrification can be defined in several ways. It can focus on the shift of the demographic of an area with regard to the ethnic makeup due to an influx of upper-middle income residents to areas where they had largely been absent. The term could also reflect the change in land prices due to the significant increase in property value and rents, or gentrification could also relate to either a minor change of urban form, which is the repurposing of existing buildings, or a major change, which would be the demolition of existing infrastructure or the intensification of use. For example, in Toronto, developers tear down small buildings to build large rises in order to meet the increasing demand to live downtown because people are less willing to …show more content…
commute to work. Municipalities find gentrification appealing due to the fragmentation of certain city regions. Gentrification signals a return of middle-income as well as more affluent residents such as double income or single income families without kids to the downtown, which leads to the increase of prices and property tax revenues, as well as a clean up or a replacement of old, derelict buildings. Cities are more focused on the intentions and wants of these childless double income and single income families because they have the most disposable income. Gentrification occurred as a result to new urbanism which successfully preserves old neighbourhoods, most commonly industrial areas. The promotion of tradition and preservation of these historical neighbourhoods made these neighbourhoods particularly attractive to the bohemian crowd, which includes artists, musicians, as well as the creative class. The relatively low initial cost of living within these areas which had primarily attracted the bohemians eventually alters due to the invasion of movers and developers because of the perceived popularity of the area. The income of this specific class of people and the increasing cost of rental and ownership within these neighbourhoods due to their popularity result in the displacement of the original inhabitants. Gentrification therefore benefits the city with the ability to produce higher income and property taxes because of the flood of interest in previously defunct areas, however, it negatively effects the pre-existing citizens and businesses from the area because they are forced to vacate their homes due to the exponential increase to the cost of living in their own neighbourhoods. This results in the loss of a significant community within a municipality. In Winnipeg, gentrification was induced through the act of offering developers tax abatements if they build downtown.
However, gentrification can also be unplanned, which is exemplified in Winnipeg’s Osborne Village. Osborne Village’s average tenant is within the middle-upper income level due to the increase in property taxes and cost of living within the community. This is because the original residents of Osborne Village have been displaced due to the unaffordable increase in property tax, despite the area being their own community. West Broadway in contrast has at least attempted to maintain a semblance of mixed and affordable housing within the neighbourhood in order to stave away gentrification and to preserve the original community.
Though gentrification can be positively perceived as an act to revitalize otherwise distressed neighbourhoods, it is not intended to benefit existing citizens. Due to an increase in employment, higher revenue generated, perceived lower crime rates, and intensification of density, gentrification is seen as beneficial to cities, however it can also displace original residents, lower-income jobs, and perpetuate a fragmentation of community and affordable housing. Gentrification can be avoided through rent control, as well as property tax rebates, limiting condo conversions, as well as inclusionary
zoning. Affordable housing was originally created for government workers and the middle class but has developed to encompass the lower classes as well. The Government of Canada, through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation works together with provincial partners to provide funding in order to reduce the number of impoverished Canadians who struggle to afford housing. Affordable housing is based on income and is therefore relative to the individual, however within government jurisdictions this would include particular housing that costs thirty percent or less of the household’s income. For example, if you have a household income of $50 000, an affordable house would be $15 000. In order to ensure that only thirty percent of a household’s total income is spent on housing, the federal government states that it will supply a subsidy to support them. Affordable housing used to predominantly be an issue effecting lower-income households only, however the growing housing costs in some markets such as the metropolitan areas of Vancouver and Toronto impact the lower, middle, and upper-middle income residents as well. The affordability of housing not only relies on the physical price of living in the structure, but also can be affected by the proximity to transportation. This has led lower-income residents to amalgamate in downtown areas because of the accessibility to public transportation. In Winnipeg, the services available in downtown are comparable to those in the suburbs therefore it is easier for lower-income residents to live downtown where their commute to work could potentially not be as expensive as investing in a car and continuously paying for insurance as well as gas. However, closeness to transit and office buildings subsequently increases the cost of housing, therefore in some cities lower-income residents often have to live far away from their work with limited access to transit. A lack of sufficient social housing can also lead to lower-income residents ending up in substandard housing conditions, which intensifies poverty. Some inhibitions to affordable housing include the absence of federal regulations and interest rates. The federal government is not required to ensure affordability, access, or the quality of housing in Canada because there is no mention of housing in the British North American Act or the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. The lack of concrete legislation within Canadian governance leads to significant downloading of responsibilities from the federal government onto the provincial, and municipal levels of government. Other than federal restrictions, interest rates are also a leading cause of unaffordable housing within Canada. The Bank of Canada sets “overnight” lending rates and uses interest rates to encourage economic growth or to counter inflation. Following World War II in North America there was a mass exodus of white, middle-class families from the cities to the suburbs. This transition from a centralized city lifestyle to dispersed communities was made possible through the improvements made in the automobile industry, such as making cars more reliable and accessible to the masses due to the increase in disposable income. As a result, roads became a focus of municipalities and highways became constructed in order foster faster travel as well as long distance road trips. Favouring cars created a decline in the use of railway transportation, which was eventually exacerbated further through the use of large trucks to transport goods. Businesses were now spread out across town instead of centralized within the city, therefore, industry was outgrowing downtown. Competition for businesses began to increase between the city and the suburbs, however the financial industry, major law firms, head offices, as well as government buildings remain in the central part of the city. The “baby boomers”, which were the children born following the return of the World War II soldiers, created a large demographic shift in municipalities. Cities experienced rapid growth as well as a growing level of middle-income households. Downtown became negatively perceived due to the growing ethnic minority population, the lack of parking for the influx of automobiles, as well as the lack of retail due to the abandoning of department stores. For example, Winnipeg’s downtown population significantly declined following World War II, while both the old and new suburbs of the city flourished. Today, the downtown and West End of Winnipeg have much lower incomes than the rest of the city which shows the powerful and seemingly irreversible effects that suburbanization can have on a city. Municipalities eventually began using urban renewal tactics in order to entice citizens to return to the downtown. These tactics included the construction of shopping malls and event centres, as well as revitalizing and repurposing older buildings in disrepair. However, these projects have yet to substantially oppose the rapid increase in urban sprawl and movement from the city to the suburbs. With a lack of retail and industry downtown as well as the dispersion of businesses throughout the city due to the increase in accessibility of cars, downtowns have become a haven for lower-income residents who remain dependent on public transportation, while middle-upper income level citizens hide out in distant communities and refuse to contribute to the heart of their own city
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...
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 makes way for safe neighborhoods that were once considered to be unsafe because of crime. Areas such as Echo Park, East LA, and Bed-Stuy, once notorious for being some of the most dangerous places in the United States are now safer than ever because of the changes brought by gentrification. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “…gentrification can cause an initial increase in crime because neighborhood change causes destabilization, although in the long run gentrification leads to a decline in crime as neighborhood cohesion increases.” (2016, HUD USER). The arrival of new members of the community and the changes they bring creates unrest in the form of crime.
Furthermore, both articles “Gentrification: A Positive Good For Communities” and. “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.
... 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.
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,
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.