Gentrification and Its Effects

Gentrification is an increasingly common process that is a topic of debate in today's world. In New York City alone, according to Webber, a writer for the Gotham Gazette, "Gentrification has been spotted throughout Brooklyn, in places like Prospect Heights, Williamsburg and Greenpoint. It entered Queens through Astoria and was last seen creeping through Long island City and west into Jackson Heights. In Manhattan, the new gentrification has entered tiny patches adjacent to already affected areas lending credence to the suggestion that the trend is contagious. These areas include the Bowery, "Esso" a tiny area between Little Italy, the Lower East Side, and Chinatown, the meatpacking district, and SoCo, the area south of Columbia University" (Webber).

Basically, what happens during the gentrification process is that an older, middle to lower class neighborhood is identified as a unique place. Since urban living has become more desirable again, Wealthier people start putting money into this area for new development. Houses and businesses are torn down to make way for luxury condominiums or older, promising houses are renovated by wealthy people. The neighborhood is "turned around" in some cases almost overnight.

This process sounds wonderful, but it is not wonderful to all parties involved. For the people who redevelop the neighborhood, there are wonderful advantages. However, to the people who are displaced, these changes are anything but wonderful. There are obvious worries that accompany gentrification. The simplest among them are the displacement of low income families and how they will find similar housing elsewhere. The conversion of row houses from multifamily homes to single family homes creates even less housing in the neighborhood being gentrified. And even if the housing is there, people from that neighborhood can no longer afford it. The neighborhoods typically become less diverse, economically and racially since usually gentrification includes higher income whites moving back into the city where lower income minorities live. These, often close-knit communities, are broken up and left to fend for themselves. Unable to fight the gentrification because they have neither the money nor the political power, they are powerless to fight their fate. The whites who fled the inner cities for the suburbs are now coming back to oust the families who have been living there for decades, all in the name of progress.

Many with exalt the benefits of gentrification, and there are some to the people who continue to live in the neighborhood after it has been "gentrified." Low income residents can benefit from gentrification but only if they can afford to stay in the neighborhood. Their homes will appreciate in value, and there will be renewed interest in public transportation as well as new businesses that will bring more money into the community. But if the residents cannot afford to stay, they will only be displaced. Homeowners, renters, and business owners may be displaced from their communities due to gentrification. Low income residents like the elderly and people on fixed incomes may not benefit from gentrification if they are displaced from their own neighborhoods. Landlords, who can receive more money from new people, may evict low income renters. Landlords may also convert their own properties into condos or other luxury homes.

Businesses can certainly benefit from people with more money spending at their establishments, but only if they can pay their own rising rents to stay in the neighborhoods. Existing residents may be left without necessary services while boutiques and fancy restaurants take the place of the businesses that used to sustain the neighborhoods. One example that shows the advantages and disadvantages of gentrification is Pilsen Street in West Chicago.

"Pilsen, is a thriving vibrant community at risk of losing their ethnic charm and inhabitants. It is Chicago 's largest Latino immigrant entry point and the one of the most densely populated neighborhoods in the city. Small business owners in Pilsen and neighboring Latino community Little Village are confident that gentrification on the west side will improve conditions and reduce crime" (Chicago Business).

But, Waquant goes on to show the downside of this gentrification. And there is a downside. Pilsen Street is a largely Hispanic community who stands to lose as much as they gain.

"However, most small businesses in Pilsen have specialty markets that will lose demand if Latinos are priced out of the neighborhood. If there businesses do not adapt to the demand of new residents, they too will be forced out of the community. In addition, enclaves tend to become insular communities whose residents depend on the consistency of their spaces for their livelihood. If local businesses cannot compete with new firms or lose a portion of their customer base remaining residents will be left with little to stand upon" (Waquant).

The entire excerpt above is provided by Jennifer Huestis in Gentrification: Will the University of Illinois at Chicago Threaten Surrounding Communities? It clearly shows that there are two sides of this issue.

And gentrification has brought positive changes for some, even those who were initially against it as Webber points out. "In the East Village even some who mourn that neighborhood's loss of character, praise some aspects of development. Bodega owner Rob Rose told the Voice, "I used to have to call the cops every day to get the drug dealers away from the front of my store. Now they're gone for good" (Webber).

There are certainly those who see gentrification as a positive force to stop neighborhoods from sliding further into decline. There area also those who feel that the changes must come from inside the neighborhoods. Rebecca Webber presents both sides of this debate at gothammagazine.com.

"To people such as Oakland mayor Jerry Brown, who has actively promoted development of the California city, the issue is clear: Cities, he has said, must choose between "gentrification and slummification." The National Community Building Network, however, thinks that the people who have lived in their communities -- not outsiders in three-piece suits -- can revitalize their areas by developing a community vision, strengthening existing neighborhood institutions, cleaning up and repairing the area, and improving the economic well being of existing residents" (Webber).

Some of this displacement could also be called voluntary if residents are no longer comfortable in their own communities. Gentrification typically involves turning communities of color into chiefly white communities. This is due to the previous uses of redlining or restrictive covenants that kept minorities out of many other parts of the city and the suburbs. Now the communities may completely change color and culture. They may sell their residences for what they believe to be a good deal only to find out how difficult it is to buy a house elsewhere. This is called voluntary displacement, but that seems to be a euphemism. These people did not necessarily voluntarily allow the changes that dispersed their neighborhood, and they certainly did not want to feel strange in their own neighborhood, but because they choose to leave, it is called voluntary. Today in New York City, the Fifth Avenue Committee has established an anti-displacement zone and will try to prevent evictions of low-income people living in this area. "In our view, neighborhood residents who contribute to a community have a right to continue to live in it," says Rubenstein, development coordinator for Fifth Avenue Committee (Webber).

One case in point of widespread gentrification is Harlem, New York. Harlem was one a "happening" place with ornate brownstones and beautiful surroundings. In the 1910s Harlem became open to blacks, and many moved in. Harlem was the cultural and intellectual center for blacks in what was called the Harlem Renaissance with notables like Langston Hughes living there. Then, in the 1960s when many Americans were fleeing for the suburbs, Harlem declined. Many of the beautiful brownstones were bought up by the government and left vacant. Banks "redlined" Harlem. Redlining is a term that means that banks were not willing to give loans to people to buy in Harlem, especially for non-whites. Banks played a large role in what races lived where by redlining. Harlem declined further and further until it was a place almost nobody would want to live. In the 1990s people began to look again at Harlem As people were "priced out" of other places in New York by the bursting real-estate market, middle-class New Yorkers began buying these gorgeous brownstones, now in various states of disrepair. Harlem is now in its "second Renaissance." While this is wonderful for those people who were priced out of other areas, it is not great for the working poor and poor who currently reside in Harlem. They cannot afford to rent these re-developed houses or apartments, and landlords are evicting more and more people because they know they can get people to rent for more money. Where do the people who currently live there go? There aren't many places left around New York City where they can afford the rent. Once again, just like the Federal Housing Administration's low cost loans to whites in the 1940s and the 50/50 freeway program, the federal government is subsidizing the renovation of these brownstones. Unfortunately, the government provides no assistance to the people who can no longer afford Harlem and must move out. At least in the 1960s, the government built federal housing projects. Today they are doing nothing to provide for these low income people who have been displaced from their longtime neighborhoods.

Brooklyn is another neighborhood undergoing extensive gentrification. As Michael Powell says in The Washington Post.

"One must look at Brooklyn as well. Brooklyn is being transformed overnight. One such neighborhood is Williamsburg. But dislocation looms. The median family in Williamsburg earns $27,466 and spends 45 percent of its income on rent. The three-piece-suited newcomer hails from the financial sector, where the average salary is $195,857. "How do we compete with this tsunami?" Niederman asks. "Our insularity is no match for this money" (Powell 3)

There are many residents who protest against this gentrification for many of the reasons already discussed. According to Powell,

"City officials relented; they agreed last year that 20 percent of the apartments should be affordable to the working class. Celebrators pushed through the door at Teddy's Bar, a tin-ceilinged joint on North Eighth Street. Round after round of shots were tossed back" (Powell 4).

However this is not enough for many of Brooklyn's residents.

"Late that night, a young activist stood on not so steady feet and led a beery chant: "No justice! No peace! No justice! No . . . " Then the sky bled red at sunrise and reality leaked back in. Hobbled by poor credit, many working-class tenants cannot qualify even for "affordable" apartments. (A city report estimates the new development will displace 2,500 residents -- very much a low-ball estimate, officials acknowledge" (Powell 4).

Again. there are two sides to this issue as USA Today points out.

"Jose Sanchez, an urban planning expert at Long Island University in Brooklyn, says some changing neighborhoods stabilize with a mixture of people. But he says the poor - and the bohemian pioneers - can also be "washed out" by scheming landlords or government policies such as rezoning and urban renewal"(Hampson)

Also, in Brooklyn there is a battle being fought for/against father gentrification. According to an article by Jarrett Murphy, an entrepreneur named Ratner has proposed a development made up of an NBA arena for the New Jersey Nets and thousands of residential units near the MTA's Atlantic Avenue Rail Yards. Murphy cites what critics of the proposal have to say.

"Critics of the proposal-including Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, the Fifth Avenue Committee, and the Pratt Area Community Council-see far larger costs than the dollar figures. The character of the neighborhood might change dramatically. Eminent domain could be used to force people out of their homes for a private development. And there's the precedent set by such a major project as Ratner's not going through the city's land use approval process, which does not apply to state property like the MTA-owned rail yards" (Murphy).

How is this problem solved? Not easily. Webber provides a few ideas in interviewing various people.

"Many experts believe that the only way to stop or slow displacement is through government action, including expanded rent regulation."There's no alternative, if you want to have affordable housing, says Marcuse. "It's very much a political question. If the political leadership is willing to face the problems and the disadvantages of gentrification, it can be controlled and can be a good thing. If it lets the market simply play itself out, it's going to be very bad for a lot of people" (Webber). The city [of New York] takes a different tact and encourages development to improve communities. "Recently, the Department of Housing Preservation and Development announced that 13 Harlem sites would be sold for $1 to developers with plans for new housing. "Anytime you have vacant land, it's sometimes dangerous for a neighborhood," said department spokesperson Abrams. "It's poorly lit and certainly isn't adding to anyone's sense of safety in an area" (Webber).

It is clear that at least two things that must be considered for gentrification to do minimal damage is to make sure that affordable housing is provided. Not the public housing projects of the 1960s that turned into huge disasters but real affordable housing that people want to live in. Educational and job opportunities must also be provided in these new communities. Critics of gentrification have valid points about the destructions of neighborhoods, but it is also very hard to tell people where they can live and where they can't live. It would be a real shame to let these neighborhoods with strong senses of community and unique culture fall for the creation of Starbuck's Coffee or other chains.

Works Cited

Chicago Business, February 2003, http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?_id=19559

Hampson, Rick, Studies: Gentrification a Boost for everyone, USA Today, April 19, 2005. Retrieved April 8, 2007, at http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-04-19-gentrification_x.htm

Huestis, Jennifer. Gentrification: Will the University of Chicago Threaten Surrounding Communities? April 15, 2005. Retrieved April 8, 2007 at http://www.umich.edu/~econdev/gentrification/

Murphy, Jarrett, "The Battle of Brooklyn: Grassroots groups split on whether arena plan scores for borough," The Village Voice, July 19, 2005, Retrieved April 8, 2007 at http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0529,murphy,66004,5.html

Powell, Michael, A Condo Tower Grows in Brooklyn, The Washington Post, February 21, 2007, Retrieved April 8, 2007 at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001912.html

Waquant, Loic J.D. 1997. "Three Pernicious Premises in the Study of the American Ghetto. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. v.21, n.2, p.34

Webber, Rebecca, The New Gentrification, GothamGazette.com. Dec. 11, 2000. Retrieved April 5, 2007, at http://www.gothamgazette.com/iotw/gent/