Gentrify

Contemporary perspective reflect Ms. Glass description of class change. For example, some observers describe gentrification as the rehabilitation of working-class or derelict housing into housing for middle-class residents or as the process of higher-income households moving into neighborhoods that have suffered from systematic outmigration, disinvestment or neglect (Atkinson 2002, Wyly and Hammel 1999). Gentrification also has been described as the middle- and upper-class remake of the central city—not just a residential phenomenon but one that affects commercial and retail areas as well (Smith 1996). Other observers include a racial component in their definition of gentrification—new, higher-income residents are white and the incumbent, lower-income residents are racial or ethnic minorities. This change can lead to tensions along racial or ethnic lines in the gentrified neighborhood (Kennedy and Leonard 2001).

Not all definitions of gentrification include the displacement of the incumbent, lower-income residents. Some observers argue that displacement is not a necessary outcome of gentrification if original residents cannot afford to move elsewhere or are attached to the neighborhood or if higher-income households are able to occupy vacant properties or move into newly constructed developments (Vigdor 2002).

Freeman and Braconi (2002) define different types of displacement that can occur due to gentrification. “Direct displacement” occurs when a demographic or ethnic group succeeds another due specifically to a process or program. Direct displacement was typical in the federal urban renewal programs during the 1950s and 1960s. “Secondary displacement” is the type of displacement most often of concern today: low-income households relocate due to new development or gentrification in their neighborhood once they can no longer afford to remain due to higher rents, appreciated taxes, tenant harassment, or the withholding of services. Others refer to secondary displacement as “involuntary displacement” because low-income households prefer to stay but cannot afford to (Kennedy and Leonard 2001). Marcuse (1986) describes a third type of displacement, “exclusionary displacement,” where changes in a gentrified neighborhood prevent future low-income households from locating there.

Gentrification can be a contentious issue. It highlights the instability of renting: people might be forced to move away from newly-desirable areas because the landlords increase rents. Usually this conflict is limited to the local level; many who live outside urban areas may not be aware of it.

Demographic changes often occur because an increase in average income causes a decline in the proportion of racial minorities, a reduction in the size of the households, and low-income families are replaced by “up and coming” singles and couples. In American cities, it is sometimes the case that the new, wealthier demographic of the neighborhood more closely resembles the original populace for which the neighborhood was constructed. In this, gentrification represents the reversal of the white flight phenomenon. Real Estate markets in the area also change because, due to large increases in rent and home prices, there are also often increases in the number of evictions, increases in ownership of formerly rented homes, and new development of upscale housing. The use of the land in the area may also change as formerly industrial areas become converted to office and/or residential use (lofts). New retail and restaurants are built, eventually followed by luxury housing. This often brings with it a change in culture and character. Neighborhoods prior to gentrification often have a unique style formed by their longtime residents. As these residents become displaced by newcomers, ideas about what is attractive change, and standards for architecture, landscape, and public norms (including behavior, noise, and nuisance) change as well (Grant).

Property owners can also feel the effects of gentrification through increases in property taxes. Property taxes are typically based on a percentage of a property's assessed value. As property values increase in a given neighborhood, municipalities will typically reassess the values of properties within gentrifying communities resulting in higher property taxes for the neighborhood's long-term owners. If the owners cannot afford the tax increases, they are forced to sell (or, if they own a multi-family dwelling, they may pass the increases on to tenants in the form of higher rents). However, the increase in property value will increase the selling price of the property, so in purely financial terms this phenomenon generally enriches the owners.

While the views on gentrification tend to be polarized, it is potentially possible to lessen gentrification's damages to the older residents while striving to make the benefits of changes brought by the new residents reach the older residents as well. This rests on a precarious balance between the newer wealthier residents and the older, poorer residents of the neighborhood. Community input, engagement, and interaction during the revitalization process can ameliorate some of the negative effects of gentrification. However, as gentrification by definition includes displacement and rapid change, it seems unlikely that strife and class conflict are entirely avoidable.