Gentrification has become a new buzzword. The term denotes shifts in demographics, higher socioeconomic status, and a rise in real estate values.
Grand Concourse in South Bronx, a neighborhood once shunned due to fear of crime and a bad reputation, is seeing a surge of white, middle-class professionals moving in. For the first time in four decades, the white population has increased instead of decreasing, according to 2010 Census data. Some have attributed this shift to increased tolerance of diversity.
Nobody questions the good gentrification brings-Newcomers to Concourse enjoy an increasingly safer neighborhood (crime rates plummeted), proximity to Yankee Stadium, nicer parks, yoga studios and access to organic produce. Those who have children, in addition, appreciate the diversity their children are growing up with. But an inevitable tradeoff is: As South Bronx continues gentrifying, and real estate values increase, can lower-income groups, who were there originally, afford to continue living there?
What do you think? Is there a way to take the pros without the cons? Or should we set limits to gentrification, and if so, where?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/26/nyregion/grand-concourse-neighborhood-in-the-south-bronx-gentrifies.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ref=nyregion
#1 by Jenna Peet on March 28, 2012 - 2:05 am
Wow, you chose an excellent topic for the discussions we’ve been having in class! Robert Moses is actually partly to (blame? credit?) for the structure of the Grand Concourse and the nearby Cross-Bronx Expressway, and I’m sure it’s no coincidence that the area was (before now) populated primarily by lower income families.
It’s hard to say that gentrification is a bad thing, especially when the article highlights that our generation is much more accepting and open to living in communities with people that are different from them, and a movement like this results. What is currently drawing this population to the South Bronx is the low pricing of homes, because they are more affordable in this economy. Now, given that, the homeowners/real-estate agents/whoever is making this property available needs to make sure that if they are going to keep making money, that these homes be as affordable as they can, but just that, to keep people moving into the neighborhood. Then, I think current residents would be okay.
#2 by Anna Liang on March 28, 2012 - 10:53 pm
As Jenna had said, it is not much of a surprise that most families living in South Bronx are of lower economic status. With the influx of middle-class white inhabitants, the neighborhood has suddenly caught the eye of New York Times. (To quote Marlen Valarezo from the article, “Why do people only pay attention when other races move into the neighborhood?”)
As for the gentrification that Grand Concourse is undergoing, it is not necessarily a bad thing. As cited in the article, Valarezo notices healthier produce around the area. In addition, there is the new yoga studio and renovated parks and roads. Regardless of the changes the Concourse neighborhood may face in the coming years, infrastructural improvements should be appreciated (this refers strictly to the renewing of pre-existing structures and not the bulldozing of streets and avenues to build highways).
In spite of the goods that gentrification may bring, there are bound to be negatives. There is the likelihood that poorer inhabitants will be force to move out as more and more better-off families move into Grand Concourse. It is, however, important to acknowledge that such a shift in demographics is not definite. It is up to the home owners and community to fight for a reasonable cost of living. After all, people are moving to the neighborhood because the homes are cheaper. If they drive up the price of commodities, then would it not be counterproductive?
#3 by Vita Xie on March 29, 2012 - 7:04 am
Thanks Jenna for some background Moses information. An analysis of the history of the Grand Concourse from his time to now would be a great paper, ha!
Gentrification. I have many mixed feelings about it. On the face value, lowered crime rates (but then again, the entire city and country is experiencing that…), interest in the arts, and increase in public and private commodities and services are pluses. On the other hand, the commodities and services usually scream “yuppie” to me and the big question that looms over my head is: what happened to the people that lived there before? As the articles states, most of the newcomers bought apartments for less than a cool $500,000 and I think it’s realistic to say that some people still cannot afford that…so where do these people go?
And then the pessimistic cynic in me goes: the realtors are going to come in and shoot up the prices (I can imagine the selling points now…Yankee Stadium view… up and coming neighborhood). While it makes sense to keep the prices steady so more people can buy real estate and that the surrounding commodities and services remain affordable, I think a mentality driven by the prospects of (much higher) profits would be that even if you drive the prices up to some ridiculous level, you can still find somebody to buy it, just not most of everybody.
One last point would to be how does this happen? Piggybacking off Anna and the Marlen Valarezo quote, I do think gentrification is more complicated than just a bunch of white people moving in. From last seminar, I remembered hearing that studies show when artists move into an area (usually for cheaper spaces), this migration usually indicates future gentrification…food for thought.
#4 by Vanessa Rene on March 29, 2012 - 1:51 pm
I always naturally feel a little apprehensive towards ~gentrification~ and its awful implications…
Like Vita, I guess I am a bit of a pessimist with regards to this situation. As neighborhoods become more gentrified, as the neighborhoods ‘pick up’ with little yoga studios and organic supermarkets, they also tend to get more expensive, and history has shown us that usually, the original members of the community are eventually moved out.
But I’m definitely not against all these developments, I honestly think they’re great; they’ll make the neighborhood more attractive, and ‘hip’ and fun, but I can’t help but feel as though there are going to be losers in this situation…
#5 by Michael Squitieri on March 29, 2012 - 2:26 pm
I agree with a lot of what everyone is saying. I am fascinated in how gentrification begins to happen, and although they give some reasons, I’m not sure those capture the whole story. Where is the tipping point for gentrification? It’s definitely something really great to research.
I think its very interesting to think of gentrification from an economic standpoint. Once neighborhoods are gentrified, can the prices of housing and commodities stay reasonable? I like to think of neighborhoods as in equilibrium with each other. If some people move in, some must move out. While one neighborhood may become affluent, another becomes destitute.
Can gentrification also play a role in the ghettoization of New York City, much like Robert Moses’ evictions did earlier? After a neighborhood becomes gentrified, are there an increase of applications for, say, public housing? I’m basically just thinking aloud here, but it’s something to consider.
#6 by Rahima Nayeem on March 29, 2012 - 2:54 pm
It’s an interesting point that Anna brought up about Marlen Valarezo saying, “Why do people only pay attention when other races move into the neighborhood?” According to some of the residents who have been living there, Grand Concourse has been becoming a better place, a more “livable place” before the middle-class white families started moving in. It is true, however, that because of these new residents who can afford much more, the neighborhood is becoming more attractive and attracting much more attention. This attention is probably going to hurt the low-income families who live there because living there is going to become more expensive. These families may not be able to afford it anymore.
Also, as Sam Goodman says, “there is an increasing comfort among New Yorkers with people who are different from them.” This is definitely true, and it may be one reason why more white families are moving into the Concourse area. However, with “gentrification,” the people who used to live there, the lower-income families and the black and Latino families are going to be displaced. Some parents want to raise their kids around different kinds of people, but in a couple of years, Grand Concourse might not be as diverse as it is now. In a Renaissance Revival building, 40 percent of the tenants are white professionals. Who knows what the percentage will be in a couple more years.
#7 by Joseph Langer on March 29, 2012 - 3:27 pm
From a pure economics view, it seems to be impossible to take the pros of gentrification without the con of higher real estate prices. Economics follow one basic rule, as demand (people wanting to move into that neighborhood) goes up, supply goes down (number of available apartments) which leads to an increase in price. There are obviously a lot of other factors involved here which make Deborah’s question all the more difficult. I feel, however, that there are measures that can be taken to ease the burden of these higher costs. Firstly, competition. Competition by definition lowers prices for costumers. If the local government can get involved and pass legislation that encourages small business growth, I believe everyone in the neighborhood can benefit.
#8 by Brian Ghezelaiagh on April 4, 2012 - 7:25 pm
I’ve never actually witnessed gentrification myself, but the whole thing sounds rather nasty. What I have witnessed, though, is, for lack of a better term, “reverse-gentrification. I’ve lived on Long Island my whole life and, though I could be dead wrong, a major trend I’ve seen has been the gradual movement of the white upper-middle class eastward. Slowly but surely this demographic is moving towards the coastline of the island. Before we know it, they’ll be building an exclusive island-metropolis in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
This peculiar Eastward push seems to be due to this “reverse-gentrification.” As for causality, I couldn’t say. Is it that the lower-middle class and ethnic groups are turning these descendants of the robber barons off, and they’ye consequently moving east to escape the refuse? Or is it that white upper-middle class folk just like to change they’re shells every once in a while, kind of like hermit crabs, and this just happens to work out for lower-middle class ethnic families looking for some suburban living?