Author: Jordan Williams

Source

Throughout the world, the emergence of modernized cities has often come at the expense of the wellbeing of lifelong residents. Many people, typically from low-income and minority communities, have been driven out of their homes by means of gentrification, eminent domain, socio-cultural isolation, and other external forces. In his discussion of urban planning in New York for Sale, Tom Angotti disproves a series of misconceptions and instead puts forth a starkly different voice. He specifically draws attention to the overlap of community engagement, public policy, and the forces of the broader international arena when it comes to shaping an urban landscape. As Angotti says, “Community planning is rarely politically neutral at the local level and often addresses citywide, regional, and global political issues” (8). The interaction these seemingly independent agents complicates the conversation and raises the stakes of the potential outcome.

Continue reading “Urban Planning: Competing and Overlapping Forces of Development and Displacement”

Gentrification has long been portrayed through a one-dimensional lens. It is the force that kills the cultural and socio-economic particularities of a city, giving rise to homogeneity. While the validity of this statement has been hotly debated, this larger discussion has failed to do much in addressing the issues at hand – one of which concerns the evolving economic landscape.

Continue reading “A Gentrifying Economic Landscape: Integrating the Old and the New”

…it’s here to stay.

Cartoon by Bill Bramhall ( for more cartoons click here:   Cartoons)

With sleek high rises and trendy coffee shops opening up at unprecedented rates, gentrification has made its mark on the mainstream socio-political agenda.  Rezoning and redevelopment within urban hubs have triggered an increase in property values. While the process of gentrification has much potential to stimulate the economy and improve the quality of life in a neighborhood, it can also shatter the livelihoods of many people – those who are forced to uproot and move out because they can no longer afford to live in an area.

Scholars like Fillip Stabrowski, Jacob Vidgor, and Kathe Newman and Elvin Wyley contribute to the discussion of gentrification by examining the phenomenon from distinct, often overlooked perspectives that complicate pre-existing arguments. In particular, Stabrowski expands the term gentrification to encompass more than just spatial relocation. He says, “I define ‘everyday displacement’ as the lived experience of ongoing loss—of the security, agency, and freedom to ‘make place.’ This is the inherently violent process whereby the systemic nature of capitalist gentrification colonizes ever-greater reaches of the lifeworlds of working class residents” (796). Everyday displacement fuels neighborhood erasure – or the loss of the unique character of a place. Thus in his examination of the evolving landscape of Polish Greenpoint, Stabrowski forces us to consider gentrification as a two-fold process – one that involves displacement from both the personal home and the communal enclave.

Continue reading “Gentrification is no longer just an urbanist buzzword…”

One of the most challenging aspects of crafting an urban landscape is striking a balance between the public and private realms. Sharon Zukin examines the change and continuity over time of Union Square Park in her analysis of the implications of increased private influence. As Zukin says in The Naked City: The Life and Death of Authentic Public Spaces, “It’s a normal evening at Union Square, but in this normality you find all the fascination of city life. You like to think of Union Square as an endless arcade of possibilities, reflecting and refining city dwellers’ creative ability to shape their own, spontaneous social space. It’s an authentic public square, not a place for contemplating nature, but a marketplace for meeting, trading, and gaining intelligence about social life. Yet this high degree of face-to-face sociability hides a paradox, for the public space of Union Square is controlled by a private group of the biggest property owners in the neighborhood” (126).

In other words, the perception of Union Square as a publicly owned space is simply an illusion.

Continue reading “Whose City Is It Anyway?”