The And Its Effects On The Community

With Massachusetts State spending on affordable housing and open space at a historic low, when considered as a percentage of the total budget, the production of dwelling units and the conservation of land have become the responsibility of local government, but cities and towns do not build housing, except in rare circumstances. As well they do not routinely buy expensive tracts of open land,

When a neighborhood is gentrified it will not only change the image of it, but also the services available there (Al-Kodmany 2011, 62-63). In other words, gentrification does not only have an impact on the physical aspect of the land, but also the resources that lie there. During the 90s, the Near West Side neighborhood located near Loop, an up-scale neighborhood, sought drastic changes within the area. The changes in racial demographics in the Near West Side indicated that the health risks that affected minorities dropped in the past decade (1992-2002) (Al-Kodmany 2011,

On May 3rd when I visited the site where the Norman Blumberg Housing Project once stood, the air was hauntingly peaceful. I had read about the notoriety of the site during my research, how over its existence it had become an area of concentrated poverty and crime, but on this day this urban setting was quiet and calm. On the two square city blocks where a complex of apartment buildings once ruled the landscape, only a single high-rise remained among the unchecked wild grass. However, even in the peacefulness of this day in Sharswood, the looming presence of the infamous Norman Blumberg Apartments could still be felt.

The gentrification process can be seen through the demographic and physical changes of the South Parkdale neighborhood. Gentrification is “the invasion of working-class areas by the upper- and middle-classes, who upgrade shabby, modest housing into elegant residences, resulting in the displacement of all, or most of the original working-class occupiers”. (Lyons, 1996) South Parkdale is a neighborhood in downtown Toronto that faces problems of gentrification. This problem has been ongoing since the nineteen fifty’s’.

Those who cannot afford the high prices of housing are often forced out into the streets where they face a very uncertain future due to the number of abuses they encounter daily from all walks of life, with the most damning being the vagrancy laws that come into vogue in areas that are getting gentrified, which many cities have passed to “protect” their newfound assets and tax base from the “lowering” of property values. Furthermore, when cities such as Los Angeles demand that property developers set aside affordable housing for lower income people, they get sued in court, such as in 2009, when real estate developer Geoffrey Palmer successfully sued in order to overturned an ordnance which required that. This was also the same man who also proposed building a footbridge connecting two of his buildings to minimize contact with people he deemed undesirable (Davis).

Those who support the proposition have suggested that the volatility of funding for municipalities has reduced as a result of capping tax increments for previously owned homes. Also, they assert that property tax revenue before the proposition was more volatile. The older generation perceives

In the constantly changing economy of cities, the growth of city housing is oftentimes neglected. In “Cities Mobilize to Help Those Threatened by Gentrification” Timothy Williams recounts how gentrification has evolved over the years. Mentioning how cities have changed in order to appease the younger professionals, Williams shows how the city itself is in jeopardy due to the tax increases. Slowly loosing their faithful residents as well as historic culture cities face a big deal. Williams gives quotes from faithful residents, “…long time homeowners are victims of the success story”, (Williams 346). In “Cities Mobilize to Help Those Threatened by Gentrification”, Williams uses his credible quotes and modern statistics to generate the reader’s emotions, with desire to change how city officials go about gentrification in culturally infused cities.

Imagine the home you lived in for decades, being knocked down for a football stadium, shopping center, or new housing. That is gentrification. Webster’s dictionary defines gentrification as “the process of renovating and improving a house or district so that it conforms to middle-class taste” (“Gentrification”). Gentrification is not a new subject, as it has been occurring for centuries, dating back to medieval times, constructing forts over villages. Today, gentrification typically occurs in urban settings where buildings are vacant, and most of the residents live in poverty. Gentrification can destroy families, communities, and history. This topic is often at the center of debate for politics and town gossip, as developers are disrupting the current residents that reside in the vicinity. Gentrification occurs all around us, having pros and cons for each project. How is it ethical to kick individuals out of their home, and community for another’s benefit? Questions arise as the development and takeover of land often displaces individuals, their entire families, and livelihood. Temple University is a prime example of gentrification as well as other wealthy organizations, including football teams from the National Football League. The practice of gentrification comes to symbolize the new development and demolition of individual’s lives while trying to benefit the parties involved.

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) is the “largest public housing authority in the nation” (Developments, 2015). In existence since 1934 (About NYCHA: NYCHA at 70, 2015), NYCHA is a low to moderate income public housing initiative consisting of 328 developments throughout all five boroughs of New York City. More than 400,000 residents benefit from these developments through the receipt of not only apartments but additional services provided by each development and New York City overall. Over recent years the NYCHA developments have been experiencing a reduction in government funding, forcing the organization to re-evaluate strategies addressing maintenance of old buildings (About NYCHA, 2015).

This has caused a change in the way the homes in the area appear. Currently, many of the homes have lost their curb appeal. At one time this neighborhood had

A mix of housing age, old houses ( 40-100 years old predominant) and new housing developments

Yet another effect of gentrification is its effect on senior citizens. Seniors often live in the same unit for many years. As a result, rent control has kept their rents well below market rate, and landlords stand to gain the most from evicting them. For example, in the Mission District of San Francisco, many seniors live on a fixed income, and cannot afford market rate rents once they are evicted. "They lack mobility, and have difficulty

By the 1960s many of these urban areas, with the loss of capital, jobs, and so on; began to deteriorate, and property values fell. Currently with the higher costs of property in the suburbs and other communities, there are fewer and fewer opportunities to invest small and gain a big profit; thus, making the once "undesirable" urban properties with their low property values and costs, more "desirable."

Prior to Proposition 13, the property tax rates throughout California were a little less than 3% of market value. However, property taxes were linked to the assessed value of a property and these taxes had no limits. Since home values were rising, properties were reassessed by as much as 50% to 100% during the 1970’s. Coupled with the stagflation of the Jimmy Carter era, these affects led people to see their property taxes rise significantly. Additionally, in the 1960’s, there were many scandals in California involving property value assessors. All of these issues hit senior citizens hardest since they saw their taxes skyrocketing but were retired and didn’t have any incomes (Lecture 2). Furthermore, by 1977, the state government had built

Home ownership at the age of twenty-two was lessons of life that I greatly appreciated. Even though my mother communicated her concerns about the house, I proceeded to purchase without regards to her emotions. Consequently, I abandoned my home and added to the epidemic that afflicts my county. Additionally, owners of these unsightly structures never had the intentions of foreclosure, but inevitable circumstances confronted the decision to either, leave or stay. Unfortunately, Cuyahoga County's resolution to the abandoned property epidemic resumes but the residents also face unwanted crimes; therefore, Cuyahoga County collaboration with banks initiating a housing program while establishing profitable returns, and demolishing distressed properties would definitely, increase the county's value and decrease the abandon property epidemic.