What sections are considered The "South Bronx"? (Paris: transplants, renting)

[Guywithacause]

I could not disagree more with Hustla. HOw can he possibly believe that over the last 30 years the Bronx has not improved and the changes I have mentioned are insignificant? He sees the glass half empty, I see it filling.....2 very different perspectives.

Clearly communities like Mott Haven, Melrose, Hunts Point were bombed out neighborhoods with nothing but rubble. City services like garbage service, fire depts, etc were discontinued and the area was left to shrink (depopulate). Since that time, billions of dollars have been spent rehabbing buildings, putting up new 2 and three family homes on formerly vacant/abandoned lots, city services were reinsterted, parks were cleaned up and developed, affordable housing has expanded to accomodate city workers, the borough continues to get greeners, and it is attracting significant commerical, residential, and infrastructure investment, with no signs of abating.

Or you can take Hustla's view and look at the glass as eternally half full: the new affordable housing is ugly, parks suck, crime is higher than average in the city, and there are many poor people. The choice is yours but we are both correct....the glass is half full or half empty..the difference is...I see it filling with new investment, businesses, homes, residents, and amenities.

What I, and many people see, is not a yuppified Bronx. We see a Bronx that has , and continues to significantly improve. You may call these changes insignificant, however I think any rational person can acknowledge the changes have had a significant impact on the area, with increasing rents, property values, investments, stability, and a much improved quality of life for its current and future residents. How else can you qualify significant improvement?

[Moth]

HOw can he possibly believe that over the last 30 years the Bronx has not improved and the changes I have mentioned are insignificant?

Perhaps its because 30 years ago neighborhoods that are now trashed were still rather nice. In 1977, most everything north of Fordham Road was still working or middle class. Now they either have or are steadily merging with the morass that is traditionally known as the South Bronx.

I admire your determination to participate in some kind of renaissaince up there. Nothing would be better than a resusitated Bronx. And patching up the more obvious signs of blight is a step in the right direction. But it does little to alter the fundamental reality up there- serious poverty. Putting poor people in better housing is nice, but it does not solve their condition.

It may happen. But it is going to require a sustained saturation of people willing to gentrify as well as scores of immigrants who will build the new, safe communities. It was also require a city government that is willing to demolish a lot of projects and move poor people elsewhere.

Quite a tall order. Still, I often fantasize about a Grand Concourse totally repaired and resembling 7th Avenue in Park Slope.

[Guywithacause]

I agree with your post Moth. However you have to start somewhere...and we are already past the mere patching up of obvious blight, with major investment and repositioning of the Bronx well under way. Furthermore, I am not "determined to participate in some sort of renassiance up there," I am merely giving the perspective of a lifelong resident as to the real and planned changes that have and will occur. I also agree that putting poor people in better housing is not an answer in and of itself, but it sure as heck is yet another improvement: better housing, aesthitically pleasing communities often lead to better attitudes, security, self-esteem, hope...

It is a difference of seeing an individual act like new housing for the lower classes and simply dismissing it as "it does not solve their condition" and thats it. Versus stepping back and seeing the numerous other improvements that together culminate into an overall substantial effect. Again...this is my experience and perspective....you may be suffering from an acute case of Hustla-itis: focusing on one thing and subsequently dismissing everything as pointless, a waste of time, and not the answer, so why bother, there is no hope.

I also agree that only time will tell. Many people/speculators/investors/businesses are laying their bets in the Bronx as we speak..and investment is increasign exponentially. It is currently in the beginning stages of transition....and nobody knows what the next 5-10 years will bring, however I believe it will reflect the future of the Bronx.

[Moth]

I never said there was no hope. I am simply saying that for the Bronx to morph into a place that is truly in demand, a lot of things need to happen. The Bronx from the river up to Woodlawn is slum after slum. Miles of them.

As for housing and the poor, most of those projects, when they were built, were nice. Most are modern high rises after all. However, the belief that giving a man a toilet and roof will lift him from poverty has gone the way of the dodo bird. Poverty is not a function of bad or good housing. Putting poor people in high rises salves the conscience but little else as its merely changing the backdrop.

[Guywithacause]

I agree that alot has to change in the Bronx in order for it to be a place that is "truly in demand." However, the Bronx has never been a place that has truly been in demand, as it has always been an affordable refuge for the city and new immigrants. I do not believe it will be (at least not in the next 20 years) a place that is truly in demand, that is not the plan for the Bronx, nor is the past or current development pushing for some sort of overrunning by stockbrokers, CEOs, and International Conglomerates.

I disagree that most projects when they were built were nice. They were nice in comparison to the tenements with 10 people to a room, no windows, and no indoor plumbing. These behemoths were built by crushing neighborhoods and splintering communities...though some were happily built over these horrendous tenements.

I agree that poverty is not solely a function of good or bad housing, and nobody believes that "giving a man a tiolet and a roof will lift him from poverty." However, I see you are still suffering from Hustla-itis: focusing on one action, and believing that it is not the answer so let's just ignore everything and forget it. Clearly it does not solve all of the city's problem's by putting the poor into better housing...however it is a starting point....and that was the only case I have made. Furthermore, it is only one part of all the different improvements that the city is making to improve the poor's condition, not to solve the problem of poverty. With the poor living like human beings...maybe they might act like human beings too huh? It's possible....and maybe others will want to come now that buildings are nicer, streets are cleaner, and neighborhoods are better maintianed? And that likely will bring money, and more investments, and jobs, and.....get it?

There are no guarantees, and I am stretching here, but the point is that the city is going down that road by putting up new housing, improving parks, greening the borough, allowing huge commercial developments to occur, etc.

[NooYowkur81]

What's all this talk about projects? I would say that most poor people in the Bronx live in regular 5 and 6 story apartment buildings. Yes there are projects but they are not the majority. Most of the stuff recently built is not in the form of high rise projects either.

[Guywithacause]

Agreed NooYowkur....but in certain area...those large projects seem like all there is.

[Moth]

With the poor living like human beings...maybe they might act like human beings too huh? It's possible....and maybe others will want to come now that buildings are nicer, streets are cleaner, and neighborhoods are better maintianed? And that likely will bring money, and more investments, and jobs, and.....get it?

Well, I do not want to disparage a person simply because they are poor and I am not saying you are either. However, for the Bronx to reach the state you describe, you will have to push those people out so that people of means have an incentive to live there. That's the cold, hard truth of the matter.

Its one thing to gentrify a seedy area that is relatively small and close to more prosperous areas- the East Village and LSE come to mind. But the Bronx is a very large area, virtually a city in its own right. To make such a large area civil again is going to require a superhuman effort and a lot of auspicious conditons that may or may not happen.

Its possible, yes. That is where I diverge from Hustla. But his descriptions of its present state are spot on.

[Guywithacause]

I do not dispute the accuracy of Hustla's posts...there is no doubt that he has witnessed all of those things and experiences, as have cops in Florida, Tennessee, Ohio, Massachusetts, Nebraska, etc.. However, I do not subscribe to his doom and gloom reports of NYC, or the Bronx...which is where we will always butt heads. He will always focus on the negative, whether it be because of his personal and professional experiences is moot, however I take a more reasonable and balanced approach.

Ultimately Moth, I agree that the only way to truly change the brough is to get rid of the projects. Period. Will that happen anytime soon? Unlikely...is it possible...I think it is, but not in the immediate future.

That being said, the development that is occuring, and the improvements being made, are in spite of the obvious problems. The goal is not to gentrify to a LES, East Village (which is the LES..there is no East Village anymore than there is a Clinton.) standard, it is to improve the Bronx...that's it...quite simple. The intentions of the politicians, bureacrats, investors, speculators, etc is not to clear the way for the CEOs, yuppies, and hippies...but to lay the groundwork for a healthier economy, more diverse population, cleaner streets, sorely needed amenities, and just an overall higher quality of life...which does not equate to Nobu and Armani opening in 3 years.

The goals I have outlined (and the city ascribes to) are achievable and happening, albeit one step at a time, and the problems are being addressed from a variety of angles, not just better housing.

[Elvira Black]

The apts on the Grand Concourse (designed after the Champs Elysees in Paris, BTW) are all in all still structurally sound ( a lot better than some of the cheap, newer NYC construction), and many have gorgeous Art Deco detailing. Pre war can be very desirable (think Upper West Side), and people on this forum who used to live in the Bronx "back in the day" have very fond memories of how wonderful it used to be. When the El (subway) was built early in the last century, lots of folks moved from cramped LES tenements to apts which had then-rare amenities and were much more livable. People who could afford it were considered fairly "well off." There were canopies, doormen, fancy lobbies, etc. The basic "shell" is still there so it's an easy step to turning some of these buildings to coops.