Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For the record. Gentrification is not all about the %1 highest earners. Anyone with a stable job with an income greater then the surrounding community, causing waves of revitalization can be considered a gentrifier. Gentrifiers can be of any race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, age, or gender.
High poverty, dense, urban communities are not good for anyone, especially the residents. You need a mixture of incomes. If you really want to combat displacement educate and become an activist in favor of high density development with mixed income requirements. Go to your community planning boards and support dense, pedestrian centric development. The taller the building, the more units, the more poor that can be subsidized.
You tell me which you prefer?
http://www.observer.com/files/2011/09/Via_Verde_03.jpg (broken link)
The Via Verde mixed income housing development on the left. Zero parking spaces included, pedestrian oriented (A number of bus and subway lines within walking distance), solar panels, smoking ban, sun shades, community gardens. The Bronxchester NYCHA development on the right. High percentage of households in poverty, and numerous social issues.
via verde has me in awe. i witnessed the greenery coming in by trucks, and the building is amazing. the development itself can reach its maximum potential and sustainability if the management screens, and stays on top of the tenants whom are living, and about to move in. i don't like the fact that it's built directly across the street from a project though. this practically screams from the rooftops the building, development looking the way it is, wont maintain.
Via Verde is affordable housing done right. This is what NYC needs.
I feel the NYCHA, although good intentioned, causes more harm then good. It's time for the city to:
-Start converting these outdated, horribly maintained, residential structures into mixed income developments. If they are even salvageable. Personally, I would like to see them demolished.
-Increase the density within superblocks by constructing new Green, transit/pedestrian oriented apartment buildings. The demand is there.
-Reestablish the neighborhood street grids.
-Create ground floor retail.
That or continue to pump funds into a failing system that only encourages income isolation and resulting social problems. Gentrification can (and will) save neighborhoods like the South Bronx. History shows us that ghettos do no good for anyone.
(Though I am not a fan of the nearby 90's era ugly townhouses with included driveways. Already eyesores, unnecessary to include driveways. Why not push to sidewalk to maintain neighborhood street wall and enhanced shared public spaces out back.)
Last edited by nykiddo718718; 03-08-2012 at 01:56 AM..
(Though I am not a fan of the nearby 90's era ugly townhouses with included driveways. Already eyesores, unnecessary to include driveways. Why not push to sidewalk to maintain neighborhood street wall and enhanced shared public spaces out back.)
Rich people don't do anything cool. They get to the top and they aren't hungry anymore.
Discuss.
On the other hand, occasionally it's a good thing when people move into a neighborhood and all of a sudden there are services and conveniences that weren't available before.
By the way, make sure you never do anything that might wind up making you rich...or you know just what kinds of snide things people will be saying about you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.