[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

Not necessarily. An area doesn't always have to gentrify and push people out to improve. I know that's often the case, but it's not inevitable. There's a neighborhood in Chicago's South Side called (coincidentally) Bridgeport, that has experienced a revitalization of sorts without going from one extreme (severe urban decay) to another (over-gentrification). Back in 2014, researchers from U. of IL Chicago reviewed the trends of all 77 Chicago neighborhoods, ranking them into nine categories from "stable upper/middle class" to "severe declines". Of all the neighborhoods, only nine were gentrifying. While not considered one of these areas that was gentrifying, Bridgeport was considered "improving." That is to say, the neighborhood is on the upswing as it is becoming more integrated and desirable, without gouging longtime residents to the point where they can no longer afford to live there. A hard thing to pull off, but it can happen. I'm hoping we can see a similar pattern follow in Bridgeport, Connecticut. We'll see, I guess.

Maybe in Chicago but here in CT it's one way and one way only - gentrify and push people out. There is no other alternative in CT. It's the only way.

[New Englander]

https://www.ctdatahaven.org/reports/...nges-2010-2020

Some good data on Bridgeport on a neighborhood level.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by SteveM85

Maybe in Chicago but here in CT it's one way and one way only - gentrify and push people out. There is no other alternative in CT. It's the only way.

Well, no, it's NOT the only way, it's the chosen way. And Bridgeport is not Westport. It's not the Gold Coast, and it never will be. And I don't care how much they yuppify it. That city will never have the prestige of its western suburbs. That being the case, the city would be wise to clean up its brownfields, create a diversified housing stock, and explore new commercial opportunities.

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

Well, no, it's NOT the only way, it's the chosen way. And Bridgeport is not Westport. It's not the Gold Coast, and it never will be. And I don't care how much they yuppify it. That city will never have the prestige of its western suburbs. That being the case, the city would be wise to clean up its brownfields, create a diversified housing stock, and explore new commercial opportunities.

Diversified housing stock doesn't give the best returns and margins. If they decide to gentrify an undesirable neighborhood in Bridgeport they will push out the poors, that's the first order of business. They will not be invited to stay. That's how it works in CT by choice and that's how everyone wants it. These decisions are always final. There is no deviating from that. It's the way it is in CT and there isn't anything anyone can do about it.
Yes, everyone knows they can't turn Bridgeport into a leafy tony elite suburb.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by SteveM85

Diversified housing stock doesn't give the best returns and margins.

I'm sorry, but you cannot build nothing but overpriced, "luxury" units in the city. It's unrealistic to think that they will be able to find tenants to live there, no matter how many amenities they have. It doesn't matter if it's part of NYC metro, you're not gonna find people to live there for outrageous costs if the main benefit is a Metro North stop into the city. Especially if there are neighboring towns offering rentals at similar costs. And if they have kids, the city won't even be a consideration. The city is on the upswing, but it's not at a level now or in the imminent future where it's a place young people, especially those with children, want to live.

Originally Posted by SteveM85

If they decide to gentrify an undesirable neighborhood in Bridgeport they will push out the poors, that's the first order of business. They will not be invited to stay. That's how it works in CT by choice and that's how everyone wants it. These decisions are always final.

It is? Oh, this is news. I can name other cities in CT that actually do have diversified housing stocks. And for the reasons mentioned earlier, it's unrealistic to think that it's going to think Bridgeport will follow the path of Stamford or even Norwalk. It's not going to happen.

Originally Posted by SteveM85

There is no deviating from that. It's the way it is in CT and there isn't anything anyone can do about it.

Bull****. There's always something people can do about it. They have, and they should.

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

I'm sorry, but you cannot build nothing but overpriced, "luxury" units in the city. It's unrealistic to think that they will be able to find tenants to live there, no matter how many amenities they have. It doesn't matter if it's part of NYC metro, you're not gonna find people to live there for outrageous costs if the main benefit is a Metro North stop into the city. Especially if there are neighboring towns offering rentals at similar costs. And if they have kids, the city won't even be a consideration. The city is on the upswing, but it's not at a level now or in the imminent future where it's a place young people, especially those with children, want to live.



It is? Oh, this is news. I can name other cities in CT that actually do have diversified housing stocks. And for the reasons mentioned earlier, it's unrealistic to think that it's going to think Bridgeport will follow the path of Stamford or even Norwalk. It's not going to happen.



Bull****. There's always something people can do about it. They have, and they should.

I didn't mean that it will actually happen there, only that that's how it will go down if it does.
If demand for luxury units in Bridgeport suddenly happens then that's when gentrification will occur. Until then nothing will happen.
Stamford and Norwalk have tons of demand for diversified housing stock. From profitable 3K/month studio apartments to 500 and 800K average homes all the way up to multi $Ms priced homes. I don't think that's realistic for Bridgeport either. I would have to agree.
No one of any significance in CT will do anything about it because they don't care. they just don't. They're all in their leafy bubbles.
Rule number one in CT, the First Commandment - No one builds stuff for the lower incomes and poors.
As the popular saying goes, It is what it is.

[Abe_Lima]

Well… Bridgeport doesn’t have to be a leafy suburb. Shouldn’t the city instead well focus on… maybe being what it always has been. A cheap city, yes a beautiful yet very cheap American city. One most of its residents can still afford to live in without being priced out. Without the crime, a model American city! It’s kinda a wrong way to see it no? Plus, I’m terms of a city shutting out people, it’s long term residents… why improve the cities then? It just really makes so there might not be a solution. After all, cities are just buildings!?! They are just some man made… structures and bridges and stuff. Why would people improve Bridgeport. There will always so long as mankind continues to exist on this earth, be people with more means and with less of course. Those people, will need places to live, and contribute to the economy, an entire class of people. And cities well… should plan heavily plan for more affordable development in that sense. In a manner where developers use the newest cheap building methods (look up wooden skyscrapers in Milwaukee and a specific Vox video on why new developments look ugly, or so is the consensus by many). Bridgeport should, and really is in the position to make a genuine effort, to continue to be a working class town, while improving the city by taking in new development, meaning a better tax base, meaning better education for its residents and really figuring out a way for more to be done with less. It’s not impossible, LOOK AT JAPAN! With their school lunch system! Excellent! Brilliant! No system is perfect that is of course rue, but as all empires rise and fall, so to Bridgeport could rise and stay like that until generations late unforeseen falls lead it down, and the cycle goes on. As like Fairfield which lost population for decades after Bridgeport began to grow into an industrial powerhouse and tiny Fairfield remained agricultural, until bam! The 50s brought suburbanization and interstates! In short, all places are much the same, and the more Bridgeport improves, the more affordable housing should be built to ensure the population doesn’t get priced out and more people move in, specifically working class people as the housing stock diversity. In 1930 Bridgeport, was 32% foreign born. And today 29.9%. That doesn’t need to change.

[Abe_Lima]

Sorry if that was too… um far. My bad, and I understand this idea was coming from. Cities and suburbs are inherently different places. And it’s interesting as things adapt and social and changes in planning well… it’s just the social issues that since the 60s have kinda given these cities bad reps. I’m 16 so pls correct me if I’m wrong.

On the intersection of north and park and pequonnock.
Oh I’d like to share something that I’m working on… thoughts?

https://pueblasquaremasterplanbpt.weebly.com/

Who would I contact to get this going?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Abe_Lima

Sorry if that was too… um far. My bad, and I understand this idea was coming from. Cities and suburbs are inherently different places. And it’s interesting as things adapt and social and changes in planning well… it’s just the social issues that since the 60s have kinda given these cities bad reps. I’m 16 so pls correct me if I’m wrong.

On the intersection of north and park and pequonnock.
Oh I’d like to share something that I’m working on… thoughts?

https://pueblasquaremasterplanbpt.weebly.com/

Who would I contact to get this going?

You could start by getting those businesses and a City Council member to support and promote this. You could also try the City Engineer. Even better would be the Mayor. Good luck, Jay

[Abe_Lima]

Originally Posted by JayCT

You could start by getting those businesses and a City Council member to support and promote this. You could also try the City Engineer. Even better would be the Mayor. Good luck, Jay

This is great sir! Appreciate it! Thank you Mr. JayCT!