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.
I think it's more that 1) the South Bronx was until recently just that bad and 2) the South Bronx is more uniform in safety (or crime for that matter) than Brooklyn, if that makes any sense. So while East New York and Brownsville are the worst, Brooklyn is patchier safety-wise.
I think a lot of street criminals are drawn to Brooklyn by all the wealthy people who have moved there the past 10 years....
It's kind of hard to compare NYC murder statistics to the rest of the country due to the way the statistics are gathered, from what I understand. Somebody on here (I think it was Anon1) explained it to me once that the way it works now is that if there's a gang shootout or something and 4 people die, it used to be considered 4 separate homicides, whereas now it's considered "1 incident", so it counts as 1 and not 4.
I don't know if that's really how it works or not, but it sure would bring the averages down and make certain places look safer on paper than they really are.
It's kind of hard to compare NYC murder statistics to the rest of the country due to the way the statistics are gathered, from what I understand. Somebody on here (I think it was Anon1) explained it to me once that the way it works now is that if there's a gang shootout or something and 4 people die, it used to be considered 4 separate homicides, whereas now it's considered "1 incident", so it counts as 1 and not 4.
I don't know if that's really how it works or not, but it sure would bring the averages down and make certain places look safer on paper than they really are.
Please don't misquote me... I do remember the conversation but while I do not remember what I said exactly, I know it wasn't that... That being said, I do feel that the way they gauge crime statistics across the board whether in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, etc. is a little off... This cite has become super sensitive in recent months though so out of fear of starting another pointless debate about compstat i'll just leave it at that...
The Bronx has gone through significant gentrification and urban renewal. Many working people have moved into new or renovated apartments in the borough's most blighted neighborhoods. Places that were once only home to the poorest of the poor. There is a lot more income diversity, even in the South Bronx.
The Bronx has and is still mostly improving. NYC in general is has been going through a renaissance.
However, on the flipside I will mention that violent crime has only become even more concentrated in certsin areas, among certain demographics.
Gentrification is occuring in the Bronx. Why is this so hard to understand. Some members of this board really under estimate the change in certain districts. When you have professionals moving into communities with many times the average income, that's gentrification. There is plenty of private development in the South Bronx. New businesses included too.
As for crime, citywide, even borough wide stats are useless. Who cares about a borough wide stats if say you live in the Mott Haven Houses which see well above average rates of violent crime. The stats in Riverdale don't mean $ hit to those people. The reality is there are a lot more disparities among certain demographics. More decent places to live, but the same problems in certain communities. The Bronx overall has improved though, good for the Bronx.
To have "gentfication", you need GENTRY! No "gentry", no gentrification.
Not to mention the fact that Gentrification and Urban Renewal are POLAR OPPOSITES!!
Urban Renewal, by definition, is government intervention into the market. Government designed, government financed, and normally follows some idiotic architectural *theory*.
Urban Renewal is foisted upon the people from on high. Think Robert Moses.
Gentrification, by definition, and action, is a 'grass roots' *organic* effort by PRIVATE individuals.
Gentrification emanates from and is financed by those who benefit from it. Think all those Transplants moving into Harlem, privately financing purchase and renovation, without benefit of government loans or guarantees; and, the asthetic is of an organic rather than *designed* nature.
The two are politically juxtaposed.
Gentrification normally succeeds in transformation. Urban Renewal, generally, fails in its grandiose ambition of transformation.
Gentrification is Capitalism at work. Urban Renewal is Socialism!
Not sure I agree with your premise or pehaps I'm missing your point. I moved to the Bronx and I am a gay white professional. In my new neighborhood I see people like me walking around and getting off the train from Manhattan. I would say that I am "gentrifying" my new neighborhood based on your definition.
I read the newspapers and several recent articles in the NY Times (all of which have been posted on this blog) have described changes that are occurring and have occured in several Bronx neighborhoods that would meet your definitions of both gentrification and urban renewal.
Do you disagree with the position that Bronx neighborhoods are improving or just with the description of the improvement as gentrification vs. urban renewal?
^-I want to add that urban renewal policies have lead to Bronx gentrification. See the zoning changes in Melrose and Port Morris or the landmark district of the lower Grand Concourse and the historic townhouses of Mott Haven. The rise in higher income earners in say Melrose has changed the face of the neighborhood. The area was once dirt poor, now you see more professionals like teachers, firefighters, even doctors then ever before. It's gentrification.
To have "gentfication", you need GENTRY! No "gentry", no gentrification.
Not to mention the fact that Gentrification and Urban Renewal are POLAR OPPOSITES!!
Urban Renewal, by definition, is government intervention into the market. Government designed, government financed, and normally follows some idiotic architectural *theory*.
Urban Renewal is foisted upon the people from on high. Think Robert Moses.
Gentrification, by definition, and action, is a 'grass roots' *organic* effort by PRIVATE individuals.
Gentrification emanates from and is financed by those who benefit from it. Think all those Transplants moving into Harlem, privately financing purchase and renovation, without benefit of government loans or guarantees; and, the asthetic is of an organic rather than *designed* nature.
The two are politically juxtaposed.
Gentrification normally succeeds in transformation. Urban Renewal, generally, fails in its grandiose ambition of transformation.
Gentrification is Capitalism at work. Urban Renewal is Socialism!
Then by your definition for example South Bronx is not undergoing gentrification but urban renewal because almost all of the new housing are governmentally assisted developments.
Then by your definition for example South Bronx is not undergoing gentrification but urban renewal because almost all of the new housing are governmentally assisted developments.
Forget the South Bronx.Most of the housing developments( maybe all) built in anywhere in NYC are governmentally assisted in one way or another, including giant tax abatements given to multi million dollar Manhattan condos.Many multi millionaires like Derek Jeter are getting these kinds of government subsidies.
"The beneficiaries of the 421-a program aren’t always the lower- and middle-income families intended by the original lawmakers, however. According to a recent article in the New York Post following an investigation of city tax records, designer Calvin Klein gets a $134,450 annual tax break on his Richard Meier-built Perry Street penthouse. Yankee shortstop Derek Jeter saves $130,000 a year on his $4 million Trump World Tower apartment, and actress Natalie Portman saves $26,300 annually on her $5.8 million condo."
Forget the South Bronx.Most of the housing developments( maybe all) built in anywhere in NYC are governmentally assisted in one way or another, including giant tax abatements given to multi million dollar Manhattan condos.Many multi millionaires like Derek Jeter are getting these kinds of government subsidies.
"The beneficiaries of the 421-a program aren’t always the lower- and middle-income families intended by the original lawmakers, however. According to a recent article in the New York Post following an investigation of city tax records, designer Calvin Klein gets a $134,450 annual tax break on his Richard Meier-built Perry Street penthouse. Yankee shortstop Derek Jeter saves $130,000 a year on his $4 million Trump World Tower apartment, and actress Natalie Portman saves $26,300 annually on her $5.8 million condo."
Excellent point. Based on the OP above, is this "urban renewal" as well?
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.