4 ms·

> loads of new restaurants Who is going to staff those restaurants (and other low-wage services) when the housing prices are so high that it isn't realisticall

by pdkl95 11y ago

> loads of new restaurants Who is going to staff those restaurants (and other low-wage services) when the housing prices are so high that it isn't realistically possible to find a rent (forget a mortgage) low enough to be affordable for someone making those low wages? This is made worse in places like south-bay/SF area where the private busing and 2nd/"weekend" apartments further distort local taxing/etc and drive prices up even further. > I don't know how many people have been forced out due to the gentrification. That depends on a lot, but when money is involved, there are lots of creative ways people can be forced out. Zoning laws and other "fees" are common. If renting is involved, buying out the landlord and raising the rates on the tenants (sometimes to unreasonable levels designed to not be paid) is a popular move. > Generally, this seems to me like a great example of gentrification. From your description, that sounds like an example of how a town or city should be maintained. There is a difference between rising housing prices from normal inflation and gentrification.

alistairSH 11y ago
The US also has additional "baggage" that comes from it's past racial problems. I live near DC. Gentrification in the city is almost always wealthy whites displacing poor blacks. There is very much an us-vs-them feeling among those that are being displaced. One ridiculous effect of the gentrification... Historically black churches in the downtown areas now have congregations that have been displaced and commute from the suburbs to attend services. This causes all sorts of problems with parking that didn't exist when the congregation lived in the neighborhood. This in turn causes conflict with new residents, who want to add bike lanes. The congregation doesn't like that because it would reduce on-street parking.
- liotier 11y ago
  > new residents, who want to add bike lanes. The congregation doesn't like that because it would reduce on-street parking. One can easily imagine the bike lanes being used as stealth exclusionary devices, which depresses me as I would rather see them as empowering people through better urban transportation.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  > displacing poor blacks That would be "redlining", another very despicable tactic used to keep cities segregated. If you haven't read it, Ta-Nehisi Coates impressive essay on the subject is worth a read. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case...
  - forkandwait 11y ago
    No, redlining is something different (not loaning money), though very messed up.
    - pdkl95 11y ago
      As the essay I linked to discusses, there are more aspects to redlining than just loans (though that is where the practice gets its name). In any case, it's all part of the same racist attempts to keep people segregated. At least in the USA, you can't really separate gentrification, redlining, and other housing problems.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  It seems a modicum of regulatory creativity would result in a marvelous new invention: a bike lane that is open to parking on Sunday mornings. This would inconvenience approximately zero cyclists, since Sunday morning is a time of low traffic.
  - angdis 11y ago
    That is exactly what was done in Philadelphia on Pine and Spruce streets. These are East-West bike lane "arterials" that allow parking on Sundays.
  - mcv 11y ago
    Except for people who ride a bike to church.
    - jessaustin 11y ago
      As observed above, they will face very little traffic, because most commuters are godless heathens who are snug in their beds on Sunday morning. There is nothing wrong with travelling by bicycle in the street in general, but certainly even less wrong with doing so near a church on Sunday morning. Bike lanes with no nearby churches wouldn't have this special rule.
- commandar 11y ago
  This is very much what's happening in Atlanta right now. The city was a pretty extreme example of white flight for much of the 20th century, and the gentrification process over the past couple of decades has been just as extreme. As a result, you have expensive condos going up in historically black neighborhoods like the Old Fourth Ward (where MLK Jr. grew up).
mcv 11y ago
I suppose there's a big difference between intentionally driving people out to replace them, and it being an unintentional side effect of all sorts of stuff that's going on. It was my impression that the problems with gentrification are generally of the second type, but your comment makes it sound like this is being done intentionally. In any case, in Amsterdam there's a pretty hard limit to how much rent can be increased, particularly for existing tenants. If landlords are free to set rent to whatever they like, it's easy to see how that could lead to all sorts of terrible situations. In any case, I think a mixed neighbourhood like the one I live in is pretty much the ideal. The mix of high and low incomes means there's money to pay for jobs in shops and restaurants, and people to fill those jobs. According to the article, it also means that it's easier for those at the bottom to find better jobs. Of course attempts to intentionally drive people away are terrible and should be stopped, but my impression was that gentrification was more subtle than that.
- maxsilver 11y ago
  > I suppose there's a big difference between intentionally driving people out to replace them, and it being an unintentional side effect of all sorts of stuff that's going on. It was my impression that the problems with gentrification are generally of the second type, but your comment makes it sound like this is being done intentionally. In some neighborhoods, it truly is a campaign to drive out the existing residents ("orchestrated a campaign of 'polite harassment' / "bought out tenants apartments from their landlords") http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/04/neighbors_who_fought_to_reclai.html http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/04/nei...
- cuillevel3 11y ago
  I remember an article about redlining in Rotterdam, but this was in the nineties.
- pc86 11y ago
  > If landlords are free to set rent to whatever they like, it's easy to see how that could lead to all sorts of terrible situations. No, it's not. I'm not a landlord, but the logic is pretty simple: if the market rate is $1k/mo and I charge twice that, nobody will sign a lease and I make $0. If I charge $1,250 I might very well get someone. Why should I be forced to rent for $1k or $1,050 or something just because last year the person happened to be paying me $1,000/mo? There should be plenty of notice if a landlord intends to raise the rent on an existing tenant (I don't think even 6 months is onerous on the landlord), but if I want to double rent that should be my prerogative. To be clear, doubling someone's rent to $2k because they're a minority so they leave then renting to someone else for $1,100 who isn't a minority is a specific thing[0], and it is and should be illegal (in the US). I'm not talking about that. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

by pdkl95 11y ago

alistairSH 11y ago

The US also has additional "baggage" that comes from it's past racial problems. I live near DC. Gentrification in the city is almost always wealthy whites displacing poor blacks. There is very much an us-vs-them feeling among those that are being displaced. One ridiculous effect of the gentrification... Historically black churches in the downtown areas now have congregations that have been displaced and commute from the suburbs to attend services. This causes all sorts of problems with parking that didn't exist when the congregation lived in the neighborhood. This in turn causes conflict with new residents, who want to add bike lanes. The congregation doesn't like that because it would reduce on-street parking.

liotier 11y ago
> new residents, who want to add bike lanes. The congregation doesn't like that because it would reduce on-street parking. One can easily imagine the bike lanes being used as stealth exclusionary devices, which depresses me as I would rather see them as empowering people through better urban transportation.
pdkl95 11y ago
> displacing poor blacks That would be "redlining", another very despicable tactic used to keep cities segregated. If you haven't read it, Ta-Nehisi Coates impressive essay on the subject is worth a read. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case...
- forkandwait 11y ago
  No, redlining is something different (not loaning money), though very messed up.
  - pdkl95 11y ago
    As the essay I linked to discusses, there are more aspects to redlining than just loans (though that is where the practice gets its name). In any case, it's all part of the same racist attempts to keep people segregated. At least in the USA, you can't really separate gentrification, redlining, and other housing problems.
jessaustin 11y ago
It seems a modicum of regulatory creativity would result in a marvelous new invention: a bike lane that is open to parking on Sunday mornings. This would inconvenience approximately zero cyclists, since Sunday morning is a time of low traffic.
- angdis 11y ago
  That is exactly what was done in Philadelphia on Pine and Spruce streets. These are East-West bike lane "arterials" that allow parking on Sundays.
- mcv 11y ago
  Except for people who ride a bike to church.
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    As observed above, they will face very little traffic, because most commuters are godless heathens who are snug in their beds on Sunday morning. There is nothing wrong with travelling by bicycle in the street in general, but certainly even less wrong with doing so near a church on Sunday morning. Bike lanes with no nearby churches wouldn't have this special rule.
commandar 11y ago
This is very much what's happening in Atlanta right now. The city was a pretty extreme example of white flight for much of the 20th century, and the gentrification process over the past couple of decades has been just as extreme. As a result, you have expensive condos going up in historically black neighborhoods like the Old Fourth Ward (where MLK Jr. grew up).

mcv 11y ago

I suppose there's a big difference between intentionally driving people out to replace them, and it being an unintentional side effect of all sorts of stuff that's going on. It was my impression that the problems with gentrification are generally of the second type, but your comment makes it sound like this is being done intentionally. In any case, in Amsterdam there's a pretty hard limit to how much rent can be increased, particularly for existing tenants. If landlords are free to set rent to whatever they like, it's easy to see how that could lead to all sorts of terrible situations. In any case, I think a mixed neighbourhood like the one I live in is pretty much the ideal. The mix of high and low incomes means there's money to pay for jobs in shops and restaurants, and people to fill those jobs. According to the article, it also means that it's easier for those at the bottom to find better jobs. Of course attempts to intentionally drive people away are terrible and should be stopped, but my impression was that gentrification was more subtle than that.

maxsilver 11y ago
> I suppose there's a big difference between intentionally driving people out to replace them, and it being an unintentional side effect of all sorts of stuff that's going on. It was my impression that the problems with gentrification are generally of the second type, but your comment makes it sound like this is being done intentionally. In some neighborhoods, it truly is a campaign to drive out the existing residents ("orchestrated a campaign of 'polite harassment' / "bought out tenants apartments from their landlords") http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/04/neighbors_who_fought_to_reclai.html http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/04/nei...
cuillevel3 11y ago
I remember an article about redlining in Rotterdam, but this was in the nineties.
pc86 11y ago
> If landlords are free to set rent to whatever they like, it's easy to see how that could lead to all sorts of terrible situations. No, it's not. I'm not a landlord, but the logic is pretty simple: if the market rate is $1k/mo and I charge twice that, nobody will sign a lease and I make $0. If I charge $1,250 I might very well get someone. Why should I be forced to rent for $1k or $1,050 or something just because last year the person happened to be paying me $1,000/mo? There should be plenty of notice if a landlord intends to raise the rent on an existing tenant (I don't think even 6 months is onerous on the landlord), but if I want to double rent that should be my prerogative. To be clear, doubling someone's rent to $2k because they're a minority so they leave then renting to someone else for $1,100 who isn't a minority is a specific thing[0], and it is and should be illegal (in the US). I'm not talking about that. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining