Gentrification

[AriPVD]

The race issue that concerns me is that we seem to have a lot of white people at odds with each other over what is best for a neighborhood that is majority minority (as the enitre city is if I'm not mistaken). A lot of white people crying foul over the possibility of a change of demographics in an area. Has anyone attempted to give a voice to the non-white, immigrant, and low-income people they claim to represent?

There I said it.

I've been wondering the same thing myself. I haven't seen many of the truly disadvantaged people (i.e. the people who lived there before the artists, et al moved in) speaking up. I know they're politically disenfranchised, too busy scraping together a living to protest, etc etc, but I'd still like to be sure that the very vocal artists and activists represent their true interests. I'd wager (lightning rod, please) that most of the low-income people (people not low-income by choice like many artists and activists) who live in Olneyville would move out in a second if given the chance to have a green lawn, SUV and an address in Cranston or East Greenwich.

P.S. I have no empircal or even anecdotal evidence on that...just throwing out some ideas.

[jencoleslaw]

The race issue that concerns me is that we seem to have a lot of white people at odds with each other over what is best for a neighborhood that is majority minority (as the enitre city is if I'm not mistaken). A lot of white people crying foul over the possibility of a change of demographics in an area. Has anyone attempted to give a voice to the non-white, immigrant, and low-income people they claim to represent?

There I said it.

We have a few latino businessmen who come to every CPC meeting and hearing about anything that happens in that neighborhood to voice their opinions. And their opinions are often the same as the artists--worried about their businesses, feeling like they are being pressured out of the neighborhood and worried about housing costs....But don't forget it isn't just the immigrant and artist population that is worried about gentrification in the Valley neighborhood and Olneyville--i thought the local tradesmen were very well spoken about the importance of keeping some industry in the city...

and i remember at some point that the fastest fleeing demographic in Providence was middle class minority families. But don't ask me where i know that from because i honestly can't tell you, so it might not be right.

[basachs]

I know they're politically disenfranchised, too busy scraping together a living to protest, etc etc, but I'd still like to be sure that the very vocal artists and activists represent their true interests.

A lot of folks that fall into this category had no problem protesting yesterday. Or the immigration rally a few weeks before at Dexter Park. When issues are important enough to anyone, regardless of political, economical, and cultural stumbling blocks, people protest.

I'd wager (lightning rod, please) that most of the low-income people (people not low-income by choice like many artists and activists) who live in Olneyville would move out in a second if given the chance to have a green lawn, SUV and an address in Cranston or East Greenwich.

P.S. I have no empircal or even anecdotal evidence on that...just throwing out some ideas.

This echoes what the famous Armory leasing agent at Rising Sun said. That most of the people they offer to buy out are extremely happy. I am not at all surprised.

In general we put a lot of stock in the voices of 10 or even 20 individuals. We have to remember that there are a lot more people than that who have an opinion on this. It is a documented social phenomenon that it takes a relative few, to convince people that a majority believes unwaveringly in a concept.

[eltron]

Here is some very interesting news from our Big Brother to the north:

Menino pushes to increase housing - The Boston Globe

[eltron]

This echoes what the famous Armory leasing agent at Rising Sun said. That most of the people they offer to buy out are extremely happy. I am not at all surprised.

Living and working in majority minority and lower-income neighborhoods, I can tell you unequivically that this is untrue.

Just because minorities are not posting on internet blogs and getting soundbites in the Projo or channel 12 does not signify that they are not concerned about these very things.

There are many, many organizations representing minorities and lower-income individuals that are very concerned about gentrification and all the same stuff y'all harp about on this board. You know, trash in their driveways, rats, safe parks for their kids, traffic, parking on the street, and on and on.

Well, maybe not the design of parcel 12...but you get the point.

[jencoleslaw]

and just because landlords are happy as clams at high tide with unloading their buildings doesn't mean the three families that live there get any net benefit of that sale. In fact, one could easily say that getting evicted, or having their rent go up is actually a disadvantage.

[AriPVD]

Living and working in majority minority and lower-income neighborhoods, I can tell you unequivically that this is untrue.

Good to hear. Wanted some "on the ground" intelligence. I do stand by my previous comments however, if only for conversational stimulus.

Here is some very interesting news from our Big Brother to the north:

Menino pushes to increase housing - The Boston Globe

Interesting article but we must be careful not to compare ourselves to other cities, especially Boston, New York, Montgomery County in MD and Orange County in CA. I have heard presentations on I.Z. and affordable housing comparing Providence to these markets. Absolutey dishonest, untrue and unfair. We are much more closely aligned with the Worcester, Hartford and Omaha metros than Boston or New York.

[runawayjim]

There are many, many organizations representing minorities and lower-income individuals that are very concerned about gentrification and all the same stuff y'all harp about on this board. You know, trash in their driveways, rats, safe parks for their kids, traffic, parking on the street, and on and on.

then why are the dirtiest neighborhoods those that house mostly minorities and lower-income people? if they really cared about their neighborhood and wanted their voice to mean something, why don't they start locally and clean up the place? just because they don't own the house they live in doesn't mean they don't have to pick up the trash in the neighborhood or start a neighborhood watch to help prevent crime.

[jencoleslaw]

then why are the dirtiest neighborhoods those that house mostly minorities and lower-income people? if they really cared about their neighborhood and wanted their voice to mean something, why don't they start locally and clean up the place? just because they don't own the house they live in doesn't mean they don't have to pick up the trash in the neighborhood or start a neighborhood watch to help prevent crime.

i don't want to get tarred with the same brush here, but i have honestly often wondered the same thing. And i work in some of the most filthy neighborhoods in PVD and i just look around and say "doesn't anyone give a sh*t about where they live?--Why should i care if they don't?" And then i go ahead and plant trees anyway but frankly i still care even if they don't.

[runawayjim]

i don't want to get tarred with the same brush here, but i have honestly often wondered the same thing. And i work in some of the most filthy neighborhoods in PVD and i just look around and say "doesn't anyone give a sh*t about where they live?--Why should i care if they don't?" And then i go ahead and plant trees anyway but frankly i still care even if they don't.

i don't think we'll catch too much crap for thinking this... it's a real problem in my opinion. actions truly do speak louder than words in many cases. people can sit there and say they want the best for their neighborhood all the way. but if the neighborhood looks like crap because they can't take some time to pick up trash, rake leaves, shovel snow, etc (all simple things), why should anyone believe that they really want the best and really care?

of course we still care even if they don't. i don't think we'd be posting here (or planting trees) if that wasn't true. i make sure my home looks decent and i don't even own it. i shovel snow in the winter and make it possible for people to walk down the sidewalk without having to walk in the street or climb through snow piles. it makes it much more pleasant for me knowing that the area around my home looks nice.

[basachs]

Living and working in majority minority and lower-income neighborhoods, I can tell you unequivically that this is untrue.

Just because minorities are not posting on internet blogs and getting soundbites in the Projo or channel 12 does not signify that they are not concerned about these very things.

There are many, many organizations representing minorities and lower-income individuals that are very concerned about gentrification and all the same stuff y'all harp about on this board. You know, trash in their driveways, rats, safe parks for their kids, traffic, parking on the street, and on and on.

Well, maybe not the design of parcel 12...but you get the point.

I dont exactly live on Blackstone Blvd. I live in the Armory and there are plenty of streets like the one you describe still in this neighborhood. I live on a street that has a variety of houses, some totally renovated, some not.

My neighbors is one house that is not. Yet, he takes extremely meticulous care of his property. It is clean and kept up as best he can. No reason why others cant do the same.

I am sure there are plenty of organization representing minorities that care. I know of a lot actually. Just as these exist, so do people who would love to sell their house to a developer for 300k. It all goes back to what I was saying about how there are a lot of people and a lot of opinions.

[basachs]

and just because landlords are happy as clams at high tide with unloading their buildings doesn't mean the three families that live there get any net benefit of that sale. In fact, one could easily say that getting evicted, or having their rent go up is actually a disadvantage.

Now that is something over which anyone who rents has limited control over as has been spoken about before on this board.

[Cotuit]

What do the business owners outside of ALCO feel about gentrification? Surely the hardware store in Olneyville Square would be happy for some more homeowners in the area. The area immediately around ALCO doesn't have much in the way of retail businesses, so the influx of residents doesn't really help any retailers. But more residents on Valley Street at and near Rising Sun should translate into more business for local retailers in Olneyville Square. It should lead to vacant storefronts filling. More businesses bring more shoppers... There's always the threat of runaway gentrification of the local businesses, the local coffee shop gives way to Starbucks, the local chicken house gives way to KFC... But business owners with stong business should benefit from new residents, especially new residents with disposable income.

[eltron]

Good to hear. Wanted some "on the ground" intelligence. I do stand by my previous comments however, if only for conversational stimulus.

Interesting article but we must be careful not to compare ourselves to other cities, especially Boston, New York, Montgomery County in MD and Orange County in CA. I have heard presentations on I.Z. and affordable housing comparing Providence to these markets. Absolutey dishonest, untrue and unfair. We are much more closely aligned with the Worcester, Hartford and Omaha metros than Boston or New York.

How 'bout Madison, WI? As Garris can attest, Madison is very similar to Providence, and has quite the effective inclusionary zoning ordinance. Or Cambridge and Somerville, which together has almost exactly the same population as Providence, and very effective inclusionary zoning ordinances. Boulder? almost every city in California? Hoboken, NJ? If not Omaha, how about Lincoln, Nebraska? Worcester is working on implementing inclusionary zoning...

there are HUNDREDS if not thousands of communities, all sorts of communities, that already have inclusionary zoning on the books. While I see your point about not getting too close in comparisons to Boston or New York, I think Providence should be on the forefront of progressive policy, not the third or fourth wave.

[Jerry2]

then why are the dirtiest neighborhoods those that house mostly minorities and lower-income people? if they really cared about their neighborhood and wanted their voice to mean something, why don't they start locally and clean up the place? just because they don't own the house they live in doesn't mean they don't have to pick up the trash in the neighborhood or start a neighborhood watch to help prevent crime.

Well,

The Valley neighborhood and many of the areas around Providence are populated by immigrants, mainly hispanics. ( mostly illegal..see Coffee House thread) They come from third world countries like Dominican Republic, Mexico, and Guatemala. These countries are poor, run-down, and trash is all over the streets in the cities. Sanitary water is a commodity.When they come here, the majority of them don't care because anyting a step up is acceptable. As of the recent population estimate, 40% of the city is hispanic while 17% is other. The "other " is mostly likely hispanics or other third-world inmmigrants( Cape Verdeans) who couldn't read or understand the forms to fill this out. Again, they argue that they have "assimilated" into our culture quite well. That's another topic....

[BJE]

Newly developed housing costs what it costs due to a variety of factors, including the availability and cost of developable property, the cost of design and development, and the cost of construction. To make housing less expensive, you need to reduce those costs. Cumpulsary "afforable housing" statutes do NOTHING to reduce those costs, so how can they possibly produce affordable units?

The answer is that they distort the housing market, and push the price of "market-rate" units up to account for the loss associated with building and selling subsidized units. Wealthier buyers are directly subsidizing the buyers of the affordable units. Now, one could make the argument that the wealthier buyers are doing so willingly, but if ALL municipalities had affordable housing statutes, and the ENTIRE housing market gets distorted as a result (and this is the current trend), then those "market-rate" buyers have little choice but to subsidize. How is that justified? Can anyone tell me why someone of "low-income" DESERVES a discount at the expense of other buyers? Arguably, as others have pointed out on this thread, someone earning $25K/yr may be a dedicated, hard worker, as can be someone making $50K/yr. But the limits of what you can afford are limited by your income -- that's capitalism plain and simple.

If the goal truly were to make housing more affordable (via government action), then communities could adjust zoning regulations to allow greater density, modify building and fire codes to allow less expensive construction, reduce property taxes to reduce the cost of owning real property, etc. "Affordable housing" legislation is nothing more than forcing developers to steal from one class of people to give it to another.

BJE

[HartfordTycoon]

then why are the dirtiest neighborhoods those that house mostly minorities and lower-income people? if they really cared about their neighborhood and wanted their voice to mean something, why don't they start locally and clean up the place? just because they don't own the house they live in doesn't mean they don't have to pick up the trash in the neighborhood or start a neighborhood watch to help prevent crime.

Many people in these communities are un- or undereducated and un- or underemployed. Not gonna go into why that is right now, but with that said they do not share the values of middle class people with stability in their lives. Their lives are too chaotic to care about litter and the landlords are deplorable in most poor communities, it goes back to the broken windows theory. They have grown up in substandard conditions so they do not expect what you expect, especially not from a neighborhood or area that has been messed up for as long as they can remember. It is however a gross exaggeration to act like everyone in the ghetto acts or behaves the same. Don't act like this is a minority issue. Read your history, slums are dirty that's part of the definition. They have been dirty since the early 20th century and before when they were filled with poor white Americans and European Immigrants. Have you seen gangs of New York? To a lesser degree it was like that in Hartford, Boston, and Providence as well as all other industrialized cities. It's part of being poor living in the slum and it affects your mentality in ways that suburbanites from well off homes just don't get and can't get. Am I excusing it, no. My father yells at people all of the time for littering and I feel the same way. I bet if the properties were fixed up by the owners and the city cleaned regurlarly it would change things. Also don't forget that the shear density of urban neighborhoods will cause them to be dirtier than suburban ones where it's one family to a housing lot. In the ghetto its more like 3-10 families per housing lot.

[AriPVD]

If the goal truly were to make housing more affordable (via government action), then communities could adjust zoning regulations to allow greater density, modify building and fire codes to allow less expensive construction, reduce property taxes to reduce the cost of owning real property, etc. "Affordable housing" legislation is nothing more than forcing developers to steal from one class of people to give it to another.

BJE

A voice of reason from above!

[runawayjim]

Many people in these communities are un- or undereducated and un- or underemployed. Not gonna go into why that is right now, but with that said they do not share the values of middle class people with stability in their lives. Their lives are too chaotic to care about litter and the landlords are deplorable in most poor communities, it goes back to the broken windows theory. They have grown up in substandard conditions so they do not expect what you expect, especially not from a neighborhood or area that has been messed up for as long as they can remember. It is however a gross exaggeration to act like everyone in the ghetto acts or behaves the same. Don't act like this is a minority issue. Read your history, slums are dirty that's part of the definition. They have been dirty since the early 20th century and before when they were filled with poor white Americans and European Immigrants. Have you seen gangs of New York? To a lesser degree it was like that in Hartford, Boston, and Providence as well as all other industrialized cities. It's part of being poor living in the slum and it affects your mentality in ways that suburbanites from well off homes just don't get and can't get. Am I excusing it, no. My father yells at people all of the time for littering and I feel the same way. I bet if the properties were fixed up by the owners and the city cleaned regurlarly it would change things. Also don't forget that the shear density of urban neighborhoods will cause them to be dirtier than suburban ones where it's one family to a housing lot. In the ghetto its more like 3-10 families per housing lot.

i never said it was a minority issue or that everyone in the ghetto acts teh same or that it's a low-income issue. i said that those areas where there are a lot of minorities or low-income people tend to be teh ghettos and tend to be dirty.

if even one of those 3-10 families took an hour a week to clean up their housing lot, the neighborhood would look beautiful. they don't have neighborhood pride. they have yet to prove their care about their neighborhood. and i undersatnd that they've come to accept dirtiness and don't have the same expectations i do. i will be moving in about a year. i will be considering more urban neighborhoods than the one i currently live in. i will be sure to clean up the area around my apartment even if my neighbors are slobs. i have pride. i refuse to live in a mess. there is absolutely no excuse for it. gentrification can only help the neighborhood in the eyes of the developers and city officials when the actual residents don't seem to care enough to even pick up litter. but then they're given a proposal that will create somewhat upscale housing and they're up in arms. i don't think they have that right when they don't even try to make their neighborhood look nice.

[Lone Ranger]

Wealthier buyers are directly subsidizing the buyers of the affordable units. Now, one could make the argument that the wealthier buyers are doing so willingly, but if ALL municipalities had affordable housing statutes, and the ENTIRE housing market gets distorted as a result (and this is the current trend), then those "market-rate" buyers have little choice but to subsidize. How is that justified? Can anyone tell me why someone of "low-income" DESERVES a discount at the expense of other buyers?

"Affordable housing" legislation is nothing more than forcing developers to steal from one class of people to give it to another.

Hmm.

I'm reminded of something I read recently. I don't remember where I read it, but I keep a quote book: when I read it, I wrote it down. So I'll copy out of that. Anyway, to proceed, the words of FDR: "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."

Now, maybe some will argue that that's empty rhetoric. I dunno. If it's a topic worth talking about, then I'm sure somebody here will have some insight to add.

And we've already heard a couple of panegyrics on the virtue & rectitude of the Puritan work ethic, so let's not assume too much. There might be lazy people in ghettoes. In fact, I suspect that every ghetto in the world has at least one lazy person in it. Same as every other neighborhood of every other social status.

Laziness is a fact of life, but laziness isn't the reason that some places are ghettoes and other places not.

Many people in these communities are un- or undereducated and un- or underemployed. Not gonna go into why that is right now, but with that said they do not share the values of middle class people with stability in their lives. Their lives are too chaotic to care about litter and the landlords are deplorable in most poor communities, it goes back to the broken windows theory.

Good post. Can we keep these word in mind, people, next time somebody suggests that, for the greater good, poor people should simply refrain from having sex ever again? The very idea is insulting, yet it's come up at least twice in the last several pages of this thread.

[HartfordTycoon]

i never said it was a minority issue or that everyone in the ghetto acts teh same or that it's a low-income issue. i said that those areas where there are a lot of minorities or low-income people tend to be teh ghettos and tend to be dirty.

if even one of those 3-10 families took an hour a week to clean up their housing lot, the neighborhood would look beautiful. they don't have neighborhood pride. they have yet to prove their care about their neighborhood. and i undersatnd that they've come to accept dirtiness and don't have the same expectations i do. i will be moving in about a year. i will be considering more urban neighborhoods than the one i currently live in. i will be sure to clean up the area around my apartment even if my neighbors are slobs. i have pride. i refuse to live in a mess. there is absolutely no excuse for it. gentrification can only help the neighborhood in the eyes of the developers and city officials when the actual residents don't seem to care enough to even pick up litter. but then they're given a proposal that will create somewhat upscale housing and they're up in arms. i don't think they have that right when they don't even try to make their neighborhood look nice.

Truthfully I agree. I really don't have a problem with people buying the slums and redoing them. No one should really be living in those conditions anyway. There is no excuse for being a slob, it's a matter of being raised the wrong way. That's not your fault or mine.

I'm not really all that familiar with this project or Providence. Are they really buying a whole neighborhood of housing to raze it? If that's the case isn't anybody concerned about that?

[Recchia]

I'm not really all that familiar with this project or Providence. Are they really buying a whole neighborhood of housing to raze it? If that's the case isn't anybody concerned about that?

No it's a mill complex, not existing housing.

[CtownMikey]

Part of immigration to this country should include lessons on the american lifestyle and expectations for quality of life... or is that already something being done?

[runawayjim]

Truthfully I agree. I really don't have a problem with people buying the slums and redoing them. No one should really be living in those conditions anyway. There is no excuse for being a slob, it's a matter of being raised the wrong way. That's not your fault or mine.

I'm not really all that familiar with this project or Providence. Are they really buying a whole neighborhood of housing to raze it? If that's the case isn't anybody concerned about that?

this is what i find part of the bigger issue of this discussion... they bought an old run down mill complex. they aren't really displacing anyone's homes, but rather businesses. one of the big issues the people who are being displaced is that they're taking away their place of business and replacing it with unaffordable housing in a neighborhood predominately occupied by low income families.

Part of immigration to this country should include lessons on the american lifestyle and expectations for quality of life... or is that already something being done?

hard to do when a lot of immigrants are not living here legally. i've seen discussion on other forums about how immigrants should be required to take english classes as well since it's the predominant language spoken here (even though there is no official language of the USA). it's a touchy subject as we have seen today with the "day without immigrants".

[Cotuit]

Part of immigration to this country should include lessons on the american lifestyle and expectations for quality of life... or is that already something being done?

The Netherlands is doing that. But my question would be, whose American Lifestyle would we encourage people to emulate? I can think of a lot of Americanisms that I'd be happy for new comers to never learn about.