9 replies to this topic

[johnfwd]

Recent news about the city striving to improve infrastructure on the city's northside and about new developments in the Como neighborhood prompted me to explore the concept of gentrification.  I downloaded from the Web this thought piece by Lucy Turner.  https://medium.com/@...ad-7681a3277528

 

Being of an optimistic nature I consider myself a progressive, not in the political sense, but in the sense of promoting progress.  Toward that end I've a always had a "pro growth" attitude.  Pro-growth means economic development which means progress for the city, the state, the country.  But I sympathize with the plight of those in poverty, the unemployed, the homeless.  What to do about ghettos is the focus of Ms. Turner's article.

[renamerusk]

Recent news about the city striving to improve infrastructure on the city's northside and about new developments in the Como neighborhood prompted me to explore the concept of gentrification......Pro-growth means economic development which means progress for the city, the state, the country.  But I sympathize with the plight of those in poverty, the unemployed, the homeless.....

 

 

The North Main Street Improvement efforts and the Como Neighborhood Improvement seem to me to be two different things.

 

North Main Street is a corridor that the City has an invested interest in seeing it improved for safety, traffic movement of business, tourists and the general public.  It is a commercial purposed project.  I do not believe it is a gentrification purposed effort.  I do believe that with the improvements on North Main Street, there will be spill over that raises the profile of the neighborhoods that feed into it.

 

Como Neighborhood Improvement is a gentrification effort.  The Como Reservoir, its juxtaposition to the West Freeway, Camp Bowie, CTP, Bryant Irvin, Hulen Street, Ridglea Areas and overall proximity to Downtown and the Cultural District makes it a prime location for upscale housing and multiple family towers as well as setting aside affordable housing.

 

Of the two projects, the current Como residents may have a stronger argument that they are being displaced than do the North Side residents.  It is understandable the concerns coming from the residents; but it is not possible for the City to remain unchanged forever. The market will decide between winners and losers.  Some residents will profit and some will be encouraged to make improvements to their property.  The best scenario is that everyone gets a better home or a better neighborhood which is good for the City.

[Austin55]

Here's a great article from the Atlantic which explains why the word is so confusing and hard to define. It means something different for everyone. If you are short on time, just read the 2nd paragraph.

 

https://www.theatlan...eanings/394016/

[johnfwd]

This is a sensitive issue particularly because race is a predominantly determining factor such as in the Como neighborhood.  The Como neighborhood consists predominantly of black residents living in old homes.  Many are of low-income.  Those grand modern apartments being built along the west side of Horne Street just north of Vickery Boulevard, are they to be occupied by existing Como residents or people from elsewhere who are not of the same race or ethnicity?  I would have to go back and read about whether or not this particular project is HUD subsidized for affordability by low-income people, but I presume it is.  So one would expect Como residents who so desire will leave their old homes and occupy these new multi-family dwellings.  Certainly some will be displaced by further development of such housing.   I don't know if the Como neighborhood renewal is gentrification or what was called  "urban renewal."  Is there a difference in these concepts?

 

An added thought from those 1960s-era publicly financed urban renewal projects in Chicago, New York, etc.  The public projects were intended to be occupied by low-income people who happened to be black or Latino.  And, because this group was also ill-educated, of a lower class, and used to living in substandard housing, the result was occupancy by tenants who may have shared some of the blame for the slow structural deterioration of these public projects (not to mention a rise in crime in these areas).   Will this happen to the above-described modern multi-family dwellings in the Como neighborhood?  I've thought about these issues for many years.

 

When asked if gentrification by race is different from gentrification by class, D.W. Gibson, the author referenced in the article linked in Post# 3 above, replied in part:  

 

I think at the end of the day they are inextricable. There are a lot of class issues at the heart of capital coming to the neighborhood and displacement and all of these factors that are a part of what we loosely call gentrification. But at the end of the day, we can’t operate in a bubble in 2015. We have to acknowledge all the historic context, all the different forms of discrimination, particularly red-lining, these sorts of practices, that have made the class issue a race issue. At its heart it’s a class issue, but in the States, through our history, we’ve made it a race issue. It very much is a race issue.

[JBB]

I don't have a quick answer to any of your questions, but I would imagine redevelopment in Como is going to move very slow and is likely to start in the area to the east of Merrick and the park. It may happen in the western half of the area eventually, but it could take a very long time to stretch that direction. Look at Linwood for comparison. That eastern section of Como is comparable in size. Linwood's redevelopment has been relatively slow (coming up on 20 years since the tornado) and mostly moved from east from Carroll and north from 7th. A slower redevelopment might lessen the likelihood and impact of current residents being pushed out. I remember a lot of the talk of gentrification in Linwood revolving around the fact that there were a high number of renters vs. owner-occupied houses. I'm curious if that is the case in parts of Como. Owners living in their houses obviously stand to fare better from redevelopment than renters, even if they are priced out of the neighborhood.

Great topic. Gentrification and renewal of depressed areas is always an interesting discussion topic.

[renamerusk]

Great topic. Gentrification and renewal of depressed areas is always an interesting discussion topic.

 

  Agree.

 

  Gentrification, done correctly, can simultaneously produce societal and environmental benefits.  Urban areas must take actions to recycle its disposed inner core areas which today persist as economic deserts.

[elpingüino]

https://www.texasobs...n-architecture/

The Texas Observer's special report on housing explores the Architecture of Gentrification with examples such as Dallas,



Austin,


and Houston

[renamerusk]

This is not what my idea of gentrification is;  it is instead "plow and build".

[johnfwd]

Cottages and bungalows that are being demolished or overwhelmed by the scale of new construction, Koush says, “have a lot of character because they’re old, but when they were built they weren’t considered very interesting or nice.” The new construction heightens the contrast between a stoop with potted plants and, say, a two-car garage.

 

The passage above is excerpted from the article in Post#7 and corresponds with the photo taken in the East Ward of Houston of the quaint old house and it's next-door modern architectural residential structure.  I'm guessing the brown wooden fence was erected by the owner of the new house for reasons of privacy and, perhaps, seclusion.

 

Which house would you want to live in?  The old cottage has a front porch and a front lawn.  Trees in the back suggest a spacious yard where kids can play.   This quaint old house reminds me of some in the old TCU neighborhoods.  One of my attorney friends and her husband reside in a similar house not far from South Drive in the TCU area; they've fixed up the back yard for barbeque parties; for lounging around a warm outdoor fire in winter; and watching football on an outdoor screen.  Their house's market re-sale value is not cheap, despite it's quaint look. 

 

Or would you want to pay a higher price, perhaps, to live in the modern structure next door in the Houston photo?  It's exterior facade and the environs are not as aesthetically pleasing.   But the high-income residents probably have great indoor parties.

[rriojas71]

I prefer the quaintness of the small charmer but would want all the updated electrical and energy savings of the modern house.  LOL