Gentrification and Displacement

These buildings. Are they talking about these or the vacant lot?

That’s what the first discussion (7:40) looks like since it goes down to Hoke. The second one (7:55) is the rezoning for the area directly adjacent to the north. Looks like the same developer for both blocks.

Interested to hear how the meeting went. All the buildings in the picture @Bryan posted above are currently boarded up. I’ve been in that store before, absolutely a tear down an no way was it all up to code. All that was available were cigarettes, soda, and chips. Good riddance, the neighborhood needs real food options. Hopefully whatever is proposed takes that into consideration.

I think the intent of this article is to stir up racial discord. If Shaquille O’Neal or Oprah Winfrey were to invest in an economically depressed neighborhood, (and they do) wouldn’t the economics be the same?

2 Likes

Completely agree with @CanesFan on the intent of the article. It tells a very one-sided and negative story. My wife and I (who are white) purchased a home in the South Park area because we wanted to live close to downtown, valued its diversity and don’t think someone’s value is determined by their income.

As residents in the area the article depicts a very different picture than our experience thus far. We have attended our neighbor’s 78th birthday party with her friends and family (in her home her daughter purchased over a decade ago) and cookouts some of our neighbors (who rent) host experiencing no issues due to our race, income or home purchase price. So to have someone who doesn’t live here write an article quoting one person saying “integration isn’t going well” is baffling because we haven’t experienced that at all.

Kia Baker has done a lot for Southeast Raleigh but her quote is surprising. She was able to purchase a home for $288,500 on a sole income in Knightdale which would have bought her a home in the neighborhood when she bought her home in 2018. The home we purchased was a new build for under $300k and we closed a few weeks after she closed on her home in Knightdale. Ms. Baker quoted as being upset makes little sense as she could have reinvested by purchasing a home in the area but she chose to live in Knightdale.

Also, most of the other people quoted as being upset are renting and do not own homes in the neighborhood. The homeowners in this area for the most part are happy with the change. When we have spoken with our neighbors that have seen South Park change over the years they view the change as a good thing. The higher property taxes being paid have improved the neighborhood and continue to drive reinvestment. The homeowners we have gotten to know that have decided to leave have done so because they can walk away with $100k+ profit which they never dreamed possible.

Our neighbor’s daughter (who is African American) just purchased her second home in the neighborhood this summer which was new construction for $240k. She purchased it through an income restricted program which also stipulated it had to be owner occupied, so there are programs to counter gentrification and provide more affordable housing in South Park. I am not saying it is perfect and more needs to be done to provide equal opportunity for all, but this article doesn’t provide the whole picture.

Affordable housing for renters in the South Park area is also a focus for the City of Raleigh. See South Park/ Garner Road section in the link provided:

https://www.raleighnc.gov/content/HousingNeighborhoods/Documents/ActionPlanCommunityReport.pdf

13 Likes
Before I continue, could we make sure we're on the same page of what 'gentrification' is?

Now that we got that out of the way:

No, because in the end, they’re asking for protection from losing the roof over their heads. Some people will throw in problems about systemic racism into the conversation, but as long as you’re talking mainly about gentrification, you’re dealing with a housing problem. That’s always been the case, and I don’t think it changes here, either.

Like I said in the hidden aside, most conversations on gentrification in America focus on neighborhoods with poorer residents of color. Because there’s a history of segregation that already exists in those areas (think eastern Raleigh or downtown Durham), developments that cater to richer people will also have a racial narrative to it.

But activists against gentrification aren’t always NIMBYs; some of them are asking for fair housing reform to balance against market forces to protect the poorer residents. Public housing, affordable housing requirements, TODs… those are not segregation tools, but they’re still in the scope of things people against gentrification want.

I’ve never met anyone with/read any convincing ideas that actually asks to keep racial segregation going (unless the writer is showing their anger and frustration more than genuinely talking about policy). If anything, those people are asking for balance. Equity. A chance for them to fend for themselves against forces that, today, seems out of their control.

“They” aren’t a national, organized conspiracy. You can just look at the author’s Twitter, for example, and just find out his biases for yourself…

3 Likes

Don’t entertain people who clearly don’t have open minds. Gentrification doesn’t integrate housing and never will, it only increases the pricing for houses and kicks African Americans out of their neighborhoods because rich people want to move into old historically black neighborhoods for what reason I can not find. That’s all I’m saying.

Not exactly correct. Usually gay and bohemian types are the gentrification trailblazers. At least that is how DC gentrification started in the 80’s and 90’s. A few years later, after establishing a gentrified foothold, others move in, including wealthy developers.

3 Likes

Also what if the people moving in are black. Or the people getting pushed out are white? I reject the notion that gentrification is inherently racist. Problematic in some circumstances, certainly.

7 Likes

The gay and bohemian types move in because things are cheap. They create little pockets of the kind of culture that more affluent people want to be near. The more affluent people move in and start pricing others out. Then the initial residents end up moving away, followed closely by the original gentrifiers. The cycle starts anew somewhere else.

It looks like the shopping malls and the really old suburbs of the cities, the ones nearest to town, are the newest places to become gentrified. Those industrial outskirts of towns, the post-war housing communities and the like.

3 Likes

It’s not the same thing, but 20 years ago, even North Hills was “gentrified”. I put that in quotes because it wasn’t exactly the same thing. BUT, it did become more expensive, with a quick escalation in prices that continues to differentiate it from other parts of north Raleigh.

1 Like

North Hills does indeed feel different. It was a chic address in the 70s, lost momentum during the land grab that was North Raleigh in the 80s, and then as North Raleigh consolidated in the 90s, North Hills rose with the value of land. Certainly the mall’s regeneration put an exclamation point on it, but the neighborhood never went into a downward spiral that usually precedes gentrification.

My family moved here in 74, and by then NH was already seeing its best days behind it. My family looked at houses there but my mom turned her nose up at them because they were older than the house we left in California. While we also looked at Brookhaven, Quail Hollow, Springdale, and Coachman’s Trail, we ended up in North Ridge in a new house. At that time, there were just too many new housing choices with gracious land to consider something that was “used” in North Hills. Also, at that time, traffic was’t a big deal so driving a few extra miles was a piece of cake.

1 Like

Agreed. You hit it spot on. However, it is not just gay/bohemian culture that brings the masses to the gentrified areas. The main thing the gay/bohemian trailblazers provide is a low crime environment. Once the crime goes down and homes are getting restored, the initial group of mass followers flock in while the prices are still relatively low. Then the wealthier group comes later, after the neighborhood becomes hip. That is the general pattern.

3 Likes

On age I’ll defer to you, because I wasn’t born until ‘82. But I do know that parts of North Hills was built in the 70s, particularly the closer you get to Shelley. My parents had one of them. Quail Hollow for sure would have been a contemporary (mid-60s onwards). I don’t think any of those would have been able to match North Ridge lot sizes in the 70s though, so that is true. But even when North Raleigh moved north of Millbrook, NH the neighborhood never really went into decline. And certainly it’s original owners weren’t pushed out by gentrification. They either moved to Crosswinds or stayed and simply retired to Springmoor or Cardinal Living.

Even if this were an apples to apples comparison (spoiler: it’s not), where specifically is this happening? In which neighborhoods are long-standing white residents being pushed out due to an influx of affluent people of color?

1 Like

While I don’t doubt that your parents have a home from the 70s near Shelley, the reality is that the vast majority of the area from Shelley southward was well established when my family moved to Raleigh. In fact, much of North Hills proper was built out in the very early 60s. The spree of mansion building on Shelley is usually replacing homes that were built in the 50s, because the lots are large. The part of Shelley around North Hills Drive is certainly a younger collection of homes. Maybe that’s where your parents bought?
FWIW, when I talk about North Hills, I am not talking about the broader “North Hills”/Midtown area, I’m talking about the original North Hills neighborhood that’s immediately west of the former North Hills Mall, and up just north of Northbrook. The majority of that area north of North Hills proper, and up by Shelley isn’t North Hills in my book. That’s Chestnut Hills, and it’s even older. Maybe I’m too old school here and too literal?

It seems to simply be a difference in defining. I was always taught everything south of Millbrook from North Hills Dr to Six Forks was NH. As such our house on Lennox Place was squarely a NH house. It’s possible the realtors of that era were more concise than my parents were at the time, or how I think most people view it today.

I didn’t say that. I just said what if white people are getting displaced…by anyone. That isn’t racist. Also, if black people who have money are moving in, that also isn’t racist. I think gentrification can be a bad thing, it can also be a good thing, or both. Racism is always bad. I see this as a socioeconomic issue. I do understand the legacy of racism plays a part in some perceived injustice of gentrification. My point is just that if some crappy old houses filled with poorer white people got bulldozed to make way for new development, I’m just as happy or unhappy with that.

4 Likes

I am not suggesting that people moving into working class neighborhoods are racist, or that no one should move into working class neighborhoods. I am not someone who believes neighborhoods can ever remain frozen in time; I am instead an proponent of simply being aware of history and sensitive to it in our policy.

And in that context, ignoring the racial element of gentrification as it typically plays out is tone-deaf, considering the fact that race, wealth, zoning, and housing policy have all been intricately wound together in this country since its inception. I wrote a lengthy post about why this crucial to consider when we talk about gentrification, which was moved to this other thread.

I don’t think it’s really helpful to pontificate about “what-ifs.” What if wealthy black people were moving into working class white neighborhoods, thereby displacing them? I agree with you – that, surely, would be horrible. I’d probably call it gentrification. But it’s also a thought exercise that’s completely distinct from the actual history and reality of this country thanks to the centuries of discriminatory policy that created the very conditions that enable gentrification. (And, by the way – middle-class black people moving to white neighborhoods causes property values to decline, even if they make a similar income. Again, we cannot categorize this solely as an issue of economics.)

3 Likes