Last night, we attended a viewing of “Some Call It Home,” a documentary on the gentrification of Downtown Brooklyn. Like many cities in America, Brooklyn is rediscovering and redeveloping its downtown. Old buildings have been torn down and glass-covered towers have shot up, often at the expense of lower-income residents. While the economic downturn may decrease the city’s development budget, not to mention the demand for luxury housing, long-established communities are already affected by empty storefronts and increasing rents.
The next district slated for development is Fulton Street Mall, a collection of mostly locally-owned businesses. It may not look like much, but it’s actually the third largest retail district in New York City, right behind Madison and Park Avenues. However, more and more companies have been evicted, their buildings seized by eminent domain, with the end goal of of creating “a cleaner, more contemporary physical environment on Fulton Street with improved landscaping, modern street furniture, and additional seating and public spaces. These new improvements will make Fulton Street a better place to shop and to do business. The project will start in early 2009 and should be completed by early 2011.”
The development plan also calls for commercial space, a new hotel, and luxury residences. While higher-income residents will bring more discretionary income, it seems unlikely that they’ll spend it at the current establishments, and many business owners are concerned they will be priced out.
Of course, the flip side of this argument is that development brings better-paying jobs and more tax dollars, and that a vibrant, exciting (but somewhat pricey) downtown is essential to creating a successful city. Can any city truly balance the needs of current residents with the demands of development? Should cities offer incentives to private developers if they increase an area’s wealth but turn it into a generic strip mall? And is the destruction of established communities part of the natural life of a city, or an unnecessary side effect? These questions are becoming increasingly significant for a growing number of cities across America – and the answers increasingly divisive.
“Some Call it Home” doesn’t conclude the debate but provides the necessary background for understanding the problem. Watch the trailer below:
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
It’s always sad to see historically entrenched establishments disappear only to be replaced by an Apple Store, Pottery Barn and Barnes and Noble. Unfortunately, as historically low-income areas start attracting students, hipsters and people with money but not quite enough to live in more established areas, I feel that this kind of gentrification becomes inevitable. As the long term residents are slowly replaced, or displaced, by the new, demand will have to be met for the sort of luxuries that a gentrified neighborhood wants. This will most likely be at the expense of the old, and definitely at the expense of the charm or low cost living that was one so attractive in the first place.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
MEH: Downtown Brooklyn is completely surrounded by neighborhoods that have been in the process of grentrification for 15-20 years. The original artists are either long gone or they are trying to get their kids get into Yale. The area around Fulton Mall is one of the last pockets that remained economically diverse but it other than its location it is not a destination for hipsters or artists. That’s what makes the current development plan for Fulton Mall so pig-headed. It does not need to happen as there is plenty of space for high-end development in near-by neighborhoods gentrified long ago like Park Slope, Carroll Gardens and Fort Greene.
February 27th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Forced penetration against the will of another is a punishable offence…. some people call it rape, and that’s the first word that comes to mind after reading this article/watching the video.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:22 am
Sorry Dale, but its not that clear cut. I’ve lived near downtown Brooklyn and lets be frank – it’s not a great place. Overcrowded stores with bad merchandise filled with low paying jobs – a replica of most of the rest of Atlantic Avenue. Redevelopment would lead to, at the very least, a nicer place to live, which in turn inspires more people to come and spend money, which in turn leads to a better tax base, better schools and a better off populace. And how do you get redevelopment without attracting outside help?
Not that mass eminent domain evictions are the answer either. The point is more that there should be able to be economic redevelopment with out the building of masses of luxury condos (somehow, the other neighborhoods mentioned by others in their comments got it done that way). .
March 1st, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Great comments you guys, keep them coming.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm