Urban renewal and gentrification do not have the same connotation in my mind. Urban renewal seems to describe the redevelopment and restructuring of existing urban neighborhoods. This could include the demolition or rebuilding of dilapidated commercial and residential buildings. Urban renewal also includes the improvement of public structures and areas. Economic development, such as the relocation of businesses, is also connected to urban renewal. From my understanding, the process of urban renewal takes into consideration the situations and needs of the current local residents. Developers build new residential structures with the incomes and lifestyles of residents of the area in mind. Also, retailers
that relocate into the area would be businesses that the residents would support and appreciate.
From my understanding, the process of gentrification often has more negative consequences for the current residents of the urban area. Gentrification involves a movement of renovation and rebuilding in older central-city neighborhoods (Palen, p. 239). Palen notes that those involved in gentrification “are generally young adults, childless, white, urban-bred, well-educated, employed in professional or managerial positions, and earning middle-class to upper-middle-class incomes” (Palen, p. 240). Gentrification does share many positive consequences with urban renewal, such as the improvement of residential structures and the influx of commercial business to the area. However, because the individuals involved in the gentrification process are typically very different from the current residents of older city neighborhoods, it seems that the changes brought on by gentrification do not always align with the wants of the current residents. Furthermore, poor urban residents may be displaced by the influx of higher-earning individuals. However, Palen notes that this trend is often greatly overstated: “those displaced are most often low-income renters, and low-income renters as a group have high residential mobility” (Palen, p. 242). The group that is supposedly displaced directly as a result of gentrification already has high rates of mobility due to evictions and other circumstances.
that relocate into the area would be businesses that the residents would support and appreciate.
From my understanding, the process of gentrification often has more negative consequences for the current residents of the urban area. Gentrification involves a movement of renovation and rebuilding in older central-city neighborhoods (Palen, p. 239). Palen notes that those involved in gentrification “are generally young adults, childless, white, urban-bred, well-educated, employed in professional or managerial positions, and earning middle-class to upper-middle-class incomes” (Palen, p. 240). Gentrification does share many positive consequences with urban renewal, such as the improvement of residential structures and the influx of commercial business to the area. However, because the individuals involved in the gentrification process are typically very different from the current residents of older city neighborhoods, it seems that the changes brought on by gentrification do not always align with the wants of the current residents. Furthermore, poor urban residents may be displaced by the influx of higher-earning individuals. However, Palen notes that this trend is often greatly overstated: “those displaced are most often low-income renters, and low-income renters as a group have high residential mobility” (Palen, p. 242). The group that is supposedly displaced directly as a result of gentrification already has high rates of mobility due to evictions and other circumstances.