Gentrification

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

Paul McMorrow writes about gentrification in Union Square. He notes that with the arrival of the Green Line, it will be much more desirable to live in. This will cause an increase in demand for housing there, and that there are two choices: Allow enough additional housing to be built to prevent prices from rising insanely, or preserve its "character" (appearance) at the cost of pricing out just about everybody who already lives there.

"Desirable, inexpensive, low-density -- choose any two!"

Comments

[pixelsand.livejournal.com]

Some of the comments were interesting, but to be honest I have a hard time empathizing because they are not very specific about their concerns.

" The residents are not opposed to development, but they want development that fits in with the current atmosphere of the neighborhood. "

"They want to see good development, and will continue to challenge poorly considered, arrogant proposals which ignore the concerns and goals of those who care about Union Square and fall short of the vision of this community, including that outlined in the 'Somervision' comprehensive plan."

"The bottom line is that the new zoning is terrible and should be completely redrawn or repealed by the residents of Somerville."

What does all of this mean? I get that they don't like the zoning, but from what I can tell the only thing they don't like is that it allows the area to densify and let more people live and work there. That means change, which is "out of character" for the neighborhood. Except that this is a city, and neighborhoods change. The GLX into Union has been known about for a very long time, and one of the most obvious effects of it would be more desirability, density, and urbanity. The city zoning seems to have been developed to work with and embrace this, and the residents of the area who do not want to see it change seem to be opposing it for the sake of delaying the transformation of the neighborhood into something more urban.

If these people had more specific examples about how their lives would be negatively effected by development - like for example the Crossfit gym owner who after spending a lot of money renovating the place learned his property is on a list to be taken up by eminent domain from a "master developer" - I think I'd be more willing to empathize. Without that though, it's hard not to side with the author of the article. That's not to say I think development should go ahead unchecked - these people may well have legitimate concerns, it's just that I've yet to hear any specific examples of what they might be.