UK Article on "Gentrification" in Detroit
The Guardian ran this article condemning the recent renaissance/gentrification happening in greater downtown Detroit. It makes many forceful and absolute assertions, and I am interested to hear what DYes posters think about it.
"This new renaissance does not address why Detroit declined in the first place. It does little to address poverty, unemployment and access to resources for the vast majority of the city’s residents. What’s worse, the gentrification of downtown Detroit contributes to greater inequality and polarization..."
The author goes on to talk about the negative impacts that were created by the flight of business, jobs, and population leaving the city for the suburbs, yet somehow concludes that beginning to reverse this trend is somehow even worse.
While the recent influx of investment, jobs, and residents into the greater downtown is certainly noticeable and growing, it is still very much in the early stages, and certainly has not reached a point where it is outpacing the ongoing decline that continues to plague the majority of city. Nobody is saying otherwise. However, it is ridiculous to claim that the recent growth in greater downtown, which is starting to stem the losses and seeding growth, is even worse than continuing an unabated decline, and "contributes to greater inequality and polarization."
"The boundaries between revival and decay can be very severe. Travel three minutes by car from Midtown’s Wayne State University and you are surrounded by streets overgrown by vegetation and burned out factories. The gentrified Corktown neighbourhood, centred along Michigan Avenue, abruptly ends one block west of its famous Slows BBQ restaurant.Greater Downtown’s current revival will mean that this 5% of the city will pull further and further ahead of the other 95%."
The assertion that the current greater downtown revival will mean that "this 5% of the city will pull further and further ahead of the other 95%" is completely illogical and not supported by evidence. The very example used by the author is proof that he doesn't know what he is talking about. The "gentrified" Corktown section of Michigan Avenue is filled with new businesses that have just opened within the last few years. This stretch of Michigan Avenue was not what anybody would consider "gentrified" just five years ago. The opening of Two James, and the soon to be open Katoi, stand as evidence that the new businesses explosion recently seen in Corktown is indeed spreading outside of Corktown, and further away from downtown.
There is simply no evidence to suggest that greater downtown revival will not continue to expand further outward.
Of course, this doesn't mean that the greater downtown revival will expand throughout the entire city, or even most of it. Reviving greater downtown will not solve all of the city's problems, but it is certainly a step in the right direction. Claiming that it only makes things worse is a ridiculous assertion.
http://www.theguardian.com/public-le...es-race-divide
Academic says downtown regrowth a bad thing
One of my photos [[Detroit skyline at sunset, seen from Belle Isle) was used to illustrate a news story in the Guardian newspaper in the UK.
http://www.theguardian.com/public-le...es-race-divide
As usual , I don't agree with much of what gets published in newspapers next to my photos. The author [[from the Netherlands) has very few good things to say about Detroit's current - albeit limited to certain areas - 'gentrification'.
Seems to me Detroit's regrowth will happen along the spoke roads [[Woodward, Jefferson, Grand River, Michigan, etc) and gradually expand out from there. The same thing happened for Detroit in the Industrial Age. Until that happens, I just don't see a demand for housing in Detroit's currently empty suburbs.