Can Neighborhoods Be Revitalized Without Gentrifying Them? (xpost from GD)

[KamaAina]

http://www.thenation.com/article/trusting-baltimore-communities/

Last year, the death of Freddie Gray in police custody placed his neighborhood in a tragic spotlight, highlighting an all-too common urban misery: epidemic poverty, blighted lots, and shattered homes. Gray’s Baltimore has become notorious as the site of failed “urban renewal” projects, rife with liberal talking points but showing precious little progress in alleviating poverty and joblessness. There’s now a plan to generate change from the inside out, creating community housing as a source of collective healing.

Facing a change in administration in pending elections, activists are pushing a plan before the City Council to devote about $40 million to housing development, not just to fix up vacancies or construct commercial towers but to overhaul neighborhoods through developing Community Land Trusts. As we’ve reported before, the idea would be to establish communally owned property under a democratic governance structure, which allows residents and the surrounding neighborhood to cooperatively manage land and property use.

Baltimore struggles with both massive abandoned vacancies and pockets of gentrification. Residents face tracts of sky-high rents alongside chronically neglected housing stock, dividing wealthy and impoverished areas. Now the Baltimore Housing Roundtable, a coalition of grassroots groups, envisions a plan to curb displacement and rationalize the twisted housing market. It sees joint ownership as a path to revitalizing community oriented housing....

Under the CLT’s cooperative ownership structure, the resident owns the property, while the community retains the land. The resident pays an annual leasing fee, plus other mortgage and maintenance expenses. When the property is sold, price is controlled through a prearranged agreement with a community authority, with representation from neighbors and “public stakeholders” such as local officials or community-development organizations. The homeowner can share in any appreciation of the sales value.

[Press Virginia]

1. No. The city can't expect people who can't pay rent

to suddenly have the ability to pay for and maintain the property in a manner that would lead to appreciation without private developers building amenities to service the residents which, still, would only provide low wage jobs.
Like it or not, private development is the only real way to revitalize these communities

[marmar]

5. Bull. Co-ops and community-based initiatives can work fine.

A neighborhood doesn't need to be wealthy and overrun with Starbucks to be vital.

[Press Virginia]

6. Not when the goal is to revitalize the community and raise the property value

and it's certainly not a very promising program when the cities revenue stream relies on people who have trouble paying rent at their current residence.

The idea is to build something that attracts businesses like Starbucks who see opportunity to invest in the community...which is kind of hard when the people responsible for building it would need a job at Starbucks just to pay their "mortgage" and probably have littls to spend in the businesses that are essential in a community revitalization project.

[Wilms]

2. Do you have the GD link? n/t

[KamaAina]

3. Ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027784113

[Wilms]

4. Yay! Helps with getting exposure and recs. ;) n/t