Gentrification Is Not Beneficial To Established Residents
Essay Preview: Gentrification Is Not Beneficial To Established Residents
Report this essay
Gentrification is not Beneficial to Established Residents
Growing up in East Austin, one would be accustomed to seeing rundown neighborhoods inhabited mostly by African American and Hispanic working-class families. In the past few years though, the view has drastically changed. Now brightly colored two-story homes housing affluent Caucasian families occupy the once dilapidated areas. The previously desolated lots are now the future sites of lofts and condominiums. The recent changes in East Austin are a clear sign of gentrification. Gentrification is the extremely evident process of displacement. Revitalizing a derelict neighborhood favors the entire community, not just the ones with money. However, revitalization and gentrification are two different matters; gentrification favors one class over another. The gentrifying of East Austin is a precarious process that is reaping negative effects on the preexisting community. While the middle-class is being attracted to the working-class area, established residents are inescapably being squeezed out. Pumping new life into the fading heart of a community through gentrification may be beneficial to some, but at what cost? The recent interest in a once forgotten area is not benefiting the current residents; instead, it is displacing them and erasing the community identity.
With a city growing at an alarming rate, the low cost of East Austin lofts compared to downtown lofts are attracting the middle-class Caucasians everyday. When these new luxury lofts are built, they make the property value of the land around them rise. Subsequently, the property taxes of the surrounding homes increase. According to Caroline Keating:
Census data shows a sharp increase in home values throughout East Austin. In 1990, 80 percent of the houses in one particular census tract were valued at less than $50,000, with just 0.5 percent valued at between $150,000 and $199,000. By 2000, the figure for houses less than $50,000 had fallen to 48 percent, and 4 percent were valued between $150,000 and $199,000. (Keating, 2005, p. 3 ¶ 4)
Even though the value of some of East Austins land is escalating, the income of longtime inhabitants is stagnant. “The 2004 estimates indicate that East Austin per-capita income is only two-thirds of the citywide per-capita income,” stated Margo Weisz (2005). The increased property taxes that longtime low-income individuals are being forced to pay is a main driving force of their displacement. Driving around in East Austin, it is apparent that real estate companies are aware of the strain rising property taxes are having on the working-class families. There are billboards and signs plastered all over the neighborhoods proclaiming, “I pay cash for your home” and “I buy ugly homes.” With no other options in site, these individuals are selling their homes to the cash buyers only to find out that they can no longer afford a house in their old neighborhood. Thus, their only alternative is to move to more affordable areas outside of Austin.
Another cause of the swelling property taxes is a “historic home” tax exemption. If someones home meets the criteria of a “historic” house, the property value automatically increases. Not only does the value of the owners home go up, he or she also has a lifetime property tax exemption. Having an escalated property value and being relieved of paying the taxes on their home is highly beneficial to the owner, but the effects are not passed on to neighbors. The adjacent owner, who did nothing to his or her home, is now required to pay a higher tax. Now if the working-class owner who is making just enough to “stay afloat,” will have no choice but to sell their home and find somewhere else to reside. Having increased property value is good for the neighborhood, city, and potential new inhabitants;