Gentrification and the North: Culture Injection, City Protection

August 6, 2014 - We hear that Sudbury is taking steps toward a more energetic and enticing downtown. The new School of Architecture, approval for two new restaurant patios, the “Lululemon” pop-up store on Cedar, as well as the management turn-overs and facelifts of several notable eateries in the CBD are used as examples of ‘good progress.’ There is much left to do however to attract people to live, and not just work or visit, downtown. The newly proposed $12 million-dollar transformation of the old brewery on Lorne Street by developer, Greg Oldenburg, is a big step forward on this front. The possibilities of this project, assuming that it reaches fruition as expected, are substantial. Commercial space, residential space, general revitalization; these are the first steps in a larger social project that is taking place – much needed downtown gentrification.

Definition

We can understand gentrification as “the upgrading of devalued or deteriorated urban property by the middle class or affluent people.”[1] “Devalued,” “dishevelled” and “deteriorated” are perhaps the most accurate words to describe the current state of the downtown core. It exists under many names. Neil Smith identified the often discussed idea of “urban improvement” as, in fact, simply a more palatable way to describe the incidence of gentrification.[2] The existence of Smith’s term suggests that there is a negative implication to gentrification, though in the context of desperately needed economic development, this is simply not the case. Gentrification can also be used to describe the restoration of old buildings in the interest of creating new, eye-catching ones, not unlike the proposed transformation for the “Brewer Lofts”.[3] In the context of Sudbury, the redevelopment projects being undertaken in and around the downtown can be seen as both causing economic change and revitalization, but also occurring from it, perpetuating a cycle of investment and reinvestment. 

Causes

Gentrification is caused by the increasing value being placed on property and an increasing income disparity between groups, leading to concentrated centres of wealth.[4] The role of tourism cannot be undervalued in developing gentrification, where revenue-producing goods and services attract concentrated foreign capital that leads to increased property values.[5] By increasing the number of interesting and attractive tourism opportunities in the downtown, Sudbury would bring an increased level of revenue to local businesses and further promote reinvestment in downtown real estate.

Measures

Gentrification can be measured by a change in “the cultural character of the neighbourhood.”[6] In the Sudbury context, the changing “cultural character” would be importing virtually any form of culture and art to introduce a new dynamic to the blank facades, dingy street corners and discarded needles. According to Aka, one of the major indicators of increasing gentrification is a change in demographics, though Aka specifically identifies race, not surprising given that his case study focused on Atlanta, a racially diverse city.[7] Sudbury, on the other hand, has fewer than 7% immigrants, so significant racial adjustments are highly unlikely, however this does not preclude changes in downtown culture.[8] The present culture of the downtown is highly dichotomous, with a successful cultural and entertainment hub along Elgin Street (west of Minto and south of Elm), surrounded by a vast crescent of dilapidated buildings and loiterers along Paris and Elm. A radical transformation is required of the latter areas in order to have the greatest effects on so-called ‘downtown revitalization.’

Effect

Gentrification inherently attracts wealthier citizens with higher levels of education.[9] The larger the gap between the low-income dwellers and the new, higher-income investors, the more significant the changes in the area will be.[10]Consequently, given the general demographic make-up of the downtown, even a relatively small level of new investment would have a significant impact. While it can be observed in both economic and aesthetic terms, the most apparent effects of gentrification are through the aesthetic upgrades that come with use of new capital in otherwise economically-depressed areas.[11],[12]

Significant negative effects of “urban improvement” are placed on unemployed renters. Gentrification and investment lead to higher rents, which displaces unemployed people from these areas, leading to even higher rents and wealthier tenants.[13],[14]This shift has positive impacts too. With higher rents, landlords have a greater ability to invest money into their properties and maintain them more appropriately.

Conclusion

The famous Jackson Brewery in New Orleans’ French Quarter (Vieux Carre) was redesigned as a commercial space, offering retail space and increasing the building’s business appeal.[15]The Brewer Lofts proposed on Lorne Street are clearly not the first of their kind, though they will represent a first step for Sudbury. The creation of condos in the ‘Vieux Carre’ also saw significant transformation in nearby property values, which gives hope to the Lofts project here.[16]Only by way of direct property investment will Sudbury’s downtown be able to grow, prosper and develop, such that new business will be able to flourish and new residents will be able to inject crucial capital into the area.

By Alex Berryman, student policy intern with Northern Policy Institute.

Citations

• [1] Aka, Ebenezer, O. “Gentrification and Socioeconomic Impacts of Neighborhood Integration and Diversification in Atlanta, Georgia.” Morehouse College (2010): 1. PDF.
• [2] Herzfeld, Michael. “Engagement, Gentrification and the Neoliberal Hijacking of History.” Current Anthropology 51.2 (2010): 259. PDF.
• [3] Clark, Eric. “The Order and Simplicity of Gentrification – a Political Challenge.” The Gentrification Reader (2005): 25. PDF.
• [4] Clark, Eric. “The Order and Simplicity of Gentrification – a Political Challenge.” The Gentrification Reader (2005): 24. PDF.
• [5] Gotham, Kevin Fox. “Tourism Gentrification: The Case of New Orleans’ Vieux Carre (French Quarter).” Urban Studies 42.7 (2005): 1099. PDF.
• [6] Rameau, Max. “Gentrification is Dead.” The Centre for Pan-African Development (2008): 2. PDF.
• [7] Aka, Ebenezer, O. “Gentrification and Socioeconomic Impacts of Neighborhood Integration and Diversification in Atlanta, Georgia.” Morehouse College (2010): 5. PDF.
• [8] Sudbury Community Foundation. “Greater Sudbury’s Vital Signs 2013.” Community Foundations of Canada (2013): 11. PDF.
• [9] Aka, Ebenezer, O. “Gentrification and Socioeconomic Impacts of Neighborhood Integration and Diversification in Atlanta, Georgia.” Morehouse College (2010): 7. PDF.
• [10] Clark, Eric. “The Order and Simplicity of Gentrification – a Political Challenge.” The Gentrification Reader (2005): 25. PDF.
• [11] Atkinson, Rowland; Wulff, Maryann; Reynolds, Margaret; Spinney, Angela. “Gentrification and displacement: the household impacts of neighbourhood change: Final Report.” Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute 160 (2011): 5. PDF.
• [12] Charles, Suzanne Lanyi. “Suburban Gentrification: Understanding the Determinants of Single-family Residential Redevelopment, A Case Study of the Inner-Ring Suburbs of Chicago, IL, 2000-2010.” Joint Centre for Housing Studies: Harvard University (2011): 1. PDF.
• [13] Atkinson, Rowland; Wulff, Maryann; Reynolds, Margaret; Spinney, Angela. “Gentrification and displacement: the household impacts of neighbourhood change: Final Report.” Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute 160 (2011): 2. PDF.
• [14] Herzfeld, Michael. “Engagement, Gentrification and the Neoliberal Hijacking of History.” Current Anthropology 51.2 (2010): 259. PDF.
• [15] Gotham, Kevin Fox. “Tourism Gentrification: The Case of New Orleans’ Vieux Carre (French Quarter).” Urban Studies 42.7 (2005): 1111. PDF.
• [16] Gotham, Kevin Fox. “Tourism Gentrification: The Case of New Orleans’ Vieux Carre (French Quarter).” Urban Studies 42.7 (2005): 1112. PDF.