Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RationalMellow t1_j5n6zpp wrote

Reply to comment by Some_Bandicoot8053 in What areas in Newark will never gentrify? by Rich_Bullfrog_3005

It seems like some of these areas are already gentrified and will do so but not so much with white residents, I’ve seen some decent newly done apartments in this area. People also think black people can’t truly be gentrifiers.

6

dengeist t1_j5o07d9 wrote

I hate to say this, but that seems to be the subtext of this post, along with many things posted on this sub.

The truth is, ‘gentrification’ is probably going to look a lot different in Newark than it does in other cities.

7

[deleted] t1_j5o07xh wrote

[deleted]

1

ahtasva t1_j5o2lyp wrote

It won’t. Developers haven’t found their footing yet as the round of large scale projects is just taking off. Once the receipts come in and developers get to see medium term performance; they will identify one or 2 locations and concentrate there. Then we will see a sudden flurry on building activity that will radiate out from these centers. Look at DT Brooklyn and DT JC as prime examples of this. Developer need funding from banks and investors and those entities rely on performance to be comfortable with parting with their money. That is why you see builders cluster. My guess is the centers will be DT Newark along the light rail lines connecting into lower Broadway effectively connecting Penn and Broad st.

4

dengeist t1_j5phufi wrote

That’s all well and good. However the South and West wards are primarily residential, which is why I said those will be the last. There isn’t enough space in those wards to build say…a Vermella. So you aren’t going to see those types of developments there. You may get some modernized fill in houses in empty lots, but that’s about it.

Gentrification won’t look the same in the south and west wards, simply because of the nature of the existing housing there. As long as there is no commuter friendly solution to get to NYC, those two wards will lag behind. At the same time, there are houses for sale, but it’s not Tom from Kansas who works in the city buying those houses. That means, at best the South and West wards will be more mixed, but not ‘gentrified’ in a traditional sense. It may become a little more white due to younger millennial and Gen-Z being priced out, but that’s it. How would the existing minority homeowners be moved? Just because the houses are being bought by minorities doesn’t mean they aren’t being improved.

1

ahtasva t1_j5psm5m wrote

The definition of lunacy is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results; that is what the fight against gentrification is. Anti gentrifiers are trying to preserve the status quo in the face of overwhelming incentives in the opposite direction. They will never succeed! Their track record is abysmal which is why I think they are so hateful and bitter.

You can’t stop people from getting what they want; you need to focus on giving people what they need.

Here is what I would do if:

  1. Reduce the affordable housing mandate from 20 to 10 or 15 % and signal to developers that Newark is open for business. No tax abatements on rental properties but you can pretty much build whatever you like.
  2. Offer 15, 20 year tax abatements on new construction that is for sale. Scale the tax abatement to be front ended. First 5 years is higher vs. second 5 years etc. Tax abatements are conditional on occupancy; so each year you have to pay taxes in full and send in your tax return to prove that you listed the home as your primary home then you get the rebate money back. The tax abatement is a pass through to owner occupiers.
  3. Any owner occupier of a SFH who has owned the property for at least 3 years can automatically convert their home to multi family. Streamlined quick application process. Low fees ; no hassle. 2k sqft or less max 2 family. Larger lots, more units; maxes out at 6 units. Allowing existing resident to monetize their homes while occupying it will be huge in helping build generational wealth.
  4. Build public housing using a build to operate. Exempt the building of public housing from frivolous requirements like solar panel and all that other crap. Offer union labor exemptions if that keeps costs low. Housing is long term value that is a force multiplier so it’s worth the initial hit to labor.
1

dengeist t1_j5qg402 wrote

I can see you’re ignoring the important ideas here and you’re sticking to your belief. The point is, it’s not the same and it’s not going to look the same as anywhere else. It doesn’t matter what you would do, it is what is. This isn’t about anti-gentrifiers, at all. Gentrification is a nice way of saying whiter. It’s not going to happen like it did in any other city, because minorities own those homes and they’re not leaving; and for what? What reason do they have to leave?

You’re citing Jersey City, but I can tell you don’t spend much time there. Large parts of Jersey City are not gentrified, only downtown (Paulus hook), Exchange place/the waterfront are gentrified. Marion, Greenville and other parts simply aren’t and they’re pretty much the same as they’ve always been. Why? Because they’re residential areas where minorities own the homes and have for years.

The status quo in Newark would be slum lords owning those houses in the south and west wards. That is simply not the case anymore.

1

sutisuc t1_j5zwtth wrote

LaMonica McIver, councilwoman of the central ward, specifically believes this unfortunately. She thinks gentrification only occurs when POC are displaced by white people. If it’s POC doing it to other POC it’s not gentrification according to her.

1