dunno
Active Member
Let's face it, gentrification is mostly a problem in NYC (where the term originated). So much of Edmonton needs so much capital invested, desperately, to even get close to where NYC or other cities are at in terms of urban experience, that we are no where close to their problems. We need quite a bit more gentrification, we are starved for it, just look around at the burnt out east end.
I hope you have the confidence to go to these communities and tell them this verbatim. Just because things are not New York level does not mean there isn't gentrification here. Anything that displaces already marginalized people so that wealthier classes can move in and profit from that displacement is bad. The callousness of this post is not great.
Are people on this thread honestly arguing that shelters are "good"? Even their advocates recognize they were only supposed to be a temporary solution, until we can get folks into permanent supportive housing. It is a tragedy that they have become a permanent fixture and speaks to failure of society.
I don't think anybody is suggesting that? There's a difference between acknowledging the presence of shelters and the desire of capital to push through them with gentrification and saying shelters are great. They aren't. They exist because other supports do not. Ideally, those in shelters should have access to safe and adequate housing and that is something we need to do, imo. But bulldozing sites where the unhoused congregate or otherwise alienating them, as profit driven real estate often resorts to, back up by the police, is an inadequate solution and further marginalizes such folks.
I would rather see yesterday's market-built luxury homes become today's affordable housing, rather than specifically building affordable housing, which can look bad and harm the cityscape. Let the older stock serve as a natural form of affordable housing.
All this requires to work is ongoing market housing built today to meet demand.
This is separate from supportive housing which is desperately needed today (i.e. w/ social supports built in).
This is a very North American mindset. Public and affordable housing is often designed to exist only for those who truly have no other options and will be less likely to complain about inadequate shelter. In other places in the world, affordable housing can be beautiful.
Vienna:
via https://images.jacobinmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/09120836/Karl-Marx-Hof_2009.jpg
Brussels
via https://www.arch2o.com/successful-public-housing-projects/
Asturias (Spain)
via https://www.archdaily.com/153189/so...ource=search&ad_medium=search_result_projects
Amsterdam
via https://assemblepapers.com.au/2018/12/13/amsterdam-social-housing-a-primer/
Last edited: