Essay on Gentrification in Philadelphia: Increased Rental Prices, Property Taxes & LOOP Tax Relief

Introduction

Gentrification process entails transforming the character of a neighborhood through the influx of more affluent dwellers and business activities. The matter has always been a controversial topic in various political arenas and urban planning processes. Gentrification within Philadelphia regions resulted in an increased value of rental properties, increasing in prices of houses along with property taxes. For instance, the Longtime Owner Occupants Program (LOOP) tax relief increased by 50% after the gentrification (Jackson, 2019). The Real Estate relief eligibility was then determined by the ability to pay the rates and not the homeowners with Homestead Exemption (Jackson, 2019). The research aims at exploring the extent to which the residents and of Philadelphia and business operations have suffered from gentrification activities. The targeted population comprises the majority of business operators and city dwellers within the Philadelphia regions. The city experienced massive increases in the value of properties along with the displacement of the residents as well as the business owners. The resulting problems led to enormous demographical changes that changed almost everything within the city. Therefore, the result of the study would be necessary for impacting certain social changes by outlining specific guidelines to assist the residents and business operators in adapting to the transformations resulting from gentrification.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Impacts of Gentrification in Philadelphia

After gentrifying Philadelphia, the new prices became unaffordable to the residents and business owners within the regions. Besides, the initiative changed the socially marginal as well as the working-class areas of Philadelphia City to more suburban residential areas. From 1990 to 2000, the Northern cities of America experienced the gentrification processes that covered up to 15% of major city tracts (Jackson, 2019). The outcomes of the activities resulted in the massive demographical transformation, which resulted from the vanishing capital among urban dwellers and loss of buying powers. Therefore, the general problem of the initiative is that most businesses have been rendered non-operational and cannot easily bounce back since their leaders lack the skills and knowledge of adapting in such circumstances.

The city dwellers and businesses within the City of Philadelphia have greatly suffered the impacts of gentrification (Jackson, 2019). The rising cost of housing and rental properties have locked most of the business owners to stop operations since they cannot afford the value of the properties as required by the government. Most dwellers have resorted to relocation from the revitalized areas, which have, in turn, led to unplanned cultural displacement within the city. The social disruptions that have resulted from gentrification activities have made the dwellers of Philadelphia City ignore the economic impact of the program (Brueckner et al., 2015). It is because the program has a compelling framework that relocates the initial dwellers indirectly through the introduction of new prices of property within the city. For gentrification to be initiated, the whole city has to be evacuated to create a good environment for the construction programs and the renewal plans. From the resulting miseries that the city dwellers of Philadelphia faced, they viewed the renewal practices to be of no direct benefit to the residents but to meet certain economic and sustainability programs of the State.

Besides, the forceful evacuation of the city dwellers and business operators made the process appear to be upholding certain discriminatory practices. The low-income groups were compelled to join the high-income neighborhood that was characterized by expensive residential options such as condominiums (Dragan et al., 2019). The displaced communities suffered immensely as they could easily afford shelter in the new residential areas. They also lost their social identity since it was difficult to hold their previous social status after joining the already revitalized cities. They disintegrated into various areas where some were permanently assimilated.

The primary aims of the multifaceted strategic frameworks conserve the underlying planning procedures of the State, along with achieving the long term sustainability plans. Therefore, gentrification and urban renewal plans of Philadelphia were characterized by a powerful force backed by the State to alter the regional economic situation (Pearsall, 2018). The major victims of the problems resulting from gentrification within Philadelphia city were low-income households. They had to seek for combative ways of rebuilding a new social class through looking for new places to fit or stay at the areas designated by the State under the Gentrification Programs Act (Freeman & Braconi, 2016). Such households have no choice but to conform to the dictates of the Philadelphia gentrification programs. They view the process as non-democratic since the government did not seek their viewpoints on the plans.

Similarly, the gentrification of Philadelphia drastically normalized the aesthetic profile of other developed cities, which in turn equalized the level of business operations. For instance, Philadelphia regions have achieved similar economic status with other cities across the country (Freeman & Braconi, 2016). Thus, making it harder for low-income households to own businesses in the city centers as they cannot afford the prices of properties in such regions easily. Besides, the neighboring cities within the Philadelphia region have been forced to harbor the displaced communities from the city. It impacted regional sustainability plans. According to the region's Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) reports, the new residents moving to neighbor regions occupy up to 1% of the total population of the new areas (Brueckner et al., 2015). The percentile translates to larger economic values that affect the planning programs of the harboring cities.

The gentrification process in Philadelphia was initiated with a powerful force that extended to the neighboring cities. The impact of the process can be beneficial to nearby cities since they enjoy a thriving cluster regarding cultural production. For instance, one study that sheds light on the issues regarding gentrification within Philadelphia used an individual data set. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York Consumer Credit Panel/Equifax (CCP) provided the relationship that exists between gentrification and the mobility frameworks regarding the financial health of residents of Philadelphia from 2002 to 2014 (Dragan et al., 2019). The data revealed the social displacement patterns of the displaced households by showing the census geography as represented in the credit bureau records of the United States of American consumers (Brueckner et al., 2015). The findings reveal that most residents in the gentrifying neighborhoods within Philadelphia have more substantial mobility rates. The only residents who remained within the Philadelphia regions only included the individuals who had credit scores of lower than 580 (Dragan et al., 2019). Such residents had a high probability of remaining within the gentrifying regions since they were capable of adapting to the new charges. The others who are unable to adjust to the original charges moved to other areas.

The background theory of Gentrification by Ruth Glass

According to sociologist Ruth Glass, the process of gentrification should be an entire sub-discipline of the underlying concept of urban studies (Johnson-Schlee, 2019). The sociologist provides that the process should be viewed from the perspective of an evolutionary manifestation that aims at developing a nation economically. Ruth Glass marked the process as one that cannot be easily stopped once started. So, the regional development programs should incorporate the interests of businesses along with city dwellers before actual execution (Johnson-Schlee, 2019). However, the gentrification of Philadelphia led to increase in the gap between the rent of most properties in the city due to the new implementations by the government that aimed at changing the value that the building s within the city could receive under their best use. Therefore, the property owners within Philadelphia saw no potential profits in reinvesting in the inner city after the gentrification (Pearsall, 2018). The new value of properties increased immensely, making them unaffordable to them. Only the new residents were able to begin investing in the re-developed city as the old ones had been locked out by the new charges of properties (Brueckner et al., 2015). Besides, some dwellers were displaced to the neighboring cities hence were not willing to renew their contracts following the new state rules on the renewed structures. Besides, the new rates of mortgages and leasing rates within the city were unfavorable to low-income individuals. It led to a total of demographical changes within the city.

Conclusion

On balance, regarding the indicators of the process, the gentrification process in Philadelphia complicated a certain level of analysis on the risk score group. The movers from various risk score groups ended up in different neighborhoods hence losing their original social structures. The inconsistencies within the credit scores also translate to differences in the movers' outcomes. The gentrification processes displaced both the low and mid-score residents of Philadelphia to lower median home values than the ones they left in the city.

References

Brueckner, Jan K., and Stuart S. Rosenthal, (2015). "Gentrification and Neighborhood Housing Cycles: Will America's Future Downtowns Be Rich?." Review of Economics and Statistics 91, no. 4: 725-743.

Dragan, K. L., Ellen, I. G., & Glied, S. A. (2019). Gentrification And The Health Of Low-Income Children In New York City. Health Affairs, 38(9), 1425-1432.

Freeman, L. & Braconi, F. (2016). "Displacement or succession? Residential mobility in gentrifying neighborhoods", Urban Affairs Review, Volume 40 Number 4, pp. 463-491.Jackson, C. (2019). The effect of urban renewal on fragmented social and political engagement in urban environments. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(4), 503-517.

Johnson-Schlee, S. (2019). What would Ruth Glass do? London: Aspects of change as a critique of urban epistemologies. City, 23(1), 97-106.

Pearsall, H. (2018). 20. New directions in urban environmental/green gentrification research. Handbook of Gentrification Studies, 329.