In defense of the "gentrification building"
Summary
TLDREl video analiza la escasez de viviendas en EE. UU., mostrando cómo los precios han aumentado debido a la falta de oferta. Aunque la construcción de nuevos edificios, especialmente los asequibles, es vista como algo positivo, muchos critican el impacto estético y temen la gentrificación. Sin embargo, estudios sugieren que la construcción de nuevas viviendas, incluso de mercado libre, puede reducir los alquileres y el desplazamiento forzado. El video también destaca cómo las leyes de zonificación en áreas ricas impiden el desarrollo de viviendas asequibles, perpetuando la desigualdad en el acceso a la vivienda.
Takeaways
- 🏡 El suministro de viviendas en EE. UU. ha disminuido durante la última década, mientras que los precios de las viviendas han aumentado considerablemente.
- 💸 Los alquileres han subido y la tasa de vacantes en edificios de alquiler es la más baja en tres décadas.
- 🏙️ Los nuevos edificios de apartamentos suelen generar críticas, asociándolos con gentrificación, aumento de rentas y desplazamiento de residentes.
- 🏠 A pesar de las críticas, muchos de estos edificios nuevos están destinados a ser viviendas asequibles.
- 📉 El diseño de estos edificios modernos, como los '5 sobre 1', es una estrategia para mantener bajos los costos de construcción y ofrecer más viviendas asequibles.
- 🏚️ Los diseños de viviendas que hoy consideramos auténticos, como los 'brownstones', fueron inicialmente criticados por ser artificiales y de mala calidad.
- 🔄 La investigación sugiere que aumentar la oferta de viviendas nuevas, incluso de mercado, reduce el riesgo de desplazamiento al disminuir la escasez de viviendas.
- 🧑🤝🧑 La gentrificación y el desplazamiento no son lo mismo: el desplazamiento afecta a las personas, mientras que la gentrificación cambia la demografía de un lugar.
- 💡 Para evitar tanto la gentrificación como el desplazamiento, es necesario construir más viviendas asequibles y de mercado, junto con políticas de asistencia de alquiler.
- 🚫 Las áreas ricas a menudo bloquean el desarrollo de viviendas multifamiliares mediante leyes de zonificación que favorecen las viviendas unifamiliares.
Q & A
¿Por qué se considera que Estados Unidos no tiene suficientes viviendas?
-La oferta de viviendas ha ido disminuyendo durante la última década, y actualmente el porcentaje de edificios vacíos es el más bajo en 30 años, lo que ha generado un aumento en los precios tanto de viviendas como de alquileres.
¿Por qué las personas critican los nuevos edificios modernos en las ciudades?
-A menudo, los nuevos edificios modernos, como las viviendas multifamiliares, son criticados porque se asocian con la gentrificación, el aumento de los alquileres y la transformación de los vecindarios hacia áreas más ricas y blancas.
¿Qué es un edificio '5-over-1' o '1-plus-5'?
-Es un tipo de construcción económica en la que se usan varios niveles de estructura de madera (conocido como Tipo 5 en el código de construcción), sobre una base de concreto (Tipo 1), a menudo utilizado para espacios comerciales o estacionamientos.
¿Qué demuestra el ejemplo del edificio en Camden, Nueva Jersey?
-Demuestra que, a pesar de las críticas iniciales por parte de la comunidad, el edificio en Camden no solo es nuevo, sino que es vivienda asequible para personas mayores y familias de bajos ingresos, mostrando cómo la percepción pública puede estar equivocada.
¿Cuál es el efecto de construir nuevas viviendas en áreas de altos precios?
-Contrario a lo que muchos piensan, la investigación sugiere que el aumento en la oferta de viviendas, incluso de mercado, disminuye la escasez y reduce los precios del alquiler, lo que disminuye el riesgo de desplazamiento en esas áreas.
¿Cuál es la diferencia entre gentrificación y desplazamiento?
-El desplazamiento ocurre cuando los residentes son obligados a mudarse, generalmente por aumentos en el alquiler, mientras que la gentrificación es un cambio demográfico en un área, donde los residentes de ingresos más bajos son reemplazados por personas con ingresos más altos.
¿Cómo pueden reducirse tanto el desplazamiento como la gentrificación?
-La solución es aumentar tanto la oferta de viviendas de mercado como la vivienda asequible, además de políticas como asistencia para el alquiler, lo que ayuda a mantener la diversidad de ingresos en un vecindario.
¿Por qué los vecindarios ricos bloquean nuevos desarrollos de viviendas?
-En muchos vecindarios ricos, las leyes de zonificación restringen los desarrollos multifamiliares y los propietarios adinerados tienen el poder político para evitar que se construyan nuevas viviendas, lo que perpetúa la escasez y la desigualdad de vivienda.
¿Cómo se utiliza la retórica de la gentrificación para frenar la construcción de viviendas?
-Algunos activistas utilizan el miedo a la gentrificación para oponerse a la construcción de nuevas viviendas, argumentando que esta exacerbará el problema, aunque la investigación muestra que no construir más viviendas es lo que realmente causa el desplazamiento.
¿Cómo se ve afectada la percepción de las nuevas construcciones por el diseño arquitectónico?
-El diseño arquitectónico de muchas nuevas construcciones, que prioriza la economía y la funcionalidad, es percibido como artificial y sin carácter. Sin embargo, históricamente, incluso diseños icónicos como los 'brownstones' de Brooklyn fueron inicialmente criticados de manera similar.
Outlines
🏠 La escasez de viviendas y los edificios criticados
En los Estados Unidos hay una gran falta de viviendas, y los precios han aumentado considerablemente, tanto en propiedad como en alquiler. A pesar de la necesidad, cuando se construyen nuevos edificios, suelen ser objeto de críticas. Estos edificios modernos y multifamiliares, caracterizados por un diseño cuadriculado y sencillo, son percibidos como signos de desplazamiento y gentrificación. Sin embargo, no siempre es el caso, como lo muestra un ejemplo en Camden, Nueva Jersey, donde una construcción moderna resultó ser vivienda asequible. Las críticas a estas construcciones tienen raíces históricas, como ocurrió con las casas de piedra marrón en Brooklyn en el siglo XIX, que también fueron consideradas poco auténticas en su tiempo.
📉 El efecto de la nueva construcción en los precios y la gentrificación
Aunque se cree que la construcción de nuevos edificios impulsa el desplazamiento de residentes y la gentrificación, los estudios sugieren lo contrario. El aumento de la oferta de viviendas, incluso a precios de mercado, reduce la escasez y ayuda a estabilizar o bajar los precios. Además, libera viviendas en otras áreas, lo que facilita la movilidad sin causar desplazamiento forzoso. Sin embargo, aunque la construcción reduce el desplazamiento, la gentrificación puede seguir ocurriendo por otros factores, como el reemplazo natural de residentes por personas con mayores ingresos. Para evitar ambos fenómenos, es crucial construir tanto viviendas asequibles como a precio de mercado.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Gentrificación
💡Desplazamiento
💡Vivienda asequible
💡Oferta y demanda de vivienda
💡Zonificación
💡5-sobre-1
💡Diversidad de ingresos
💡Impuestos de créditos para vivienda
💡Autenticidad arquitectónica
💡Monotonía arquitectónica
Highlights
The US doesn't have enough homes, and the housing supply has been dropping for a decade, leading to skyrocketing prices.
Rental unit vacancy rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years, and rent prices keep increasing.
New buildings, especially modern, boxy, multi-family homes, are often met with criticism and linked to gentrification and displacement.
Despite negative perceptions, some new buildings like the one in Camden, NJ, are actually affordable housing developments.
The architecture of many new apartment buildings is designed to be cost-effective, fitting within height limits and safety requirements, leading to the '5-over-1' design.
The construction materials and design, like light-frame wood construction, are chosen to build more affordable housing efficiently.
Historically, even iconic brownstones in Brooklyn were once criticized as being 'modern and artificial,' much like today's new constructions.
Research shows that increasing housing supply, even with market-rate buildings, decreases rents and reduces displacement risks.
While new construction can reduce displacement, gentrification, where richer people move in, can still occur due to demographic changes.
Affordable housing and policies like rental assistance can help maintain income diversity in neighborhoods.
Scarcity of housing means only the wealthy can afford homes, making it crucial to build enough housing for all income levels.
Wealthy neighborhoods often use zoning laws to block multi-family housing developments, limiting affordable housing construction.
In Woodbridge, CT, almost no land is zoned for multi-family developments, creating housing inequality compared to nearby New Haven.
Wealthy homeowners use their political power to prevent housing developments in their neighborhoods, reinforcing unequal housing distribution.
Activists in some areas, like California, use the rhetoric of gentrification to block zoning changes that could enable more affordable housing.
Transcripts
The US doesn't have enough homes.
This line shows how many months it would take
for the current supply of housing to run out.
It's a measure of housing supply and it's been dropping for a decade.
And this line shows how housing prices have changed.
They've skyrocketed in the past year.
For rental units, the percentage of empty buildings is the lowest it's been in 3 decades
while rent prices keep going up.
But here’s the thing.
Often, when new buildings go up in these places
people hate them.
"It's hard to describe... but...
you know it when you see it."
"Gentrification building."
Most often, they’re talking about new buildings like this:
boxy, modern, multi-family homes.
I saw one one day that sort of hit me.
And it was a TikTok that was showing this building in Camden, New Jersey.
That’s Jerusalem Demsas, a Vox policy reporter.
You know, the comments range from a bunch of different things.
It was people kind of deriding the building itself
saying that it was causing displacement
saying, get ready for a Starbucks to come and pop up.
Comments like this are a common narrative.
To many, these buildings don’t just look bland and artificial.
They signal raised rents, displacement, and
the complete transformation of a neighborhood
to a place that’s richer and whiter.
But in this case, what happened next might surprise you.
So I started like, kind of like, going around
trying to find the specific location, walking around Google Maps.
And eventually, I find it.
And I find the building, I look at the address.
I look into property records to figure out what this building was.
And not only is it new housing, it's actually new affordable housing.
Turns out, there’s a lot we get wrong
about how we see new construction in the US.
Whether it’s DC, Oakland, or Austin
newer apartment buildings in the US have a distinct look
one that sticks out against older architecture.
But these buildings don’t look like historic homes for a reason.
This building is actually one of the cheapest ways
to build an apartment building right now.
The design is strategic.
According to reporting from Curbed
this kind of architecture is built to fit within restraints
like cost, height limits, and safety requirements.
It’s why many of these structures are what’s known as “5-over-1” or “1-plus-5”.
That means there’s several levels of wood-framed construction
which usually contain apartments and is known as Type 5 in building code.
That’s over one level with a concrete base
which usually contains commercial space or parking, known as Type 1.
The light-frame wood construction, flat windows, and paneling around the building
are all ways to build as affordably as possible.
And that means you're able to build more affordable housing.
I think a lot of the time people don't understand that
in order to get affordable housing, the actual components of the building have to be
cheap to develop and to construct.
The results can be bland and look artificial
but that authenticity problem is an old one.
In this book, "The Invention of Brownstone Brooklyn"
Suleiman Osman writes about the iconic brownstones of Brooklyn
a design that today, is widely considered to be deeply authentic to New York.
But in the 19th century, compared to the mostly wooden homes which predated them
critics actually dismissed brownstones as "modern and artificial”.
They called them out as “products of the mechanical age”
”poorly built and subject to decay” with a “dehumanizing monotony”.
Sound familiar?
Comments in a lot of those Tik Tok videos, they say things like,
"Oh, it looks mass-produced. They look phony."
I mean, that's literally the exact same language that was being used
in the 1900s to talk about the brownstones.
That building we mentioned earlier in Camden, New Jersey
was built using low-income housing tax credits.
It has 245 units, geared towards seniors
and families making less than 60 percent of the area’s median income.
It’s easy to see why the construction of affordable housing like this is a good thing
but what about the new, market rate buildings that service middle and higher-income people?
They’ve come to symbolize displacement.
Or the idea that existing residents could be forced, involuntarily, to move out.
Often for reasons like rent increases or eviction.
Since developers like to build in places where prices are already rising
new buildings tend to correlate with those increased rents and displacement.
But a growing number of researchers have tried to find out whether these new buildings
are the cause of displacement.
They were testing “the demand effect”
or the idea that the new buildings increase demand for the neighborhood
which in turn causes rent hikes that force people to leave.
But the research suggests the opposite.
An overwhelming “supply effect”.
Where increasing the supply of new buildings
even if they are market rate
made housing less scarce and decreased rents and risks of displacement
especially in the areas closest to the new buildings.
New housing freed up space within a neighborhood
for new residents to move in without taking up existing homes.
And it also meant when they moved from theirpast homes
they freed up housing units in those neighborhoods as well.
But here’s the thing:
less displacement was happening near new construction
but it didn’t necessarily mean less gentrification was happening.
Because gentrification and displacement aren’t the same thing.
While displacement happens to people, gentrification happens to a place.
When an area experiences demographic change
typically going from lower income tenants to higher income ones
shown here in the darker green.
Over time, demographic shifts in the neighborhood could still occur
not because existing residents were displaced
but for other reasons: maybe people decided to move to more desirable neighborhoods
or some passed away.
And the research suggests when that happened
residents were more likely to be replaced by richer people.
Meaning gentrification was happening, but without forced displacement.
So, to reduce both displacement and gentrification
you need more market rate and affordable housing
like that building in New Jersey.
Affordable housing, along with policies like rental assistance
preserve income diversity, making sure those with lower incomes
can always live in a particular neighborhood.
If there is a scarcity of a product, we know this in every market:
when there is not enough of something, the only people who get anything are rich people.
And so you have to make sure that there's enough for everyone at every level.
But there’s one very big obstacle to building housing for everyone, everywhere.
Wealthy neighborhoods across the US are really good at blocking new housing developments.
Take a look at this map of New Haven, Connecticut
compared to the nearby, wealthier town of Woodbridge, Connecticut.
When we take a look at local zoning laws and where multi-family developments
are allowed in these areas.
There’s virtually no land in Woodbridge zoned for them.
Single-family zoning laws block the vast majority of apartments
or affordable housing in this area.
When you have political power concentrated in the hands of very few wealthy homeowners
and they say, "We're not going to allow housing here."
Of course, there's going to be an unequal distribution of housing.
In 2020, after a 4-unit multi-family building was proposed in Woodbridge
a group of residents even created these flyers saying “Do we want this next door?”
Pitting single-family homes against multi-family buildings.
And this kind of conflict happens everywhere
from Woodbridge, to Soho, to San Francisco.
In some places, activists have found a way to use the language of gentrification
against changing zoning laws.
For example, in response to a proposed California bill
pushing for more housing near areas with transit
including a specific percentage of affordable housing
a group called Livable California said
building more housing would add “jet fuel to a gentrification crisis.”
They see the power of this rhetoric
and they are using it as a tool to muddle the debate to make it seem like
building new housing is actually going to create displacement
when we know what creates displacement
is not building new housing.
That's what's so kind of dangerous about this entire debate.
We have gotten to a place where the actual policy solution
is seen as part of the problem.
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
El MAYOR DESEQUILIBRIO DE LA HISTORIA: MÁS DEMANDA, MENOS OFERTA. UN PAÍS SIN VIVIENDAS - Marc Vidal
¿Por qué CONSTRUIR en REINO UNIDO es (casi) MISIÓN IMPOSIBLE? - VisualPolitik
La gentrificación desaloja a población local de Ciudad de México | Contexto DW
Breve historia de la vivienda social en Chile
Real Estate Development, Explained
El sector inmobiliario se ha fortalecido pese al mal momento de la economía nacional
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)