Neighborhood Developments or GENTRIFICATION?

Ever read something and a huge word jumps off the page, like the writer themselves didn’t know what it meant but probably looked it up just to include it in their writing? I was reading a blog on LA developments today and ran across the word gentrification. According to dictionary.com, GENTRIFICATION means “the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper- or middle-income families or individuals, thus improving property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses.” I can’t really explain what rubbed me wrong about the word. Maybe it’s that gentrification seemed to be an overly specialized word for something that happens in every facet of our consumerist & capitalist driven society. There is no written rule saying that lower income families have to move to places that are less developed, but this word assumes that. Assumes that development is linked to greater socioeconomic divides and “new” is synonymous with “rich.” That thinking is false. I’m not saying that gentrification doesn’t happen, but what I am saying is that renovations & development should be seen as good for everyone. When I’m covering LA building projects, there is about a 50/50 mix of low income housing and glossy higher-end housing.
In both cases the developers operate the same; to make the housing as cost-effective as possible for the greatest profit. In both cases the developments raise property value and usually bring new business to the area. Most apartment complexes are now mixed-use projects that have retail on the bottom floor. This provides jobs in the area and more tax revenue to highly residential neighborhoods. In the process of building any new development, builders have to meet strict recommendations by the city they are building in. Often times this means new water lines, better street lights and/or required low-income housing to be included in their project. Sure, new housing developments have down sides like increased traffic flow, but the alternatives is to let the local population outgrow an area and let public amenities decay.
Two apartments ago, I was living close to a proposed college dorm site. The surrounding neighbors petitioned the project because they were worried about traffic flow and loud weekend parties. So, the college sold the property back to the city and it sat empty for several years. The neighborhood had ignored the jobs that would have been created by higher enrollment numbers and tax revenue. In a strange twist of irony, the water main that the college had proposed replacing as part of its project burst shortly after the neighborhood petitioned the deal and it cost the city millions in emergency repairs. Not to mention the lose of water to many homes for weeks. Others may say “don’t gentrify my neighborhood,” but I welcome the changes with open arms remembering the many trips to my local gym for hot showers and eating out because my own water had been shut off. Ever try to brush your teeth without water??