Mile
Zero

Gentrification in DC has been the center of some discussion again, following an article in the New York Times on the changes on U St and, most recently, the H St corridor. Ta-Nehisi Coates has a pair of posts on the emotional response to this process, and another on the statistics of DC's demographic transitions:

Washington's black population peaked in 1970 at just over half a million (537,712 to be precise.) It's declined steadily ever since, with the biggest decline occurring between 1970 and 1980 when almost 100,000 black people left the city. Whites were also leaving the city by then, but at a much slower rate--the major white out-migration happened in the 50s and the 60s.

By 1990 whites had started coming back. But black people--mirroring a national trend--continued to leave. At present there are around 343,000 African-Americans in the District--a smaller number, but still the largest ethnic group in the city. I say this to point out that the idea that incoming whites are "forcing out" large number of blacks has yet to be demonstrated.

...

More likely, we are using a local matter as an inadequate substitute for a broader national situation that still plagues us. The fact is that the two parties--those blacks who remain by choice or otherwise, and those whites who are returning--are not equal. In the District, you are looking at a black population that is reeling under a cocktail of an ancient wealth gap, poor criminal justice policy, and economic instability. On the other side, you have a well-educated, and well-insulated, white population with different wants and different needs.

There is much more here to consider about what that means, about what people feel like they're losing. Even as I interrogate the statistics, I maintain that people are not stupid, and that it's critically important to understand why they feel as they do. Black people have not owned much in this country. And yet, in the later years of the 20th century, we felt like we felt like we owned many of America's great cities.

We didn't.

Latoya Peterson, on the other hand, has written about the changes on U St. from the perspective of a DC resident, and what gets lost in the process:

The vision of the city is essentially being dictated to longtime residents from outside interests — or, worse, from the folks who have settled here while Obama is in office, and don't see DC as home. The newer visions for the city are heavily cosmetic and heavily skewed to a younger, moneyed class — which is causing tensions.

It's not just that DC is becoming whiter, in other words, but that it's losing the flavor that made it DC in favor of a kind of generic whiteness--one that offers an easier transition for the kinds of people who move to DC for a few years for a white-collar job, stay for a few years, and then probably move right back out. It's becoming a three-ring binder kind of town.

Belle and I don't live in the city, although I've been spending more time there lately, but we can see it happening across DC. And even in Arlington, you can see the cultural shapes of neighborhoods being smoothed out as the demographics change. In Clarendon, just down the road, it's like a wave of yuppie-dom rolled eastward up Wilson Boulevard, out from the Whole Foods and the Crate and Barrel towards the row of small, slightly disreputable shops around the Metro station. Over the last three years, buildings have been torn down. Businesses have been replaced with chains and upscale eateries. Houses got bigger, and parking has been rezoned to protect property values, and to drive visitors into the garages.

It's not like Clarendon was a historic area the way that U Street is. Development there was historically driven in large part by another artificial factor: the Clarendon Metro. Like Ballston and Court House, it flourished when WMATA opened the station, which is a perfect example of how infrastructure determines destiny. And it has long been a shopping district with its fair share of large brands. But that used to be mixed in with a range of local places, including a decent selection of Vietnamese restaurants. Those are almost all gone now, replaced in part by a CVS and the largest AT&T store I've ever seen.

I am by no means comparing suburban Virginia to the systematic revision of a historically-multicultural urban center, mind you. But I'm glad we're having the conversation. It reminds me of the debate a few years back over Wal-Mart driving family businesses into bankrupty in small towns. Maybe it's just that I moved out of a small town, but I don't really hear that discussion any more, as if the pushback from communities has faded away. It would be a shame for the forces of gentrification to win the same battle of attrition. Because as far as I'm concerned, if the city doesn't challenge you--if it isn't stuffed to the gills with different textures and experiences--why bother living there at all?