Gentrification in New York City is the influx of more affluent residents and investments into lower-and middle class and/or under-developed neighborhoods, resulting in rising rents and low-income residents moving out.
As a result of gentrification, some middle- and low-income residents of New York City, the largest city in the United States, have been alienated and forced to adjust to a complicated and changing urban environment, either directly or indirectly. [2] [3]
The history of New York City provides context for understanding gentrification in New York City. From the settlement of Manhattan Island, a Lenape settlement bought by Peter Minuit in 1624 during the Dutch colonization of the Americas in what would later become New Amsterdam, to the British taking New Amsterdam from the Dutch in 1664 and renaming it New York City, the history of New York City informs how it has experienced gentrification. [4]
In the 1970s, U.S. economic stagnation had a significant impact on New York City and by 1975, the city was facing a serious fiscal crisis that especially had an effect on low income New Yorkers. [5]
In one of the first instances of the term “gentrification” being applied to a United States city, a 1979 article in the New York Times states "A renaissance in New York City? The rich moving in and the poor moving out? ... Hard as it is to believe, however, New York and other cities in the American Northeast are beginning to enjoy a revival as they undergo a gradual process known by the curious name of 'gentrification' term coined by the displaced English poor and subsequently adopted by urban experts to describe the movements of social classes in and around London." [6]
Following the fiscal crisis of the 1970s, New York City entered a period of gradual economic recovery in the 1980s, coinciding with a national trend of deregulation and pro-business policies. The financial services industry expanded rapidly, and major parts of Manhattan, such as Wall Street and Midtown, benefited from an influx of investment and development. At the same time, widespread divestment and property abandonment in outer boroughs created opportunities for speculative real estate development.
City-led urban renewal efforts, including the sale of city-owned properties, rezonings, and public-private partnerships, contributed to the transformation of many neighborhoods. In particular, areas like SoHo, the East Village, and parts of Brooklyn began to see an influx of artists, young professionals, and later, real estate developers. This influx contributed to the conversion of industrial buildings into lofts, the rise in property values, and the eventual displacement of long-term, often lower-income, residents. [7]
In 1986, the creation of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s (HPD) 10-Year Plan aimed to rebuild neighborhoods by investing in affordable housing construction and rehabilitation. While the plan restored many deteriorating blocks, it also laid the groundwork for increased property speculation and demographic shifts in historically working-class communities. [8]
By the 1990s, gentrification had become a recognizable pattern in neighborhoods like Park Slope, Fort Greene, and Harlem. Tensions grew between preservationists, developers, long-term residents, and newcomers, as debates over who the city was being “renewed” for became central to urban politics. [9] [10]
During the mayoral administrations of Michael Bloomberg (2002–2013), New York City underwent extensive rezoning, with over 100 neighborhoods affected. [11] These rezonings were intended to stimulate economic growth, encourage development, and increase housing stock—particularly through upzoning in areas targeted for high-density residential and commercial use.
While some areas saw an increase in affordable housing units through programs such as Inclusionary Zoning, critics argue that these policies primarily incentivized market-rate development and led to the displacement of working-class and minority residents. [12] Notable rezoned neighborhoods include Williamsburg, Brooklyn, Harlem, and Long Island City, which experienced significant demographic shifts, rent increases, and cultural change during this period.
From 2000 to 2010, New York City gained over 600,000 residents, and housing prices in many gentrifying areas rose sharply. A 2016 study by the NYC Comptroller found that between 2002 and 2014, median rents in rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods increased by over 78%, compared to 44% citywide. [13]
Public housing developments and rent-stabilized buildings faced increasing pressure as private developers and investors expanded their reach. Advocates and community organizers responded by forming coalitions to resist displacement, push for stronger tenant protections, and demand more deeply affordable housing.
Gentrification increases property values and changes the social and physical makeup of neighborhoods that were previously thought to be unappealing to newcomers. [14]
Private real estate investment and zoning regulations guide the creation of housing across the city. New development may be disproportionately concentrated in densely zoned low-income communities of color, while areas covered by lower density zoning are disproportionately white and middle- and upper-income residents who can marshall greater political capital to fight upzoning and new housing development. [15] [16]
A wave of displacement of people in New York City started in the 1970s and 1980s with a significant increase in middle-income housing in the form of rehabilitated single-family dwellings, mostly in historic districts, driven by affluent, educated young professionals with "an increasing desire for the kinds of cultural and intellectual pursuits that are generally found only in the central cities—performing arts, museums, libraries, seminars, and etc." [17] Normal succession appears to be accountable for changes in gentrifying districts in New York City, at least during the 1990s. [17] [18]
In the wave of new policies in the 1990s the state stopped promoting public housing and allowed private institutions to lead the housing production. [19]
Neighborhoods in New York City have been upzoned since the early 2000s in order to enable the creation of more housing. The results of such policies are complex and contentious. Housing economists generally agree that strict zoning, by constraining the extent to which housing supply can respond to increases in demand, has a broadly negative effect on housing affordability. However, the details of how upzonings are executed, including their scope and whether they mandate new buildings to include subsidized units, and the extent to which existing housing is demolished can lead to varied outcomes. Some research points to upzoned neighborhoods that have become whiter and wealthier as space is made for new residents of those characteristics to move in. [20] However, neighborhoods may also experience this effect due to more privileged residents being able to outbid existing residents for a constrained housing supply, resulting in greater displacement driven by a lack of sufficient zoning flexibility. Additionally, construction of new housing can absorb residents who would otherwise live elsewhere, relieving demand pressure across a metro area and slowing gentrification on a broader scale. [21]
Gentrification is viewed by some as a source of contention between renters and working people who live in New York City and real estate interests. Additionally, some view a subset of this opposition to be an antagonism between longtime working-class residents of the city and the influx of new residents. [22]
The process of low-income displacement in New York City is often associated with increases in rent; rent rises to the point that tenants can no longer afford to live in their apartments. Residents are forced to leave their homes in search of a more inexpensive location, yet this is a problem that affects many locations. Many persons who have been displaced face a serious dilemma, as displacement can lead to homelessness. [23] The constantly trends with increasing household income, which is compatible with gentrification hypotheses. When income growth is broken down by race, Blacks and Latinos either have no effect on gentrification or slow it down by 2010. These findings back up widespread claims that as gentrification spreads across the city, even middle-class Blacks and Latinos are finding it increasingly difficult to stay in gentrifying areas. [24] [25] [26] For example, Long Island City and Downtown Brooklyn are now whiter, affluent, and more crowded. "The predicted increase in commercial development never happened," according to the report. Instead, a barrage of high-end, high-rise residential building has altered these areas." At the same time, the public schools in the area are overcrowded. [27]
Another large consequence of gentrification in New York City has been the increase of peripheral and metropolitan development of illegal housing, often at risk zones such as seismic areas, flood zones and dangerous slopes. [28] In 2003, Michael Bloomberg had chosen the "right people" from the business, governmental, and nonprofit sectors. He has created clear criteria and measurement tools to enable performance review. Bloomberg and his former private sector colleagues were leveraging their corporate management skills and extensive knowledge of the private sector to build the organizational capacity required to achieve achievements. Agencies were reformed, key missions redefined, and strategic plans [29]
Gentrifying neighborhoods in New York City witness an increase in commercial activity. [30] Gentrification has also been tied to controversial urban renewal policies.
![]() | This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Addressing gentrification requires not only structural policy reforms but also a shift in mindset toward inclusive urban development. Inclusion in this context means ensuring that historically marginalized communities are not just physically present in neighborhoods but are also socially, culturally, and economically integrated.
Public narratives often frame gentrification as a sign of “revitalization” or “improvement,” which can marginalize long-term residents and diminish their contributions. A more inclusive approach centers community voices and promotes belonging, countering the notion that displacement is an inevitable byproduct of progress.
Efforts like participatory budgeting, community-led zoning proposals, and neighborhood cultural preservation initiatives foster local leadership and build collective agency. These efforts encourage a mindset of co-creation and respect across racial, economic, and generational lines. Educational campaigns, equitable heritage initiatives, and stronger community-media partnerships are also tools for shifting attitudes about who cities are for and how development can serve all residents, not just newcomers. [31]
As urban planner Mindy Fullilove writes, the “root shock” caused by dislocation is not only physical but psychological; healing it requires building inclusive cities where stability, diversity, and equity are valued as public goods. [32]
In 2022, New York City was considered the most polluted city of the United States according to the World Health Organization, mainly due to transport pollutants, affecting gentrification in terms of urban quality of life. Since then, however, the city has invested in a diversity of projects including solar energy, smart constructions, better public transport and spaces and separate collection of waste linked to recycling/incinerating systems. [33] [34]
The implementation of green spaces into urban projects like public parks, roof gardens, protected areas, vegetation in public infrastructure or even private gardens help clean the air, improve human wellbeing, reduce noise, increase the attractiveness of crammed communities and foster interaction across social groups. Compact developments with an emphasized verticality are another approach to creating active spaces with efficient energy use, less driving distances, reduced emergency response time, mixture of homes, services and jobs. [35]
One approach to mitigating the effects of gentrification is to center and preserve the identity of existing communities. This includes supporting local small businesses, funding cultural institutions, and promoting neighborhood-based planning. Initiatives that prioritize long-term residents, such as community land trusts, resident-led zoning input, and support for minority-owned businesses, help retain the cultural fabric of neighborhoods and reduce displacement pressure.
An example is El Puente, a community-based organization founded in 1982 in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. El Puente integrates arts, education, and activism to empower youth and families in historically marginalized neighborhoods. By fostering cultural pride, advocating for environmental justice, and providing leadership opportunities, El Puente helps residents stay rooted in their communities amid broader redevelopment pressures. [36]
Brooklyn experiences or has experienced extensive gentrification for over 20+ years. The gentrification of Brooklyn includes, but is not limited to, the neighborhoods of Williamsburg, Bushwick, Sunset Park, Park Slope, Crown Heights, Fort Greene, and Flatbush. [37]
The Bronx experiences or has experienced gentrification in many neighborhoods including the Kingsbridge Heights neighborhood. [38]
Manhattan experiences or has experienced gentrification in many neighborhoods including Chinatown, [39] Harlem, [40] Meatpacking District, [41] Lower East Side, [42] Chelsea, [43] Hell's Kitchen, [44] and Times Square. [45]
As of 2023, Queens experiences gentrification in the Ridgewood neighborhood. [46] Additionally, experts predict new or continued gentrification in Queens impacting Long Island City, Astoria, Jackson Heights, the Rockaways, and Jamaica. [47]
On Staten Island there has been focused development in the northeastern corner of Staten Island, including the waterside neighborhoods of Stapleton, St. George, Tompkinsville and Clifton. [48]
{{cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: checksum (help){{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of August 2025 (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: checksum (help)