Isn't she more precise than that, at least in one place?I read it as defining the gentrification we care about as that which results in rents rising faster than an appropriate for existing units.
That caveat is important because me sense is the Wedge, for example, easily falls under this criteria. What does it mean to mitigate gentrification in the Wedge? There's certainly a problem there in that poor people are being pushed out. That's why her calling out of new housing types is important. Right now I'm not sure we have a solution for the kind of gentrification happening in the Wedge. I don't think we have a lot of people of color being pushed out. In fact I think we have more people of color in the neighborhood than we did when I first moved there.We need to flag the neighborhoods that are experiencing housing cost increases at a higher rate than the city overall – especially those with more residents of color.
She also defines gentrification as displacement of people above the city average, which is not the same thing as price. Is it some combination of the two?
I just came away from that section a bit confused.
That will help but we really need new housing types. Rooming houses, micro-apartments, tiny houses, "traditional" small apartment buildings, these can all play a role. None of these is "affordable" new construction by default so we'll need some way to make them so. Is anyone talking about smaller lot sizes? Land price is a huge issue in the Uptown area. I know that density is used to amortize that cost. Does it make sense to also allow lot sub-division for things like tiny houses? Maybe not in Uptown where more density is appropriate, but elsewhere? ADUs are kind of a form of this but pretty limited.That might even be a compromise definition people can agree on. She says we should target the NOAH preservation techniques outlined elsewhere in the neighborhoods where rents are rising fastest.