City of Phoenix is seeing a rebirth of South Mountain Village, which covers over 40 sq miles of land.  The city is utilizing the concept of “urban villages” to minimize automobile trips and contain traffic of local residents to live, work, and play within the community.  Allen Stephenson, the city’s development planner for South Mountain Village explains the general plans, zoning, and future look of South Mountain, and Dr. Nora Haenn takes us into the inner circle of the ever-changing city.

     Teresa P. R. Caldeira wrote an article called, “Fortified Enclaves. The New Urban Segregation,” in which she writes how segregation in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and Los Angeles has created social inequality separating the older populated areas with poorer residents with the newer wealthier residents.  This similar pattern of redevelopment of the inner city, such as Brazil mirrors the changes happening in South Phoenix.  The use of this article will further guide us with the in depth analysis on how old worn out inner cities are being reborn.

      First, the city is trying to find a way to beautify the look of already existing businesses.  Private small businesses, such as appliance stores along Central Ave, and commercial businesses, such as factories along Broadway are an example of why the city will not allow any more zoning permits of such businesses.  Existing commercial businesses are getting a face-lift by putting up brick walls to reduce the noise level, and increase landscaping toward the street area to match the compatibility within the community.  In her article, Caldeira explains the reconstruction of newer buildings and homes as, “The oldest industrial areas of the city are going through combined processes of deterioration and gentrification.  In some of them, especially in districts in the inner part of town where various sectors of the middle classes live, abandoned houses and factories were transformed into cortices” (p. 86).  This similar pattern of gentrification is happening in South Phoenix.  The recent development of new offices, stores, and homes rise from the ashes of old torn down buildings in association with the middle-class and wealthy people moving into surrounding areas that once were occupied by poorer residents.

     Next, existing run-down residential homes and businesses are being condemned to reduce crime and drive out drug dealers.  The city tries to purchase vacant lands and private properties, and then turns around and sells it to private homebuilders to build either residential homes or commercial shopping centers.  Although Alan Stephenson, City of Phoenix planner explains that it is no longer practiced, eminent domain had occurred in cities in which the government would willingly take private properties for public use by some forms of superior domain or authority.  Caldeira tries to explain the new blueprint of urban residential segregation as, “The increase in violence, insecurity, and fear comes with a series of transformations, as citizens adopt new strategies of protection, by changing the city’s landscapes, patterns of residence and circulation” (p. 87).  This similar pattern of segregation has occurred at the “Four Corners” redevelopment on 24^th Street and Broadway using eminent domain.  The city condemned businesses, stores, homes, and even apartment complexes surrounding this area, and bought out the land.  The City of Phoenix’s main concern was that this area attracted drug dealers, prostitutes, and gangs’ activities that posed danger to the surrounding communities.  The city’s power to purchase these properties, resell them to home builders and businesses to rebuild brand new communities, thereby erasing the fear of violence and insecurity in that area.

     Today, the city offers incentives to newer businesses, and provides extra amenities to lure them into South Mountain Village.  In return, each business fits in the bill to improve and pave new roads, and improve exterior landscapes within the community.  However, businesses that are coming in are aiming for upper-middle class customers, therefore further separating the elite from the poor in what Alan Stephenson calls a “tough balancing act between the old and the new.”

     Another guest speaker, Dr. Nora Haenn, a professor at ASU West explains an inner view of the ever-changing South Mountain Village. Dr. Haenn explains how a mixture of low and high-income community living together within this community balances out crime rates.  However, the growing housing market, increasing property taxes, introduction of homeowners associations, and the personality of the elite, are all factors that may drive out the poorer residents.   In her article, Caldeira tries to explain how the newer business, stores, homes, walled parks and public space is altered, “As the spaces for the rich are enclosed and turned inside, the outside space is left for those who cannot afford to go in” (p. 98).  In addition, Dr. Haenn clarifies this transformation of South Mountain older and poorer Hispanic populations as, “the ethnic diversity in the population does not mask a profit for the community.”  As a result, the newer homes and businesses are tailoring for the upper-middle class white population.  Furthermore, Dr. Haenn observed that the majority of the population that attends city meetings for zoning and rezoning of private and public properties are primarily the white, upper-middle class population.   Therefore, the 61% of the South Mountain population that includes the Hispanic and African Americans do not show up to these meetings.  Caldeira points out that the images and ideas of equality and opportunities for fairness of all ethnic groups involved in the new building process produce inequality.  Caldeira summarizing this as, “...they reject the principles of openness and equality and take inequality and separation as their values…While minority groups criticize the limitations of liberal fictions in terms of the creation of equality and justice, recent urban transformations materially build a space with opposite values” (p. 95).  In South Phoenix, the separation between the different ethnic groups by income and race places inequality by shutting the doors to the poorer populations.  This can be experienced how the city buys out older businesses, homes, and deserted lots, and selling them to builders to build homes priced for the richer population.  By taking away the affordability of surviving within the neighborhoods, poorer residents with have less ability to live, work, and shop in the newer upscale neighborhoods and businesses. 

     The ever-changing pace of South Phoenix is trying to lure in businesses and newer residences by tailoring to more upscale homes for those new wealthier neighbors.  However, the displacement of the older, poorer residents creates social inequality seen throughout the community.  By force or reason alone, older neighbors are leaving because of inability to live in the newer homes due to price increases, and inability to find jobs within the community because these jobs are being replaced by newer businesses.  Furthermore, older residents are having difficulty hanging on to their land and homes because of the city’s ability to condemn property further generating unfairness within the community.

Reference