Category: Gentrification

Introduction

Urbanization has been linked to human economic and social development and progress, as these urbanized areas provide exciting opportunities for growth and renewed lives. It is also evident that urbanized areas are faced with complex economic and social challenges that have risen in recent years. These challenges and opportunities have created important tasks for policymakers to develop long-lasting solutions. One of the major economic problems facing cities is gentrification and displacement. This occurrence creates conditions for the displacement of people as it raises the cost of living in a particular area. This paper examines the causes of urban renewal in America generally, its effects, assess the policies to deal with the problem, and possible solutions.

Overview

Gentrification involves urban development whereby a city neighborhood develops quickly in a short period. This is caused by an influx of middle-class or wealthy people. These people rebuild and build new homes and businesses that make an area that was once undesirable become desirable. This will result in an increase in property values, housing prices, and rent. New businesses and social amenities come in place to cater to these newcomers. These changes attract even more and more people to settle. As property value and prices go up, the original, usually poor tenants and owners are forced to leave and go to more affordable neighborhoods, thus becoming displaced. Displacement, therefore, is the involuntary movement of persons away from their homes or home region.

Various types of displacement occur in gentrified neighborhoods. Direct displacement occurs when residents cannot continue staying in their homes due to rising house costs. Indirect displacement is when one goes to reside in a neighborhood as a low-income resident vacates that same neighborhood. Low earners cannot stay because of increased rents and sale prices when low earners leave. There are some discriminatory policies, such as changes in land use, that push people from these areas. Cultural displacement happens when the size of residential change improves. Services become focused on new residents, and the neighborhoods character transforms, making the remnants in the area feel isolated despite them remaining in the neighborhood.

Problems of Gentrification and Displacement

Gentrification becomes a problem because it either forces or prevents low-income families from shifting to previously affordable neighborhoods. It can completely transform the culture of a place and even change the name of an area (Sakran 219). It compels the original residents to vacate their homes through increasing property prices, coercion, or buyouts. In some cases, there is discrimination against the poor by the rich or the powerful, and its primary focus is on the spaces that do not involve low-income earners and people of color. Additionally, it causes negativity from the poor toward the rich. It has exacerbated racial as well as economic tensions across many American communities. Racial relocation caused by redevelopment is sometimes compelled by situations rather than by legislation. Political authority is eroding as new local leaders begin to disregard the demands of the existing long-term citizens. These remaining inhabitants retreat from civic involvement and may eventually depart the region physically.

Causes of Gentrification and Displacement

Several factors contribute to gentrification, among them is family structure. Many double-earning couples who have children in old age are moving to cities. Young and wealthy people with no children are moving into gentrified places. This is because these areas provide many services that satisfactorily serve this population. Rapid job growth facilitates gentrification in that jobs wanted by the young wealthy workers are found in cities. Cities are becoming important service centers full of financial businesses, law firms, insurance companies, and high technology employers. These are typically white-collar jobs offering very high payments. Neighborhoods around cities become desirable as they offer wealthy people shorter commuting routes. As they settle in these neighborhoods, they become gentrified.

Current Policies

At the local government level, policies encourage the rich people to obtain or renovate old homes and neighborhoods with low-income people. The rich, for instance, are given a tax deduction that enables historic preservation and environmental improvements, which motivate gentrification. Similarly, government initiatives designed to lower mortgage loan interest rates in underprivileged areas enable purchasing a property in these redeveloped districts more appealing. Furthermore, federal public housing reconstruction initiatives that encourage replacing dwelling units with less densely inhabited, more varied single-family housing have considerably aided redevelopment in areas with failing housing projects.

Attitude, preference, and cultural changes have contributed to this problem. More people strongly prefer old houses that have character and delight found chiefly in central cities (Clerval 1055). As wealthy homeowners occupy them, old houses get fixed, changing the neighborhoods beauty, and extra businesses come up to be of service to these new residents. This beautifies the neighborhood, thus attracting wealthy potential homeowners. More like-minded people will be attracted to the place as it begins to gentrify, accelerating the regeneration process.

Some policies have been formulated at the local level to help deal with the issue of gentrification and displacement, for instance, using anchor institutions maximally to make them influential tools for fair development. Anchor establishments, such as health facilities, colleges, and other entities employ locally accessible procuring and hiring strategies to retain employment and income in their areas. In Richmond area, Virginia, for instance, the health system of Bon Secours has committed community monies in the Community Land Trust of Maggie Walker.

Nonprofit entities, such as controlled equity residential development, restrict the amount of capital that a participant may acquire via the sales of a house. This has contributed to the housing funds long-term stability. For years, the model has given financial assistance and opportunities to enable persons to get homes on a shared ownership basis, although they are limited (Hackworth 49). The Cooper Square Mutual Housing Association is an example of the LEHC model established in New York. It was led by the Cooper Square Committee, a coalition advocating for anti-displacement. Credit unions and other society development monetary institutions can provide credit equitably to support the locals and businesses owned by minorities usually sidelined in financial opportunities, for example, the credit union on New York Citys East Side. These unions also extend financial service choices to unsecured loans and predatory debt traps, hence their preference for bank loans.

Nongovernmental organizations have formed the Community Land Trusts, which are understandings between a community and a nonprofit organization to guarantee that long-term housing is affordable. They buy land and lease parts to individual persons or families at fair prices, separating the cost of buying land from the cost of housing. Residents are disallowed to sell these homes to make high profits ensuring that CLT can keep homes affordable for future residents. An example is the Oakland Community Land Trust, which secured the West Oakland home together with Moms 4 Housing. It proves how the CLT has been used to advocate against real estate investment that pushes black residents out of their homes and neighborhood. The city sells its insignificant vacant plots to developers to construct middle-income house units. This, however, has really not been sufficient to avert dislocation brought about by gentrification.

Shortcomings of These Policies

These policies will work well if political goodwill, capacity, and the needed resources are readily available. The federal government, for example, has shrunk investments in affordable housing, limiting its supply in low-income communities. Restrictions on land development and exclusive zoning practices have made it difficult for markets to produce affordable houses for low-income earners. Zoning focused on single family and detached family homes keeps the population density low in these areas as it restricts the number of people that live in a certain area. Jurisdictions also make development decisions based on revenue rather than community needs. Significant scale developments like hotels, stadiums and big retail stores attract people from across the region. These developments directly displace community and culture-based businesses of African American communities.

Proposed Policies

The problem of gentrification and displacement can be dealt with by considering some recommendations. The government can build income and assemble necessary support to ensure economic improvement in the neighborhood and the well-being of residents. It should provide essential services such as childcare, transportation, access to health, and a retail sector (Phillips 79). Again, there should be a reduction in taxes imposed on the property to protect long-term residents. Big cities consider these programs to retain homeowners living in areas considered to be at-risk. It is possible that forbidding extensive luxury improvement in at-risk localities can help deal with gentrified displacement. Governments ought to encourage small as well as medium scale, diverse income development in risky neighborhoods and prohibit extensive scope development. There is a need to build middle-class housing for those who cannot afford or buy houses.

The government can include the community in the planning and zoning of their communities. This planning process must be transparent and include the elderly and low-income residents. Community services should be developed or retailed for low-income residents, for example, medical services, housing, training, and job programs (Versey 709). It can purchase development rights for buildings or homes from low earners or enlist nonprofit organizations to purchase, manage, or preserve buildings or homes of these low earners. The gentrification process is inevitable; therefore, these proposed solutions will help lessen its harmful effects on affected residents.

Conclusion

Gentrification is beneficial as it creates more development and rapid economic investments, supports consumption and entertainment projects, and increases resource allocation to schools and stores. It negatively impacts the population as forceful displacement fosters discrimination from those in power or the wealthy and excludes the poor and people of color. As of 2018, 10 percent of low-income households lived in areas considered at risk or undergoing redevelopment. The above phenomenon occurs in towns and cities across America, but it is pronounced in Washington D. C., San Francisco, and the California Bay Arena. Just under 10% of all areas in Californias Bay region are classed as at risk or having preliminary or extensive urban redevelopment. Few San Francisco neighborhoods are classed as gentrifying but rather as steady, modest income.

Works Cited

Clerval, Anne. Displacement: Cause and Consequence of Gentrification. Urban Geography, vol 42, no. 8, 2021, pp. 1054-1057. Informa UK Limited.

Hackworth, Jason. Gentrification as a Politico-Economic Window: Reflections on the Changing State of Gentrification. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, vol 110, no. 1, 2018, pp. 47-53. Wiley.

Phillips, Martin, et al. Replacing Displacement in Gentrification Studies: Temporality and Multi-Dimensionality in Rural Gentrification Displacement. Geoforum, vol 118, 2021, pp. 66-82. Elsevier BV.

Sakran, Joseph V. Gentrification in America  The Potential Deadly Consequences. Annals of Surgery, vol 274, no. 2, 2021, pp. 218-219. Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health).

Versey, H Shellae. Older Women Causing a Ruckus: Gentrification, Displacement, and Tenant Advocacy. Innovation in Aging, vol 4, no. Supplement_1, 2020, p. 709. Oxford University Press (OUP).

What is the modern housing crisis? The housing crisis refers to the high rents and unaffordable housing Americans face, and how not only homes, but rentals, are becoming increasingly unaffordable. Americans being unable to afford shelter has led to both a decrease in homeownership and a rising increase in the homeless population. Simply, the problems we see within the housing crisis are people who can’t afford housing going without homes and gentrification, where the character of a neighborhood is altered through an influx of wealthier buyers, also exacerbates the issues by making more affordable neighborhoods less affordable for the people who were living there before, through rising rates.

First, in order to analyze the problems that cause the housing crisis further, we need to know what the housing market is. The housing market is just the market of houses that are being bought and sold between buyers and sellers. The housing market distributes homes to buyers who can afford the costs. The housing market also promotes property development, which leads to gentrification, so neighborhoods become wealthier, which raises rent prices. These high rent prices in previously affordable neighborhoods drive out and lead to lower-income families and individuals being displaced, resulting in lower homeownership and higher homelessness rates. So, in summary, the housing market leads to high rent and unaffordable housing and leaves those who can’t afford homes without. But, wait, isn’t that what the housing crisis is?

Articles upon articles are quick to blame millennials for the housing crisis, however it you stand back and look at the big picture, it’s easy to see that there’s no one group to fault. It’s not that people are choosing to not buy houses, it’s that they can’t reasonably justify buying a house when housing is extremely unaffordable. The housing crisis is a natural result of the system the housing market builds and forces people into.

The housing market and the housing crisis are intertwined, so much so the terms can become practically interchangeable when talking about the unfortunate effects of the two. To further solidify this connection, I’d like to bring up the works of Fredrick Engals, who documented how when regulations on the housing market were more relaxed, the housing crisis and economic status at the time worsened, as many homes were being built unsafely. The faulty system that the housing market sets up is the cause for the rising in homelessness. The housing market sets up unreasonably high prices, leaving only the very privileged few to the luxury a homeownership, something that really shouldn’t be a luxury.

Airbnb was, at one point, seen as a possible solution to the housing crisis. Airbnb is an online hospitality service where user can rent or rent out lodging. Airbnb was an amateur operation, but it’s quickly become more professional. Now, instead of the little guy renting out, for a short time, to tourists, it’s become a news story where landlords evicting and kicking out long-term tenants to make money off tourists. This creates a rent gap, where the, “potential economic returns,” in an area increase, while current rent prices reach a stalemate. Landlords want to close the gap and make as much profit as possible, as so they redevelop, so they can raise their rent prices, which may result in current tenants being unable to accommodate to new prices. Airbnb not only can create new rent gaps but can help to close them. This is great for landlords, but not so much for their tenants, whom of which will often get evicted out of their homes, and it only makes things worse for those who already can’t afford housing. Gentrification thrives on these rent gaps as well, however, unlike gentrification, landlords using Airbnb often don’t even need to put in the effort to close the rent gaps through redevelopment.

According to Amnesty International, there are around 3.5 million homeless people in America and 18.5 million vacant homes. The supply of homes is high, and the demand should be much lower, so why are the prices so ridiculous? It’s because, rather than treating shelter as the basic human need it is, we treat homes as a commodity. Shelter is the most important human resource and because it gets touted as a luxury item, people go without their most basic needs. So, we end up with these ridiculously overpriced homes that no one can afford, so no one purchases, contrasted by the growing numbers in the homeless population. This isn’t just an economic, “Why aren’t people buying more houses,” kind of issue. This is about human rights, morality, and how we need to distribute these vacant homes to those in need. Churches get together and build more houses for the homeless community, but at the end of the day, it’s not about how many houses are made. The reason these homes aren’t being expropriated and given away for free is because houses are deliberately made to be commodities, to be bought and sold.

Homes can be expropriated, sometimes right from under current tenants, for numerous economic reasons, so why not take empty houses and give them to homeless people? What if we got rid of the concept of the housing market? In order to fix the problems of the housing crisis, we need to address the actual underlying problem, which is that the system the housing market creates in inherently problematic and can’t be solved with small steps. Let’s get rid of the concept of, “landlords,” and allow people to move freely, as they may not have been able to before. No longer would someone have to be tied down to a specific property and if a new job opportunity came up, or if they wanted their children to be zoned to a different school district, they aren’t weighed down by mortgages and rent. We’d see fewer empty homes and fewer people on the streets. Previously unaffordable neighborhoods would receive an influx of new homeowners and we may be able to observe a reverse in gentrification.

And if you’re worried about property rights, look no further than Venezuela’s communes. Communes have the power to expropriate vacant homes and will fight for the rights of individuals property within court cases. The state helps, but doesn’t get too involved, and, yes, it is that simple.

The idea of no ownership may sound frightening, but it could be extremely liberating. No more rent is an ideal situation. No longer would lower income families have to worry about whether to pay rent or to buy food for their children. It sounds awful for the economy, but it’s great for the people, and the economy is really meant to serve the people. Plus, since people would no longer pay rent, they’d have more money in the banks, in savings, as well as more spending money, so really the economy would be fine, if not better. Really, the only people who would be adversely affected would be rich landlords and people who hoard property for money-laundering schemes, but when so many people who benefit, it’s hard to take their woes as seriously.

In Art and Complicity, the author defines gentrification as the restoration of public stores or private homes in urban areas occupied by predominately hispanic and black citizens. As the article states, an affected community includes Boyle Heights in Southeast Los Angeles, where the residents have examined the role of artists. The negative affects of gentrification include the loss of small businesses, reduced salary for low-income families, and the loss of homes in urban neighborhoods, as written in Hyperallergic. Several of the articles list the results of gentrification as the exploitation of artists, temporary visibility of races in art spaces, and gang violence on the streets. These struggles remain unfortunately relevant today. As Juarez, O’Brien, and Marin say, artists must “act our way into thinking” (page 2).

The fear not only of gentrification but of gang violence is present in urban neighborhoods such as Pico-Aliso. According to Caribbean Fragoza, the people of Pico-Aliso have tried to prevent gang violence happening on their streets while also struggling with losing their homes. The citizens of Pico-Aliso have experienced violence from dangerous members of the community and from the local police for over twenty years (Fragoza). The tactics women in the community use to prevent drug exchanges include spontaneous barbecue grills held in drug-dealing areas and safe walkways to school for children. The members of the community needed to find ways to protect their families and stop the death of their loved ones.

Another way that members of the community would try to “reclaim their streets” was to get a job. In the 2000s, certain galleries began moving into certain warehouses, thus causing residents to be cautious of future income. The strive to get a job was not just motivated by increased income and stability, a job was a way to get troubled citizens off of the streets. This way, they would focus their time and energy on making money in a factory, not by selling drugs. Homeboy food workers in Boyle Heights created a saying for this positive effort, “nothing stops a bullet like a job”.

Artists tend to go to these neighborhoods because of the cheap cost of living and for a community they can show their art to. Although, artists in these areas face complications with “the arrival of investors, speculators, and more affluent residents”. As stated in The Guardian, “make an area interesting and you attract interesting people to you”, these visitors are drawn to the fascinating work being created in urban communities. A common assumption is that the influx of wealth and intrigue from these guests would benefit the artists. In some ways it does, wealthy audiences will buy art which benefits the creator. However, rich investors will come to these urban places and lease an art space away from its original occupiers. Residents of Boyle Heights, who experienced this form of gentrification with PSSST, state that these speculators “planted themselves here” and did not think of the longstanding residents input beforehand.

The “hipster” term has been coined recently as a trendy, stylish young person. However, according to The Guardian, “the hipster is a capitalist” apart from style and social media. The main concern of a hipster is to “break away from the mainstream economy with independent-minded and ethical ideas and work practices”. The hipster is a common type of artist in urban communities, the innovative young artist that attracts older and wealthier investors. A hipster is also known as “ethical, sustainable, and highly mobile”, a highly neoliberal citizen who holds the ideals of “cultural rebirth, connectivity, and economic revival”.

The hipster pioneer mentality is described as a “socialist” lifestyle, that hipsters are not trying to “build empires” but to simply “make a living”. These citizens left their secure government jobs, making them “reincarnated pioneers” who’s efforts resemble that of the 19th century British colonialists. Stated in The Guardian, Hancock not only views hipsters as “small-scale capitalist innovation” but also “a coded form of cultural imperialism” which now seems to drive the Britain’s creative industries. The state now views hipsters as “autonomous, small scale capitalist expansionism” along with the artists of the community. Artists draw in hipsters before being uprooted by them and middle-class fellow citizens. Both artists and hipsters break away and explore from developing capital investment, thus continuing the course of gentrification (The Guardian).

One aspect in urban art spaces that intrigues visitors other than hipsters is “diversity”. That term is used lightly due to the temporary visibility of different races in artistic spaces. In An Artist’s Guide to Not Being Complicit with Gentrification, listed as a lesson learned from museum and gallery goers is an inquiry into “the power of art spaces to decide who is included in the first place”. The advantage gallery owners have is their ability to show what they want, which also means their ability to highlight certain races and people groups. Owners in these urban neighborhoods consisting of primarily black and hispanic families, pride themselves in including different races, even if that means showcasing one painting created by a Muslim woman amongst multiple paintings curated by white artists. The ruling class in the art world is white, and by displaying one piece of art by a person of color, owners believe that one act casts a shadow over the existing majority. O’Brien, Juarez, and Marin ask the question of “what is an art institution’s intent when they only temporarily feature a social movement in their space?” Owners might do this because they believe that more people will come and see their exhibits, which may be true, because viewers today are sick of seeing conservative art. These gallery owners need to realize that showing “diversity” for a short amount of time does not make it a diverse gallery.Members of the community tend to contribute to the hypocrisy because they partake in these exhibitions. By doing so, they give money to these institutions and are loyal to the positivity of art. Yet through gentrification, the foundations of long-term residents are destroyed. The LA Tenants Union holds themselves susceptible by coordinating protests for the “human right to housing” and by creating the School of Echoes, a “space for critical reflection on the condition of the working class and poor communities” (Hyperallergic). This is a way that artists can be part of the community, by using their creativity to start conversation and by taking responsibility for the negative impact they can have on people’s lives due to gentrification. As artists, we can “involve ourselves deeply with tenant rights groups” instead of noticing the problems in our communities, we can “act our way into thinking”.

As explained in Hyperallergic, artists need to break away from the assumption that they are exceptional and they need to start acknowledging their part in gentrification. Art is a “part of how people struggle and resist in life”. Once people don’t consider their contribution to gentrification, art can be alienated and “the critical voice of the artist is lost”. The work of the LA Tenants Union is to create spaces of “intimate solidarity”, political action centered in relationships, love, and care (Hyperallergic). By creating nonviolent, political protests in these urban neighborhoods aimed at protecting the voices, property, and lives of long-term residents, we can spark change in gentrification.

Over the decades, Toronto has been celebrated for its multicultural roots and cultural landscapes. With a variety of distinctive enclaves at every corner, they connect people to their cultures and invite a wide variety of diversity. With the growth of new development and the priority to increase purchasing power, gentrification imposes a controversial issue for many. Gentrification is a process involving modifying or changing a neighbourhood to conform to a higher class taste. Chinatown, a vibrant ethnic enclave located at the intersection of Dundas St West and Spadina Avenue holds many shops, restaurants and is the home to many immigrants, business owners and low-income residents. Immigrants from China living in Chinatown represent over 150 years of survival history and traditions. Toronto is beginning to expand its expenditures, build new condominiums, office buildings and other developments are on the rise. Chinatown may be experiencing the influential changes caused by gentrification. Many wonder what will become of Chinatown and worry a unique piece of history will be erased. Although gentrification can increase the economic value of a town, it also can destroy the history and lives within it. Is Chinatown beginning to experience gentrification? Through threats to local businesses and their owners, demolition of historic preservation and the lives of lowincome residents and immigrants at risk, gentrification is on the rise.

Chinatown is full of unique local businesses that have been around for decades. According to Nasser in his article, “What will become of Toronto’s Chinatown? Activists worry gentrification will erase a unique piece of history.” he addresses how Chinatown is losing the things that make Chinatown, Chinatown. He argues that with gentrification on the rise, the community will be lost. The restaurant, Bright Pearl which has been around for over a decade has been replaced by a luxury redevelopment concept leaving many with negative opinions. He also touches on the destruction of historic preservation, Nassar includes a photo of a stone carved lion which has been painted in graffiti and is the only one left. These symbolic statues are important to Chinatown’s roots and are slowly being destroyed by the overtaking of new development and redevelopment. These redevelopments are contributing to the modifications being made to change the heritage of Chinatown. By replacing these businesses with new redevelopment, the roots of this ethnic enclave are being stripped away. In Micallef’s article, “Chinatown feeling pains of ‘early transition’ to gentrification, historian says” he addresses the eradication of Feng Shui which brings upon good luck in the Chinese culture through in this case, statues and other elements. He mentions that Chinatown is a place of “many layers” but is now wiped of most of them.

Locals believe that with the loss of Feng Shui, bad luck has been occurring. In Naram’s article, “No Place Like Home: racial capitalism, gentrification, and the identity of Chinatown” he discusses the notion of what many argue to be racial capitalism through discrimination against the Chinese culture. He argues that through gentrification, developers are using culture as a commodity while neglecting the authentic cultural connection. Losing the authentic identity of Chinatown, gentrification incorporates racial capitalism as a marketing scheme according to Naram. Hung’s article, “Chinatowns across the country face off with gentrification” (Hung, RULA) displays an overview of the effects of gentrification across the country and how it affects Chinatowns. Chinatowns represent over 150 years of Chinese immigrants and their struggle, survival and traditions. Due to the modern-day hot real estate market, low-income residents are forced to relocate as new developments will increase the prices of rent and the standard of living within the enclave.

Mok’s article, “Toronto Business is blaming gentrification for its move out of Chinatown.” addresses a health clinic called Six Degrees, which had been evicted from their building due to gentrification. Co-Owner Lamia Gibson states, “We went through many feelings: shock, sadness, disbelief.’ as they were forced to relocate due to affordability. ‘That gentrification that we’ve been seeing happen, is happening.’ says Gibson. With the demand for renovations, new buildings and higher purchasing power many of the current low-income renters, residents and business owners can not compete with the inflation of prices in the area. Many having to move or relocate such as Six Degrees, having to downsize in a new space paying significantly less than they were in Chinatown. Lowe’s article, “Class Struggle in Chinatown: Ethnic Tourism, Planned Gentrification, and Organizing for Tenant Power.”(Lowe, The MainLander) argues the principle of cultural revitalization as a way of exploiting Chinese culture for tourism and “white” attraction. Lowe believes that without any tenant protection or social housing of any sort, these low-income immigrants get priced out. These individuals are those who made Chinatown what it is today by putting in the hard work and labour to create an enclave dedicated to their culture.

Within the Field Report, the cause and effect relationship of gentrification and its repercussions involving Chinatown’s cultured roots were explored. Through threats to local businesses and their owners, demolition of historic preservation and the lives of low-income residents and immigrants at risk, one can conclude gentrification is on the rise. Having a place where one can connect with their culture is a prominent factor of what makes Toronto such a diverse city. Many agree that with Chinatowns being in the heart of many cities, they are more susceptible to gentrification. The priority of profit and market expansion drives large developers and urban planners to change the roots of these cultured enclaves. Purchasing power, which is heavily important to the growth of an economic system, is also prioritized over the preservation of history and its members. Racial capitalism is what many consider to be an issue concerning discrimination against commodifying the Chinese culture for tourist popularity. Attracting all demographics and what many believe is “white” commodification. The demolition of authentic restaurants, shops etc which have been around for decades, are being replaced by new office buildings and condos driving commodification and changing Chinatown completely. Local businesses represent the authenticity of the enclave and its people, but they will soon all be gone due to gentrification replacing them with high rise buildings. Low-income renters and immigrants are losing their jobs, homes and businesses due to the increase in price level leaving them unable to compete with these large developers’ money and implementations.

Not only is the community being wiped of its vibrant heritage, but also driving the members who are part of the upbringing away as well. Many worry about the future of Chinatown and what will become of it. Activists protest against the rise of gentrification creating signs that contain anti-gentrification quotes such as “Chinatown is not for sale!”. Artifacts such as the stone-carved lions are being demolished and vandalized, the importance of Feng Shui to Chinese culture is being overlooked and residents are left hopeless. In Manhattan, Chinatown is suffering similarly, owners are fighting to keep their businesses but multi-million dollar developers are taking over. The economic well being of Chinatown is considered to be lower class due to the majority of residents and business owners being low-income renters. Many shops and eateries are run by families which have been open for decades providing a taste of authentic Chinese culture. The social wellbeing is vibrant, busy and exciting. Due to the location, there are many pedestrians and a high volume of traffic in the area. The environmental well being of Chinatown is biodiverse however, the condition of the enclave is neglected shown through graffiti and litter.

Local businesses and owners are threatened by gentrification fighting a fight they can not win. In Chinatown, the majority of eateries, shops, commercial businesses etc are struggling to keep their businesses alive as gentrification hits. Multi-million dollar developers and urban planners take over with the intent to increase purchasing power, profit and living standards. Demolishing existing businesses and forcing current business owners to relocate or shut down due to a price battle that these developers intending to redevelop these buildings always win. High-rise buildings, condos, office buildings etc are in the works of taking over the land while decade-old businesses are forced to leave. Restaurants such as Bright Pearl and other businesses such as Six Degrees sadly are wiped from their known location leaving many individuals with resentment. As Lamia Gibson expresses her disappointment and sadness within Mok’s article, she speaks on behalf of many business owners who have been in similar situations without choice. A fight between class and power that many will be forced to surrender to. These locally owned businesses are what makes Chinatown what it is today, the labour and struggle behind it represent the enclave and its members. Activists fight to preserve their rights and stand up to large developers and urban planners. Protesting with signs such as “Chinatown is not for sale” and the “Save Chinatown” campaign with an attempt to raise awareness and prevent local businesses from shutting down leaving Chinatown lacking authenticity. Historic preservation is also being demolished as gentrification is tearing down the things that contribute to its heritage. Historic preservation involves maintaining the elements that reflect its culture. Gentrification often wipes a town of the elements relating to the culture. These things often reflect the people within the enclave and the traditions behind it. The stone-carved lion which has been vandalized in graffiti stands as a strong symbolic statue representing protection in the Chinese culture. Due to gentrification, one of two lions has been destroyed and the other one completely painted in graffiti with a “for lease” sign behind it.

Feng Shui, an important element in the Chinese culture is being demolished and overlooked due to gentrification as well. Chinatown as a whole is an enclave of cultural representation which is being exploited for commercial gain. Racial capitalism used as exploitation by what many argue is using culture as a mass marketing scheme targeted to tourists and different demographics. Neglecting the historic preservation of the town, developers are using the Chinese culture as a commodity. Chinatown represents decades of history of Chinese immigrants and class struggle to only be overlooked for capital gain. Many worries Chinatown will be stripped of all its history and there will be nothing left to preserve. Many residents in Chinatown are low-income renters and owners, at risk of losing their homes and jobs due to gentrification. These individuals are a part of Chinatown’s roots, representing decades of struggle, hard work and growth. Now, these members are forced to move as they can not afford to keep up with the increase in price levels due to gentrification. These immigrants and their families represent over 150 years of survival and history, only to be left hopeless in the place they should feel most at home. According to Nasser, most of the Chinese community has already relocated to other areas such as the Broadview and Gerrard area where prices are much cheaper. As there are not any implementations of housing or tenant protection, residents are getting priced out.

Chinatown is beginning to experience gentrification through threats to local businesses and their owners, destruction of historic preservation and the lives of lowincome residents and owners at risk. Redevelopment is taking over this ethnic enclave and stripping its vibrant roots for commodification, purchasing power and profit-driven endeavours. Ethnic enclaves provide connections between people and their cultures and invite different demographics to experience the beauty and history within it. Businesses having to relocate or shut down, residents having to evict from their home due to an increase in rental rates and historic preservation being overlooked contributes to the notion of gentrification taking over. Businesses that have been around for decades are forced into shutting down as redevelopment occurs. Symbolism and Feng Shui are being removed and overlooked while they hold significant importance to the Chinese culture. As activists protest against gentrification and as racial capitalism occurs, residents and business owners are left feeling sadness and disbelief about what may happen to the future of Chinatown. Most of the Chinese community has already relocated to other areas in the GTA where rent is much more affordable. These are the individuals who have influenced Chinatown to become what it is today and represent their culture in Toronto as a whole. Many worry what will become of Chinatown in the years to come, as gentrification is wiping away what makes Chinatown, Chinatown.

The London Borough of Hackney is an exemplary showcase of the gentrification that has affected various areas of London. The term gentrification originated in Great Britain, as early as 1963. Gentrification has frequently been referred to as “the rehabilitation of working-class and derelict housing and the consequent transformation of an area into a middle class neighborhood”. Rowland Atkinson states that gentrification-induced displacement often occurs when pressures on the housing market from wealthy groups create inflated rents and prices which can push out the low paid or unpaid overtime. This portrays the common notion that such potential costs in attempts to socially upgrade an area greatly affect lower income classes that live in those areas.

Gentrification is present throughout various neighborhoods in London and can be thought of as a detrimental or positive force that exists in boroughs such as Hackney by attempting to improve the overall quality of urban life or conversely driving out those less fortunate economically. The positive and negative benefits vary for each borough throughout London, however in Hackney’s case the general consensus is that in both the past and present it has had a more profound negative impact on the area’s citizens. However, this is commonly disputed as it depends on which socioeconomic group one chooses to sympathize with. In terms of the vast majority of the “indigenous population of an urban neighborhood that is in the process of being gentrified, the effects are often disastrous, but from the point of view of the resettling population, the gentrifiers, there are distinct social and monetary benefits to be seen”.

When looking at Hackney itself it proves to be much more difficult, as even though there is a rising tax base as well as increased commercial and tourist activity, much of the increased flow of revenue into the borough is dragged down by the cost of services necessary to withstand the displaced who are brought together. The indigenous population is often “displaced when housing units are purchased and either returned to single-family use or renovated and leased for more than the original inhabitants can afford”.

This leaves the lower income classes homeless as they are unable to afford housing. Numerous residents that have resided in the Hackney district are have been poorly affected by the rising price of rent. Their homes are not being treated as feasible living spaces, they are solely being treated as investment opportunities for affluent highrise developers, buy-in investors and foreign investment organizations. For poverty stricken individuals that live in Hackney it makes sense why they often feel as if the government does not care; it seems as if the city council in particular does not take housing as a first concern. These factors promote the concept that gentrification in most cases is not as much of a social problem as an economic problem.

Gentrification on numerous occasions had been attempted to be explained through Neil Smith’s production and consumption side theories. Smith is a Scottish geographer and activist intellectual “whose prolific, passionate and politically engaged writings played a significant role in shaping the present day landscape of urban studies, human geography, and indeed the entire spectrum of the social sciences”. Smith is most well-known for his contributions to the study of cities and the process of gentrification; because of Smith’s critical and detailed engagement with Marxist and socialist thought, he had a clear commitment to the undertaking of social justice. This is seen through his various involvements with social movements and most notably housing issues that were of relevance in New York City

Smith began work at Rutgers University in 1986 and in 2000 was appointed Distinguished Professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. It was there that “he founded and led the Centre for Place, Culture and Politics which remains a hotbed of radical intellectual thought and critical dialogue with activists from far and wide”.

Smith first came up with the production side theory which explains gentrification through the relationship between money and production. Smith stated that areas that had low rent in suburban areas following World War II influenced the movement of municipality in the neighborhood’s. However, the government and city council that was in power often abused it and neglected its citizens which lead to urban sectors being deserted and farmland worth that the citizens obtained diminished as opposed to farmland price escalating. Following this new theory that Smith created, he came up with his rent-gap theory in order to reveal the development of gentrification. His rent-gap theory can be explained through the notion that as “disinvestment in a particular district intensifies, it creates lucrative profit opportunities for developers, investors, homebuys and local government”.

Smith believes that because there is capital depreciation in the inner city it means that it is very likely that there will progressively there will be a major difference “between capitalized ground rent (the actual quantity of ground rent that is appropriated by the landowner, given the present land use) and potential ground rent (the maximum that could be appropriated under the land’s ‘highest and best use’, as economists often put it). Smith states, the gentrification has pushed out residents “via all manners of tactics and legal instruments such as landlord harassment, massive rent increases, redlining, arson, the withdrawal of public services, and eminent domain”.

By using Smith’s theory, one is able to see the devastating effects that gentrification can have on a community like Hackney. The post-gentrification ramifications that the residents of Hackney have had to endure encapsulate the struggle that areas such as Hackney face when being gentrified. Smith also believes that capital investment is always animated by geographical tensions such as the urgency to balance environments and attempt to explore markets in new places. Further, “Smith argued that gentrification was the leading edge of a state strategy of revenge – an attempt to retake the city from the working class”.

Throughout Smith’s career he made major contributions to urban studies. His writings on gentrification embodied the theoretical and empirical discourse of debates on gentrification and urban displacement. However, his writings on gentrification generated a sequence of enthralling empirical evaluations and his “rent gap theory led to some heated exchanges between urban scholars who saw gentrification as the product of the postindustrial expansion of middle-class professionals with a preference for central city living”.

Many people in the following years challenged his theory, most notably Hamnett and Ley in 1986 and 1991 along with various scholars who believed that Smith’s theory in certain situations neglected human organizations and the concepts of gentrification. Moreover, Smith’s theory is based centrally on certain societal groups struggles and “about the structural violence”, that certain classed were challenged by. His theory in various aspects can be applied when addressing the issue of gentrification in numerous areas in London, especially Hackney. The theory provides a potential explanation to the common struggles that citizens in Hackney are faced with.

Artists are inherently part of the cycle of gentrification due to the rise of the creative environment. With this comes an influx of infrastructure, exploitation of local accommodations and the continuous appearance of a wealthier class. Artists add vibrancy to a formerly drab and seemingly unwelcoming place of residence, inciting interest from business venturers and other artists seeking out freedom and lower prices. Artists have been a given a stereotype of being more forward thinking than the average population in terms of acceptance and individuality. However if creators do not look at the bigger picture of gentrification and their part in it then we are no better than the business schemers and young entrepreneurs that we blame for the destruction of low income families and the rise of big business in poor areas.

Visual artists and creators are not known for being the wealthiest of citizens, some may even go as far as to categorize them with the lower class however if we view an artist in terms of the “creative class” (as labeled by Richard Florida in “The Rise of the Creative Class”) we are given a much wider pool of individuals to analyze. “[Creative class] follows from people’s economic functions. Their social identities as well as their cultural preferences, values, lifestyle and consumption… Whereas members of the working class work mainly with their physical bodies, members of the creative class work mainly with their minds.” By this definition “artist” can include “scientists and engineers, university professors, poets and novelists, artists, entertainers, actors, designers and architects” to the bracket of wealth. Even though stereotype and association we can see that “artists” no longer fall in the same category as the lower class but many are still attracted to rough and poorer areas.

What would be the draw of living in a poor area? What attracts these aforementioned masters of craft to ghettos and places such as Boyle Heights? Carribean Fragoza attempts to answer these questions in her article titled “Art and Complicity: How the Fight Against Gentrification in Boyle Heights Questions the Role of Artists” where she states, “Newcomers, including artists, have been drawn to Boyle Heights by its rich cultural character — forged from generations of Mexican, Japanese, Russian and Jewish immigrants relegated to the city’s eastern periphery — as well as its cheaper rent and property in an increasingly unaffordable city.” Creators are always in search of inspiration and being surrounded by “a history of racism, gang violence, drug epidemics and poverty” are strong incentives to create provoking art. The only issue is being inspired by something negative and choosing to be involved in insuring it doesn’t happen are two very different things. Voyaging artists exist as bystanders to the trauma and pain of the residents of poor neighbourhoods being directly affected by the street’s blows. And unlike the people born in these areas they lift no finger to help.

““It’s important to know that we have suffered a lot in this community. It’s a miracle that we are alive. We have seen families lose their children and husbands. We have seen violence from the police. Many people have left their lives here,” says Delmira Gonzalez. A Boyle Heights resident for more than 35 years, she has worked for decades to make her community a safer, more livable place. She is currently a member of Union de Vecinos, a tenants rights organization that formed over 20 years ago during the demolishment of the Pico-Aliso housing projects.”

The residents born into this type of environment have the incentive to see it changed for the betterment of themselves and their people. Allowing artists to infiltrate their society to merely watch them suffer and then later to be the cause of it is disheartening and inhumane in a sense.

This is not to say that artists are the worst thing that could happen to an inner city. In fact many artists have brought awareness to causes that would otherwise remain unacknowledged. Some creators also attend rallies, demonstrations and assist the people of these rough cities by joining various organisations. However if these artists do not identify themselves as the “gentrifying foot soldiers of capitalism”, as Steven Pritchard refers to them, then their efforts are not making as favorable an outcome as they would hope. While partially blaming artists for the income of capital power and big business Pritchard also points to hipsters as the cause. “[Steven] asked the hipster[s]… how they described themselves. “Socialists,” they replied, quickly adding that they were not looking “to build empires”, just to “make a living”…by “crafting” and “creating”. They, like the original pioneers, are explorers and artists and they are capitalists.” When we think of hipsters we think of people outside the norm or breaking away from commonality at all costs. The problem is that they are buying into the companies selling them individuality which only lends aid to big business in the long run. Many current stores are switching their advertising to appeal to individualism, making it a trend to not be “trending”.

Due to the creative influence artists have on poor and inner city areas they will always remain part of the cycle of gentrification despite each individual’s personal conquest sand intentions. This issue may seem unavoidable, however if we continue to educate young artists about their effect on the communities around them we can hopefully lessen the negative impact they may have. Keeping art as the positive and world changing influence that it is meant to be, without any of the unfavorable side effects.

Change to cities, neighborhoods, and communities is inevitable—however, with the latest tide of change, many communities are experiencing gentrification. Gentrification occurs when “communities experience an influx of capital and concomitant goods and services in locales where those resources were previously non-existent or denied.” Usually, gentrification occurs when more affluent people move to or become interested in historically less affluent neighborhoods. Gentrification is a phenomenon subject to much debate—some believe that its effects are purely positive, while others argue that gentrification brings about harmful consequences. I argue the latter and examine the problems that gentrification causes.

Some argue that gentrification is beneficial since the gentrification process creates more development, rapid economic investment, and support of projects related to consumption and entertainment. The incoming population of more affluent residents and people of privilege is directly connected to an increase in resource allocation to schools, stores, and other development. While these effects can be beneficial, the gentrification process becomes detrimental when it forces original residents to leave the neighborhood through exponentially increasing property prices, coercion, or buyouts. If there is no widespread displacement, and the shifts in the neighborhood are carefully planned through with community input and involvement, gentrification can be a good thing for the community, increasing “socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic integration.”However, this is rarely ever the case.

Gentrification usually leads to negative impacts such as forced displacement, a fostering of discriminatory behavior by people in power, and a focus on spaces that exclude low-income individuals and people of color.

During gentrification, poorer communities are commonly converted to high-end neighborhoods with expensive housing options such as high-rises and condominiums. As property prices increase, the original residents of the neighborhood are forced out in a variety of ways. First, with an increase in the prices of buildings, the gap between the price of the building and the income that the landlord gets from renting the building grows bigger; landlords thus increase rent prices, which forces out the low-income residents. As building prices continue to increase, the problem exacerbates because it becomes even more profitable to convert these apartment buildings into non-residential areas. Additionally, since investors can earn more money from selling buildings, real-estate dealers have less incentive to improve the buildings. The real estate dealers instead sell the buildings at higher prices. This cycle of rising building prices continues until only large and well-financed investors are able to continue.

Because of the potential for large profits from the conversion of ordinary living spaces to high-rise or office buildings, unscrupulous landlords have used immoral means to intentionally displace low-income residents from rent-controlled areas. For example, a development corporation in New York Chinatown applied for a special zoning permit for the construction of an apartment on a plot with rent-control housing; before the city decided whether or not to issue the permit, the developer had already evicted the tenants and demolished the rent-controlled building. The residents stated that the corporation forced them out of the building through deprivation of services, harassment, gang intimidation, and arson.

Even when the living spaces in a gentrifying area remain residential, the developers attract new residents with higher incomes because of the services and amenities that improve in conjunction with the increase cost of living and property values. The influx of these new and more affluent residents puts pressure on the housing market that produce inflated rents and prices that effectively displace low-income residents. Furthermore, during rezoning, the new residents, who are in the groups with the “most spatialized privilege” and “high economic [standing, have] the power to shape city policy to protect themselves from further gentrification that might have priced them out of the area.’

Displacement from these aforementioned methods is disproportionately borne by low-income individuals of color, many of whom are elderly individuals. Physical frailty makes it more challenging for elderly individuals to resist the actions that landlords take to remove tenants. Researchers have also found that elderly people are more intensively affected by social changes around them; for example, many older adults cited loss of friendships or community networks as a reason to move. This is a problem that builds on itself— with gentrification, many people are rapidly forced out of their neighborhoods, leading to less community networks and more reason for elderly low-income individuals, who are already facing struggles from rising prices, to give up on their homes and move out of the neighborhood.

In addition to displacement due to rising property values and coercive techniques, low-income individuals and people of color also can face exclusion from the newly planned spaces in the gentrifying location. Common in gentrification efforts is the urban planning shift from “fostering community formation” to “investing the city with money and consumption-oriented spaces that resemble suburban shopping malls that exclude low-income and people of color.” Instead of community integration, there is selective development and enforcement of distinction between different areas. Moreover, when developers do build houses, they are not building these houses for low income families. There are frequent cuts in low-income housing federal assistance, and so new buildings are usually intended for upper-income families. These spaces are societally problematic because they disproportionately exclude people of color and low-income individuals.

Most gentrification occurs because of a lack of policies that value community input, offer equitable rezoning policies, and provide intentional housing options. Without policies that attempt to remedy the trends that cause forced displacement, gentrification will continue to dismantle and displace lower-income communities. To develop such policies, we must recognize the disproportionate and destructive effects of gentrification.

Gentrification, also known as Chelseafication, is defined as the upgrading of older properties to higher-income housing and where dwellings are modernised which causes it to have a higher value. Gentrification has both positive and negative impacts on the current and future inhabitants of a suburbs. This ranges from social to economic impact.

Positive impact of gentrification Economically, as wealthier people move into a previously poor neighborhood, the median area income increases. This increases cash flows for local businesses and makes local business investment more desirable. Over a period of time, more businesses are built, new jobs are created, and wages increase. This development will be beneficial to previous residents, particularly in the form of higher wages for those without high school or tertiary educations, as there is more construction jobs available. Gentrification provides a fiscal windfall for the city government. Wealthier residents contribute more income tax, and appreciating home values bring about higher property taxes. This increase in local fiscal revenues allow the local government to increase investment in infrastructure, public transportation, public schools, law enforcement, and other public services. Gentrification also causes the value of properties to substantially rise and if continued it can cause that affected area to be more of worth and luxury.

Socially, gentrification, particularly in shuttered and abandoned neighborhoods, increases property ownership rates. The increased property ownership through existing properties and building of new developments helps to reduce crime. This is because there are fewer vacant properties which are often a magnet to crime. Due to gentrification, increased population and local government revenue from taxes result in more law enforcement being affordable which also decreases crime in the neighbourhood. As more business activity is introduced to the area due to gentrification, more schools are built which allow for better educational options for the children of the current inhabitants which can result in a better standard of living later on in that child’s life. Moreover, gentrification also allows for more of a cultural mix as newcomers are joining the current inhabitants of the land, this can bring people of a country together and united them.

Negative impact of gentrificationEconomically, the biggest problem comes as the gentrification process develops and attract new businesses, high skilled workers, major developers, and large corporations, the demand for and cost of housing increases. Affordable housing in the area becomes scarce and eventually non-existent. This causes the pricing out of the original lowincome inhabitants which results in them being displaced. Gentrification can displace all the poor people and unique businesses and replace them with wealthy people, this may be good for the overall economy but it shoves the problems over to another street without actually solving or fixing them. Local economic activity may be forced out due to rising rents or shifting sensibilities. Industrial activities that employ local workers may be viewed as a nuisance or environmental hazard by new arrivals. Local shops may lose their leases under pressure from posh boutiques and restaurants.

Socially, resentment emerges within the community and conflict can occur between the original inhabitants and the middle class gentrifiers. Opposition to gentrification can reflect fear of community change. Many urban neighborhoods have distinct cultural identities and strong connections among local friends, businesses, and institutions. Many residents greatly value these relationships and fear that they will be spoiled by newcomers who misunderstand or even ridicule their traditions. When these things are lost due to the displacement of these people, it can even be hazardous to their health. Studies found that hospitalization rates for mental illness – including schizophrenia and mood disorders – are two times as high in displaced people versus those who remain in their neighborhood. Neighborhood change is often viewed as a miscarriage of social justice, in which wealthy, typically white, newcomers are congratulated for ‘improving’ a neighborhood whose poor, minority residents (usually of colour) are displaced. These new buildings are usually intended for upper-income families which can be socially problematic as they disproportionately exclude people of colour and low-income individuals. Furthermore, because of the potential for large profits from the conversion of ordinary living spaces to highrise or office buildings, many landlords often use immoral means to intentionally displace lowincome residents from rent-controlled areas.

Many people (mostly the rich newcomers) will say gentrification is beneficial and many (mostly the low income current inhabitants) will say its detrimental. However, in conclusion, we notice that gentrification actually has both positive impacts and negative impacts on the current and future inhabitants of a suburb, socially and economically.

The underground drainage system is an important component of urban infrastructure. It is consider being city’s lifeline. Most management on underground drainage is manual therefore it is not efficient to have clean and working underground system also in such big cities. It is difficult for the government personnel to locate the exact manhole which is facing the. Increase urbanization has caused problem with increased flash flooded after sudden rain. All successful civilization throughout the history focused on developing efficient drainage system. Diverting both waste water away from dirking and rain water towards crops in agriculture use. If the drainage system is not properly managed then pure water gets contaminated with drainage with drainage water and infection and disease may get spread. The drainage gets blocked during rainy season and it will create the problem to routine life like traffic may get jammed environment will become dirty and totality it will upset the public. In many case blocked drains can causes sewage and water to back up and potentially come up onto your property. Therefore, it is essential to develop a system which can handle underground drainage without human intervention. Underground drainage involves sewerage system, gas pipeline network, water pipeline, and manhole. Today drainage system is not HIGH-TECH. so whenever there is blockage it is difficult to figure out the exact location of the blockage. Also early alerts of the blockage are not received. Hence detection and repairing of the blockage become time consuming. Due to such failure of drainage line people face a lot of problem. So we have invented IoT base automated drainage system with blockage clearance. It main proposes is to detect the location, and the system governing the flow of sewage from the pipe and also use of flow sensor to detect the variation in the flow, get the prior alerts of blockage and locates them using IOT, trace location using GPS and sends SMS through GSM.

Increased urbanization has caused problems with increased flash flooded after sudden rain. The idea behind smart drainage system is to replicate natural systems that use cost effective Solutions with low environmental impact to drain away dirty waste water before allowing it to back into the environment. This is to counter the conventional drainage system that is often allowed for flooding and pollution of environment. All successful civilizations throughout the history focused on developing efficient drainage system, diverting both waste water away from drinking water and rain water towards crops in agricultural use.

Most of the cities adopted the underground drainage system and it is the duty of Municipal Corporation to maintain cleanliness, health and safety of cities. If the drainage system is not properly managed then pure water gets contaminate with drainage water and infectious diseases may get spread. The drainage gets blocked during rainy season and it will create the problems to routine life like traffic may get jammed, environment will become dirty and totally it will upsets the public. In many cases blocked drains can cause sewage and waste water to back up and potentially come up onto your property.

If drainage gets blocked or water overflows, the sensor senses the activity and sends the information via transmitter to the concern persons. Manhole maintenance by human is very difficult because environment is very poor and it is difficult to go inside of manhole for inspecting the states of manholes all the time.

Immediately it is not possible to confirm if the person intrudes the manhole or an accident happens inside of the manhole. The drainage system is essential for the people who live in urban areas as this system reduces flood effect by carrying water away (a facility to dispose liquid waste).

Improper maintenance of existing drainage system leaving many people suffer.

Today’s drainage system is not high-tech. So whenever there is blockage it is difficult to figure out the exact location of the blockage. Also, early alerts of the blockage are not received. Hence detection and repairing of the blockage become time consuming. It becomes very inconvenient to handle the situation when pipes are blocked completely. Due to such failure of drainage line people face a lot of problems.

R. Sathiyakala 2016, said that the usage of mechanical drainage system cleaner to replace the manual work required for drainage cleaning system. Drainage pipes are very dirty. Sometimes it is harmful for human life while it is need for cleaning drainage system. To overcomes this problem, they implemented a mechanical semi – automated drainage water cleaner and so the water flow efficient because the regular filtration of wastage with help of that project.

Mhael Okpara (2014) reviewed about drainage cleaning to replace manual work to automated system because manually cleaning system it is harmful for human life and cleaning time, is more so to overcome this problem they implemented a design “automatic drainage water pump monitoring and control system using PLC and SCADA”. In this project the use efficient way to control the deposal of wastage regularly treatment of disposal in different way toxic and non-toxic. International Journal of Science Technology Management and Research Today the advanced time has such a variety of advances to make our life modern. Like that cleaning, procedure likewise plays a critical part. For example, our Smart Cleaning System do the residential reason cleaning flawlessly and keep the mosquito era from the sewage, by the way, intestinal sickness, influenza and so forth illnesses stay away from In future the robotization cleaning framework will be lies on each different house sewage cleaning framework.

It was found out that in the absence of some variables like heavy winds, the propeller moved at a rate relative to the velocity of the running water. The cleaner functioned move effectively during the heavier rains which had more volume of running water with garbage and high velocity. The pan functioned effectively. It moved at a rate relative to the velocity of the running water and at the rate of the propeller. The deplete squander water cleaner machine is outlined and produced by utilizing gear changing and shaft coupling standard. It comprises principally DC adapted engine, shafts, squander evacuation plates, clean container, heading, sprocket and chains Construction materials are effortlessly available, creates work (development and maintenance), simple to build. Mechanization is an innovation worried with his utilization of mechanical, electronic and PC based frameworks to work and control generation. This framework is utilized to operate automatic sewage cleaning equipment. This venture might be created with the full use of men, machines, and materials and cash. Additionally we have taken after altogether the investigation of time movement and made our venture temperate and productive with the accessible assets. This framework was Designed, Fabricated effectively and furthermore tried. It works satisfactorily. We trust that this will be done among the most flexible and compatible one even in future.

Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) the term flashiness reflects the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow, especially during runoff events. Flashiness is an important component of a stream’s hydrologic regime. A variety of land use and land management changes may lead to increased or decreased flashiness, often to the detriment of aquatic life. This paper presents a newly developed flashiness index, which is based on mean daily flows. The index is calculated by dividing the path length of flow oscillations for a time interval (i. e. , the sum of the absolute values of day-to-day changes in mean daily flow) by total discharge during that time interval. This index has low inter annual variability, relative to most flow regime indicators, and thus greater power to detect trends. Index values were calculated for 515 Midwestern streams for the 27-year period from 1975 through 2001. Statistically significant increases were present in 22 percent of the streams, primarily in the eastern portion of the study area, while decreases were present in 9 percent, primarily in the western portion. Index values tend to decrease with increasing watershed area and with increasing unit area ground water inputs. Area compensated index values often shift at eco region boundaries. Potential index applications include evaluation of programs to restore more natural flow regimes. The deplete squander water cleaner machine is outlined and produced by utilizing gear changing and shaft coupling standard. It comprise principally DC adapted engine, shafts, squander evacuation plates, clean container, heading, sprocket and chains Construction materials are effortlessly available, creates work (development and maintenance), simple to build.

Mechanization is an innovation worried with his utilization of mechanical, electronic and PC based frameworks to work and control generation. This framework is utilized to operate automatic sewage cleaning equipment. This venture might be created with the full use of men, machines, and materials and cash. Additionally we have taken after altogether the investigation of time movement and made our venture temperate and productive with the accessible assets. This framework was Designed, Fabricated effectively and furthermore tried. It works satisfactorily. We trust that this will be done among the most flexible and compatible one even in future.

Bharat, K. (2002), said that mechanization is an innovation worried with his utilization of mechanical, electronic and pc based framework to work control generation. This frame work utilized to operate automatic sewage cleaning equipment. This venture might be created with the full use of men, machines, material and cash. Additionally we have taken after altogether the investigation of time movement and made our venture temperature and productive with the accessible assets.

By study of many literature reviews we conclude that many specific empirical studies have been carried out and categories such as automatic drainage cleaning system and its automation have been studied to a great depth. We focus more on making the system in the drainage. In the treatment system of drainage Waste water control by the motor, chain drive and lifter, and the collecting to achieve automatic control of sewage waste water treatment. Automation is a technology concerned with the application of mechanical, electronic and computer based systems to operate and control production. This technology is applied on our sewage cleaning system. Also we have followed thoroughly the study of time, motion and made our project economical and efficient with the available resources. The system is made more efficient by the use of solar energy and a micro controller.