This paper analyzes the impacts of territorial stigmatization on the experiences and life strategies of residents of Regent Park, Canada's first and largest public housing estate. It centers on how discourses of isolation, disorganization, and danger (based on imported theories and depictions of life in social housing developed in a very different time and place than the Canadian inner city) have served to justify the state-driven gentrification of public housing via ‘socially mixed’ redevelopment. Drawing on semistructured, in-depth interviews with over thirty tenants, this paper offers a counternarrative documenting the many benefits and advantages of living in an area of ‘concentrated poverty’. It reveals that tenants have deep attachments to Regent Park despite its reputation, and enjoy a strong sense of community; they have access to dense networks of friendship and support, local amenities and convenience, and services and agencies that suit their needs. While these benefits are real, they are counteracted by the impacts of coping with a neglected physical environment resulting from welfare state retrenchment (particularly on the housing front); and coping with safety issues and drug-related activities. Socially mixed redevelopment holds questionable promise for meaningfully addressing these problems and may even diminish some of the benefits of community life.
AugustM, 2008, “Social mix and Canadian public housing redevelopment: Experiences in Toronto”Canadian Journal of Urban Research17(Supplement) 82–100
2.
AugustMWalksA, 2012, “From social mix to political marginalization? The redevelopment of Toronto's public housing and the dilution of tenant organizational power”, in Mixed Communities: Gentrification by Stealth? Eds BridgeGButlerTLeesLSlaterT, (The Policy Press, Bristol) pp 273–298
3.
BarberJ, 2003, “Regent Park gets a fix: Make way for the condo crowd”Globe and Mail 9 September, page M2
4.
BennettLReedA, 1999, “The new face of urban renewal: The Near North Redevelopment Initiative and the Cabrini-Green neighborhood”, in Without Justice For All: The New Liberalism and Our Retreat From Racial Equity Ed. ReedA, (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) pp 175–211
5.
BennettS, 2000, “The possibility of a beloved place: Residents and placemaking in public housing communities”Saint Louis University Public Law Review19259–307
6.
BlackwellT, 2002, “Urban guru praises RP plan”National Post 18 December, page A21
7.
BoudreauJKeilRYoungD, 2009Changing Toronto: Governing Urban Neoliberalism (University of Toronto Press, Toronto)
8.
BridgeGButlerTLeesL, (Eds), 2012Mixed Communities: Gentrification by Stealth? (Policy Press, Bristol)
9.
City of Toronto, 2005Final Report: Application to Amend the Official Plan and the Zoning By-Law, RP Revitalization (City of Toronto, Toronto)
10.
Clampet-LundquistS, 2004, “Moving over or moving up? Short-term gains and losses for relocated HOPE VI families”Cityscape: A Journal of Policy and Development Research757–80
11.
CowanJ, 2003, “The resurrection of RP”National Post 12 July, page TO1
12.
CrumpJ, 2002, “Deconcentration by demolition: Public housing, poverty, and urban policy”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space20581–596
13.
CrumpJ, 2003, “The end of public housing as we know it: Public housing, labour regulation, and the US city”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research27179–187
14.
DefilippisJ, 2004Unmaking Goliath (Routledge, New York)
FriedM, 1963, “Grieving for a lost home”, in The Urban Condition Ed. DuhlL, (Basic Books, New York), pp 151–172
17.
FulliloveM, 2004Root Shock: How Tearing Up City Neighborhoods Hurts America and What We Can Do About It (Ballantine Books, New York)
18.
GibsonK, 2007, “The relocation of the Columbia Villa community: Views from residents”Journal of Planning Education and Research275–19
19.
GillespieK, 2002, “New face for RP”Toronto Star 17 December, page B02
20.
GoetzE, 2003Deconcentrating the Poor in Urban America (The Urban Institute, Washington DC)
21.
GoetzE, 2011, “Where have all the towers gone? The dismantling of public housing in U.S. cities”Journal of Urban Affairs33267–287
22.
GoetzEChappleK, 2010, “You gotta move: Advancing the debate on the record of dispersal”Housing Policy Debate20209–236
23.
GothamK FShefnerJBrumleyK, 2001, “Abstract space, social space, and the redevelopment of public housing”Research in Urban Sociology6313–335
24.
GreenbaumSHathawayWRodriguezCSpaldingAWardB, 2008, “Deconcentration and social capital: Contradictions of poverty alleviation policy”Journal of Poverty12201–228
25.
HackworthJ, 2002, “Post-recession gentrification in New York City”Urban Affairs Review37815–843
26.
HackworthJ, 2003, “Public housing and the rescaling of regulation in the USA”Environment and Planning A35531–549
27.
HackworthJMoriahA, 2006, “Neoliberalism, contingency, and urban policy: The case of social housing in Ontario”Studies in Political Economy81510–527
28.
HallJ, 2002, “A noble experiment that went awry”Toronto Star 20 December, page A18
29.
HarveyD, 1990The Condition of Postmodernity (Blackwell, Cambridge, MA)
30.
HarveyD, 1989, “From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation of governance in late capitalism”Geografiska Annaler B713–17
31.
HastingsADeanJ, 2003, “Challenging images: Tackling stigma through estate regeneration”Policy and Politics31171–184
32.
HulchanskiD, 2010The Three Cities Within Toronto: Income Polarization Among Toronto's Neighborhoods, 1970–2006University of Toronto Cities Centre, Toronto
33.
HumeC, 2007, “RP redesign a sign of lessons learned”Toronto Star 1 November, page A11
34.
JacobsJ, 1961The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Vintage Books, New York)
35.
MallanC, 2002, “Fitting in key to success of public housing”Toronto Star 7 November, page A06
36.
ManzoLKleitRCouchD, 2008, “‘Moving three times is like having your house on fire once’: The experience of place and impending displacement among public housing residents”Urban Studies451855–1878
37.
MaysJ, 2005, “RP towers deserve to be saved”Globe and Mail 25 February, page G2
38.
NewmanO, 1972Defensible Space (Collier Books, New York)
39.
PhilpM, 1997, “RP back on the drawing board”Globe and Mail 22 May, page A10
40.
PopkinSLevyDBuronL, 2009, “Has HOPE VI transformed residents' lives? New evidence from the HOPE VI Panel Study”Housing Studies24477–502
41.
PurdyS, 2003From Place of Hope to Outcast Space: Territorial Regulation and Tenant Resistance in RP Housing Project, 1949–2001 PhD thesis, Department of History, Queen's University, Kingston, ON
42.
RumingKMeeKMcGuirkP, 2004, “Questioning the rhetoric of social mix: Courteous community or hidden hostility?”Australian Geographical Studies42, 234–248
43.
Sanchez-JankowskiM, 2003, “Gangs and social change”Theoretical Criminology7191–216
44.
SicilianoA, 2010Policing Poverty: Race, Space, and the Fear of Crime After the Year of the Gun (2005) in Suburban Toronto PhD thesis, Department of Geography, University of Toronto
45.
SlaterT, 2006, “The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research30737–757
46.
SmithN, 1996The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City (Routledge, New York)
47.
SullivanLLietzC, 2008, “Benefits and risks for public housing adolescents: Experiencing HOPE VI revitalization: A quantitative study”Journal of Poverty12133–154
48.
TCHC Corporation, Toronto Community Housing. 2004RP Community Services and Facilities Study
