Editing Society Hill Restoration (section)

== Social Implications ==

Society Hill's transformation generated controversy regarding its social implications. The restoration displaced low-income and working-class residents who had occupied the neighborhood's deteriorated housing, replacing them with affluent professionals who could afford restoration costs. This displacement, characteristic of what would later be called gentrification, raised questions about whom urban renewal was intended to benefit. Critics argued that preservation-based renewal simply produced a more attractive form of the displacement that tower-block urban renewal accomplished more brutally.<ref name="bacon"/>

Defenders of the Society Hill approach noted that the neighborhood's previous condition represented failure for all involved—deteriorated housing serving no one well and historic architecture at risk of loss. The restoration created viable housing from derelict structures, preserved irreplaceable architecture, and generated tax revenue that supported citywide services. These benefits, while not reaching the displaced residents directly, contributed to Philadelphia's broader fiscal and physical health. The debate continues to inform discussions about preservation, gentrification, and urban change.<ref name="gallery"/>