As I read through Sharon Zukin’s work, on the corporatization of Union Square, I could hardly keep myself from relating it back to an article I had read over the weekend. Just as the citizens of New York lost control over Union Square to corporate interests, the citizens of Brooklyn have lost control over their own real estate. On Fulton Street in Downtown Brooklyn, citizens feel that they no longer have influence on the actions of the city, as a new high rise is slated to be built over objections by community boards.
The Board wrote to the City Planning Commission Chairman, Marisa Lago, that “For many people, much of the appeal of Brooklyn has been its lower density and the ‘Manhattanization’ of the central business district and surrounding areas is distressing”. And, in a way, it is distressing. While, as with Union Square, many people will not see it as an issue, because there is a public benefit (30% of housing in the new high rise will be designated as affordable housing) to these plans.
However, there are detriments. For Union Square, according to Zukin, privatization meant the restriction of access for homeless people, street artists, and youth, thus eliminating some of the diversity and non-traditional nature of the area. For Brooklyn residents, it is another step towards gentrification and the loss of a borough that they once recognized as their own. Thousands of square feet in the middle of the Downtown area will be dedicated to another high rise, because real estate experts are tired of Manhattan’s exuberant prices, and now aim to bring them to another borough entirely. It means that Brooklyn is slowly, but surely, losing hold of what it used to be. Just as Union Square changed significantly between the 1970s and the 2000s, Brooklyn has experienced a severe shift, and it seems that it will be continuing along that path for a long time to come. In 50 years, Brooklyn might be seen as a second Manhattan – a place for skyscrapers, tourists, and business, rather than a home to a diverse community of New Yorkers.
And, while it can be argued that the City needed to allow the privatization of Union Square, there is no such argument in Brooklyn. But Downtown Brooklyn is already a mini-Metropolis, and the city is not facing the same financial issues it was in the 1970s. Yet, in exchange for a $500,000 contribution to the MTA, the City is allowing another high rise building, against the wishes of the community. Ever since 2004’s rezoning, the City has been desperately trying to turn Brooklyn into a second Manhattan, and it appears that the community doesn’t have a say in the matter. And, unlike Union Square, this is not a necessity. Not at all.
Source:
Croghan, Lore. “Council Approves 570 Fulton St. High-Rise despite Local Objections.” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 14 Mar. 2019, brooklyneagle.com/articles/2019/03/14/570-fulton-st-approved/.
Questions:
How should we limit privatization?
Should we preserve our communities or seek to turn the entire city into a metropolis?
Do community opinions matter, and should they?
