It is the story of how a multiethnic group with a large Latino membership acted forcefully against racial and economic exclusion.
– Tom Angotti, New York for Sale
The purpose of creating significant changes to a neighborhood should be for the sole purpose of benefiting the people residing there. Jane Jacobs, a long-time advocate for proper city planning, states that a major problem with it was that city planning officials, who did not live in the area in question, would observe said area for a few short days before claiming to have identified the problem along with its solution. She brings up a very strong point here, because there is, in fact, no way to truly improve a neighborhood without having lived in it – or at least, having heard from what the people residing there have to say.
In his book New York for Sale, Tom Angotti dedicates a section to “Community Planning Stories”. He discusses a variety of stories pertaining to how people protested to what has been done, or to what has been planned to be done, to their neighborhoods. These protests led to the community organizing to make their own plans and then working to make those plans happen. A prime example of this is The Cooper Square Plan, which was also New York City’s first community plan. They were the pioneers of community-based planning and persisted not only in making their own detailed plans, but in implementing them as well. By joining together, they were able to play an active role in how their neighborhoods would change, withstand attacks from conservatives, and create a huge amount of affordable, low-income housing. This illustrates the strength in what the people can do for their communities.
In an article regarding preventing gentrification, Rick Jacobus discusses that residents in low-income communities typically want changes that will make their neighborhoods cleaner and safer. They don’t want the radical changes that will make their neighborhoods into a “flashy” and “trendy” place, which would completely eradicate all traces of the social community that had existed there before. Jacobus stresses how important it is to know what the people want and to employ means of revitalization that “won’t dramatically change the social character of a neighborhood.” Revitalization should benefit the people living there instead of subjecting them to further hardships and displacement. This was the basic philosophy of the Cooper Square plan – that the people living there must be the beneficiaries and not the victims (116).
To solve community- based issues, the community needs to be involved. Cooper Square is so significant because it shows what the people united can do. They formulated a plan that was catered to the needs of the people of Cooper Square because, in retrospect, they are the most suitable people for the job. They worked to make changes for the people, to make them the beneficiaries instead of the victims. In a city that takes pride in its diversity, it should make changes in each neighborhood accordingly, based on what the people want. Diversity offers many perspectives, and people of various backgrounds coming together will create a strong force for positive change in their respective and collective communities.
Questions:
- The Cooper Square Plan showed the impact that the people can have in their communities. Do you believe people have lost this sense of unity in present day or is it still prevalent?
- Do you agree that the people living in a certain neighborhood are the most qualified people in determining how to best revitalize it?
- Tom Angotti mentions how Cooper Square was an example of improving a neighborhood and preventing gentrification. Taken this into perspective, why do you think gentrification is still seen by many as a means of making a neighborhood “better”?
