Being an architecture major, we are made familiar to the dynamic duo of Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs from the start. These two titanic forces in New York City’s history of urban planning portray opposite opinions on the development of cities. Moses is notorious for his rapid modernization of NYC throughout his thirty four year long rein as an urban planner through various positions.  His vision was far more advanced than what the citizens envisioned. Moses was well aware that modernization and auto-mobilizing the city would be key to its success against the suburban menace. By implementing countless infrastructural reforms he was able to advance New York City into the next tier of global cultural centers. However, he did so inhumanely. Moses relentlessly dislocated hundreds of thousands of lower class new yorkers in order to build his various highways, housing projects, and park system. His redevelopment of New York led to many neighborhoods’ extinction and destruction of their local vibe. Although these projects were integral for the city’s advance, many people wondered if this unforgiving redevelopment could have occurred without disturbing so many citizens. Moses’ greatest opponent was found in the form of a Greenwich Village native named Jane Jacobs. She recognized the adverse effects of Moses’ revitalization and publicly spoke out against his projects. Jacobs made it her goal to preserve the people, culture, and feel of neighborhoods. Personally, I find Moses’ reformation to be a necessary evil, it is quite difficult to imagine a New York City without the countless projects he made happen. And Jacobs’ position on Moses’ projects i find to be the necessary response to the revitalization process. Urban revitalization is a two-way street, and a city must develop new infrastructure in order to fix its issues, coincidentally it brings about new social issues. When considering New York today we have to keep in mind the many positions on revitalization and gentrification.

Question: How do you implant new, necessary, infrastructure without disturbing the people? How can we develop housing projects that will reduce social stigma against them and better the lives of the lower class? A major issue with affordable housing is that many residents must maintain an annual income of a certain regulation in order to stay in the housing project. This prevents residents from growing out of poverty and easing their way into a higher socioeconomic class. How can we avoid this? What are some methods for residents of affordable housing projects to comfortably work their way up the class ladder?