“The Right to the City” brought up a current view when looking at community and neighborhood planning. In recent years we have begun to think more about the “ideals of human rights” rather than just building to be efficient. This idea is reinforced in the “Planning in Context” reading as well, which talks about the various ways city planners need to take the people into consideration. They distinctly say that all “city users” could be taken into account, including residents, commuters, and visitors.”

These ideas are also discussed in the other readings we have touched upon, especially ones that examine Jacob’s views on city planning. Modernists leaned towards urban renewal through plans such as “superblocks”, but these lead to segregation and alienation. The people who end up residing in these communities often feel separated from the rest of the neighborhood and are looked upon differently, sometimes negatively based on their culture/race. But Jacob’s makes the point that diversity makes cities more appealing, and thus should be welcomed with open arms. In order to allow all different groups and communities to be incorporated as positive parts of New York City, we need to plan with all sorts of people in mind.

Another crucial part of this class’s reading was the dilemmas that surround public housing and assistance. Public policy dictates what city planners can and cannot do when it comes to projects and certain types of housing. That leads the city to allowing private owners to have “greater freedom to discriminate against problem tenants.” This idea is closely linked to my group’s project involving the homeless and shelter problems in New York City. The private ownership, without regulation, allows many people to be abused and neglected. City planning goes beyond new buildings and layouts, it also involves privately owned communities versus government run/ regulated properties.