All posts by Laura Benasaraf
Liberty? or Equality?
Our exploration of the balance (or imbalance) of equality in the urbanization of cities continues as we explore the justice behind city planning. Fainstein and Harvey describe how, empirically, urbanization takes advantage of the lesser financial and political status of minorities and underrepresented groups.
Fainstein describes the transition of community planning from an aesthetic field to a social science, as the intellectuals of the mid-nineteenth century decided to fix the disadvantages of poverty and discrimination in cities. He describes their proposed solutions, varying from neo-Marxist to democratic, with full citizen participation. However, none of the theories were ultimately put into action.
Harvey describes how Moses’ “suburbanization” of New York City led to the economic crisis of the sixties and seventies, causing the emptying of the city into suburbs and resulting in a polarization in the distribution of wealth (not unlike today’s) and unrest (and violence) in minority neighborhoods (“The Right to the City, 9).
Urbanization results in diversity, but did it result in equality throughout the classes?According to many, it did not, in fact leading to the formation of cultural enclaves throughout the city. Additionally, though it is fair to limit behaviors, we come to limit those who are stereotyped into those behaviors as well. Nevertheless, it is also a restriction on liberty to force people to live in the same building/neighborhood if they do not wish to do so. Unfortunately, progressive solutions seem to move around the key problems of segregation and inequality without solving the issues themselves.
However, it is important to note that not every social scientist agrees with the negative theories surrounding urbanization. Fainstein quotes Kirby in an explanation as to how urban sprawl can lead to benefits for those with lower incomes, as it leads to cheaper housing in fringe neighborhoods (84). Nevertheless, the immense costs and inequalities caused by urbanization far overshadow the benefit of cheaper real estate.
Harvey compares the urbanization and progression of our New York City with the development and urbanization in Paris in the mid nineteenth century, a social and economical era that ultimately ended in revolt. He shows how New York is following in the progression of Paris. Is there a way for New York City (or other cities worldwide facing the same change) to avoid the imminent revolt? Or is Robert Moses doomed to be known as a Hausmann?
Politics of POP
The politics of Place, Oppression, and Privilege are all connected in a metropolitan city like New York. Hayden discusses how “space is permeated with social relations; it is not only supported by [them] but it is also producing—and produced—by [them]. A “Place” can denote both an aesthetic history, and the cultural history—even long after the group that resided there has left. A city is organized by the biases and perspectives of the organizer; we see segregated neighborhoods, areas divided by race and social or economical inequality, because history is written in a way that neglects minority histories (Hayden, 9).
in “Privileged Places,” we read how the segregation, sprawl, and concentrated poverty of Post World War II urban development led to uneven development and racial disparities throughout the country. In the separated communities, even education—known as “the great Equalizer”—is not up to par in poorer neighborhoods and cities. Additionally, in “Five Faces of Oppression,” we are given criteria for an “oppressed race” (Young).
In our last class, we discussed what we thought the main issue being discussed was. I chose segregation (not knowing what the next week’s reading would bring). There has been uneven development throughout New York City, which leads to the underrepresentation and thus inattention to certain communities and neighborhoods that could really use some help.
Squires and Kubrin (Privileged Places) discuss how both class-based policies and race-based initiatives must be used to even out the city. They use the term “colorblindness” to describe legislation that is technically universal in character but has clear racial implications. One such form of legislation is inclusionary zoning, as proposed by Mayor Bill de Blasio. Inclusionary zoning and other forms of fair housing law enforcement will be necessary to reduce the racial segregation throughout the city.
Discussion Question: Hayden mentions how New York City (meaning, the center of global culture, finance, et cetera) would not be complete without Harlem and the Bronx. Is the unintentional class system and the society that follows a characteristic of a metropolitan city—and thus, would New York City be the same without it?
Project Update
The Future of Community Gardens in NYC: Recognition of Community Gardens
Community gardens developed in New York City in response to the fiscal crisis in the 1970’s, when large sections of New York City were abandoned by both landlords and city officials. Residents revitalized their neighborhoods, reclaiming them from decay by turning vacant lots into community gardens. The development of more than eight hundred gardens steered neighborhoods away from crime and toward community action, better diets and cleaner environments. The gardens trained a generation of activists and spawned other environmental projects, in New York and overseas. The gardens aided in the urban renewal of the city in a cost effective way, as “a garden can be more than just a place to stop and smell the roses. Its spin-off effects can help to tip a neighborhood and an entire city out of a cycle of squalor.”
However, there is little to no legislation that discusses community gardens. Though community gardens have been previously placed under the umbrella protected by the Public Trust Doctrine—the theory that certain resources are preserved and maintained by the government for public use—little actual governance exists. The 2002 agreement to protect New York City community gardens expired in 2010 and was not renewed. As of now, permanent protection for the gardens does not exist. For all intents and purposes, community gardens do not exist. For example, on the CPC maps of New York City, community gardens appear as empty lots because there are no zoning regulations for the gardens. Additionally, the city councils and committees that control the community gardens do not reflect the wishes of those who utilize the gardens. Meetings are often held at times inconvenient or impossible for working individuals to attend, and often end in decisions that support development by the private sector.
Therefore, our project focuses on the future of community gardens in New York City, specifically focusing on recognition of the gardens by both citizens and elected officials in ways that will ensure their continuity and effectiveness in New York City neighborhoods.
Our team was fortunate enough to be paired with the New York City Community Garden Coalition for our project. The Coalition, founded in 1996, promotes the preservation, creation, and empowerment of community gardens through education, advocacy, and grassroots organizing. The Coalition holds meetings once a month and advocates for community gardens all over the city.
Oneeka, Sara and Amanda met with Ray Figueroa, President—and our community contact —of the New York City Community Garden Coalition last Friday to discuss our project. He has helped to focus our research and gave us some new ideas to think about. Ray primarily works with the City Council and the City Planning Commission. He pointed out that there is a failure to translate the concerns of New York City residents into actions, and also pointed out several flaws in governance concerning community gardens. Additionally, there is not much of an awareness of the benefits of community gardens to a community, nor is their recognition of those benefits.
An interesting thing Ray described was the tensions between the advocates of affordable housing and community gardens. Many people assume that since advocates of the gardens don’t support the creation of affordable housing on garden sites, they don’t support it at all, a feeling that has probably escalated with the release of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to develop affordable housing in current community garden spaces. Ray, however, showed us how community gardens and affordable housing go hand in hand as two effective ways to combat poverty in urban centers. One example of this partnership between housing and gardens is the Melrose Commons neighborhood in the Bronx. Led by the Nos Quedamos Committee, the neighborhood is composed of small blocks with playing fields, children’s centers and community gardens scattered throughout. Sara and Kelly plan to visit this community as part of our research, observing the layout and interviewing locals.
Ray and the Community Garden Coalition were excited about a community awareness project that we could help them with, and wanted to get back to us on the specifics of a helpful media addition to their campaign. He was very interested and excited in our idea for a website that contained multimedia resources for community gardens. Some areas of the site include a video that shows how the gardens are an integral part of the community, an overview of our research, displaying the environmental and economical benefits of having community gardens, and information about how the community members can take action to protect the community gardens. Once our research is complete, Lisa and Amanda can begin to build our website with the assistance of Aaron, our tech fellow.
The next steps for our group mostly involve visiting field sites involved in our project. Oneeka and Kelly hope to interview Ray again within the next two weeks to discover more about his current projects. They also hope to interview some residents from Melrose Commons on a site visit that they and Kelly are planning to have before March 30th. In addition, we hope to send a few of our team members to a forum being held by the Urban Justice System, a public interest law firm, later this month. The panel is discussing the issue of public property, which is extremely relevant to community gardens (under the Public Trust Doctrine). We also hope to contact the Department of Environmental Protection and the City Planning Commission, two government agencies that have much to do with community gardens. Amanda and Laura hope to gain this contact and to do additional research into the governance involving the gardens. In addition, we would like to have most of the historical and legislative research done by March 20th, as this will give us time to focus on our project deliverable.
Our team works well together. We have exchanged emails and phone numbers and have no trouble communicating, gathering at least once a week for group sessions on a web forum (like Google docs) accompanied by a group chat. We share literature from meetings and research in Google docs and have sources from Ray. He is very excited to be working with our team, and is eager to see what we can come up with that can help benefit the gardens.
Urban Renewal vs. Urban Upheaval
In “Root Shock: the Consequences of African American Dispossession,” Mindy T. Fullilove discusses the upheaval of the natural progression of African American communities due to Urban Renewal. Fullilove describes how African American communities evolved in urban centers. Though they lived in ghettoes, an “urban village” developed, leading to social and cultural awakenings like the Harlem Renaissance. However, with the birth of Urban Renewal, these communities were disrupted from the natural path towards community independence and upward mobility.
Supporters of Urban Renewal claimed it would “clear the slum” to make way for modern development. Residents were cleared out of the ghetto, and the land was sold to private developers. Though Urban Renewal was meant to unify and beautify cities, the development strengthened segregation with the development of “the projects” and led to poverty conditions, stress, and illness in the segregated, overcrowded developments.
Fullilove illustrates the shortcomings of urban renewal with the example of Roanoke, Virginia, a city formerly home to two thriving African American communities. The preexisting community setting was disrupted due to the lack of aesthetic appeal of the slum. Residents of the communities-primarily African Americans-were told the changes were for their benefit; however, most of the residents were unable to afford the newly-built housing in their former home and were unable to return, leaving the community scattered. As one resident said, “We used to have a community…now it’s just buildings.”
In addition to the loss of communities and the cultures they upheld, urban renewal led to a paranoia in the displaced persons, leading to individuals who have a strong distrust of the government. We cannot blame them for their paranoia; as Fullilove explains, how can they trust a government that claims to be “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” when in fact it favors the development of one ethnic or cultural group over another?
History is written by the victor. When the weaker parties are given voices, they cause us to ask: is progress ethical if it is achieved at the expense of another group? Would African American communities have developed more-or more rapidly-without legislation like the Urban Renewal Act?
