As many of our fellow classmates have already discussed, Scott Larson’s “The ‘Patron Saint’ and the ‘Git’r Done Man'” emphasizes the dichotomy between the ideologies of Jane Jacobs, a leading figure and critic of urban design and planning, and Robert Moses, the “master builder” who brought about a massive transformation of New York City through infrastructure construction and redevelopment projects. While both may have their own flaws and critics, there is a recurring theme within the text that hints at the harmony that can arise, should elements of the two seemingly opposing viewpoints be applied concurrently. This theme of “balance” – understanding the importance of Moses’s contribution to New York City’s status as a thriving, modern metropolis, and incorporating Jacobs’s emphasis on neighborhood diversity and small-scale, localized developments – is something both Larson and many classmates have underscored.
This reading also so happens to relate quite significantly to the current issues of rezoning that New York City faces today. Mayor Bill de Blasio’s citywide rezoning plan, which includes the creation of about 80,000 affordable houses through mandatory inclusionary zoning (i.e. developers can make their buildings bigger or set up new projects, so long as they set aside a certain portion of their buildings for permanently “affordable housing”) has recently come under a lot of fire from many neighborhood organizations and residents. Does it sound a little like something Moses would do and Jacobs would hate? Perhaps.
Though Larson’s excerpt was written primarily concerning Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s redevelopment agendas, the Moses-like systems that prevailed with the Bloomberg administration undoubtedly remain at work today. That’s not to say they’re necessarily a bad thing, seeing the achievements Moses helped bring to fruition in the past. However, the negative consequences of Moses’s projects: gentrification and the displacement of hundreds, thousands of people, particularly in the low-income sectors, are two of the most major issues affecting NYC today. It thus comes as no surprise that neighborhoods and local residents are so concerned about being displaced and not actually being able to afford “affordable housing” (which is another major issue worth discussing). So what’s to be done? Maybe we have to incorporate Jacobs’s ideologies for a street- and neighborhood-level approach, just as we see implied in the reading.
Discussion: How can we do that? How can we use the ideas that Jacobs proposes and implement them in today’s rezoning plans, so as to prevent further gentrification and the displacement of numerous NYC citizens?
