In previous classes, we’ve discussed how the growth machine is responsible for much of the city’s urban planning. Scott Larson describes the mechanisms responsible for this in chapters 5 and 6 of Building Like Moses with Jacobs in Mind. We’ve already discussed the dangers of the interactions and intersections of business, politics, and development, which seem quite obvious. The communities aren’t anywhere in the equation, which can be problematic.
Larson’s discussion of the Regional Plan Association’s “Third Regional Plan” highlights the fact that despite their best attempts, bridging the “nuanced” Jacobs school of urban planning with the “bold strokes” of Moses school had some positive benefits to communities, but many of these benefits were unintended consequences of a larger plan that ultimately benefited industries.
The RPA, a conglomerate of pharmaceutical companies, real estate interests, banks, media outlets, and other large organizations, sought to “improve the quality of life” and “economic competitiveness” of New York City and the surrounding region, which appears to be a noble goal on the surface level. Regional preserves, urban parks, greenways, and new harborfront parks were planned and “inward growth” was supported to give existing employment and residential centers a boost. These improvements in turn increased property values and rents, which would allow these new improvements to pay for themselves. However, this is the essence of gentrification. Scott Larson points out a fatal flaw in the image of pioneering gentrifiers seeking to “turn around” low-income neighborhoods—the first new tenants of gentrified neighborhoods are real estate companies.
Larson points out that from the 1990s forward, gentrification was no longer the “block-by-block form of neighborhood rehabilitation that Jacobs celebrated”. Gentrification had been methodical and capitalized, with real estate interests and planning associations coordinating it. This phenomenon was precisely what the Regional Plan Association advocated: inward growth to improve economic competitiveness, raise property values, and rents.
Discussion question: According to Larson, the public was irrelevant to Robert Moses. He hired experts and specialists who shared his modernist ideals and only attempted to convince business leaders and politicians of the efficacy of his planning. Because the RPA was a conglomerate of corporations and powerful interests, is it simply a perpetuation of the Moses school?
