All posts by Erica Loo

More Green (Space) for More Green (Money)

Contemporary Planning in NYC

In “Planning and the Narrative of Threat,” Larson mentions that in the Third Regional Plan “‘[a]bandoned and underutilized’ waterfronts and leftover industrial sites and landfills – together accounting for fifty thousand acres of brownfield – would be redeveloped” and that these spaces ” were rezoned for ‘adaptive’ reuses or slated for demolition and redevelopment.”

An example of this is the revamping of the area about Flushing Creek. The waterfront of the polluted Flushing Creek is set to be developed into a waterfront promenade with housing and small businesses. As of now people do not live there, as it is zoned for high industry, which contributed to the pollution of Flushing Creek. Under the rezoning the area will be redeveloped after the creek is dredged by the Department of Environmental Protection. From an environmental standpoint, the plans to develop in Flushing West are great.

However, as Larson quotes from Yaro, “[Gentrification] is one of the constants, one of the results of the success of the city.” This result of the success of the development along Flushing Creek is an exact concern of one of the community members who spoke at the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance meeting. The representatives from the Department of City Planning and the Department of Housing and Preservation seemed to try to appeal to the community by asserting that there are resources to help tenants that are facing increases in rent and that the affordable housing included in the plans are for the benefit of the community. The DHP plans to raise awareness of these resources so that fewer people would worry about the threat of gentrification on their rents. But is that enough? Wanting to improve the city is fine, but the success of the city leads to adverse effects to the NYC residents of middle and lower incomes.

Discussion Question: How can the city be improved and developed while maintaining good relations with its lower to middle income residents?

Weekly Report 1 by Erica Loo

Future of Flushing West, Updates - Flushing West

Progress Made:

On Monday, March 7th, I emailed the Chinese Community Center of Flushing to ask for their opinion on the rezoning of Flushing West, but they have not replied.  

On Tuesday, March 8th, I called the Taiwan Center to ask for their opinion on the rezoning of Flushing West. However, the person who picked up the phone could not speak English and it became apparent to us that not many people at the center would be able to speak English or talk to us about the rezoning. That same day I called the MinKwon Center and was connected to Jung Rae Jang, the Organizing Fellow for Advocacy & Organizing team at the MinKwon Center for Community Action. He informed me of the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting taking place that week. He also talked about his position on the rezoning of Flushing, which was repeated by James Hong at the meeting. Jung Rae Jang believed that more affordable housing should be guaranteed permanently, that there should be more senior centers because Flushing has an aging population, and that gentrification may be a real threat to Flushing residents.   

On Thursday, March 10th, most of our group attended the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting. Panelists included Councilman Peter Koo, City Planner Joy Chen, and representatives from the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development. In the beginning of the meeting, the plans for the development of Flushing West were presented by the representatives from the NYC Department of City Planning (DCP) and the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development (DHP). Joy Chen stated that “[t]he goals of the Flushing West Neighborhood Planning Study is to craft a comprehensive plan that is responsive to what we’ve heard in the community and . . . [to] make Flushing a better place to live, work, and play.” She continued to say, “The plan’s objective will be to encourage new affordable housing, which is greatly needed, encourage walkability, support small business development, and help ensure that infrastructure and city services can align and meet the demands currently in Flushing as well as future growth.” Joy Chen from the DCP explained the overall goals of the development of Flushing West while the representative from the DHP went into the details of the affordable housing and development. The DHP representative stressed that there are many resources that residents can use if they are facing problems as tenants in NYC. Because many of the sites for development in Flushing are privately owned, it is difficult for the DHP to use their resources to have affordable housing in Flushing. Thus, they have to use Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) to require a minimum of 25% of the units developed on the waterfront of Flushing Creek to be affordable at an average 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) or 30% of the units to be affordable at an average of 80% of AMI. Both the DHP and DCP representatives made it a point to say that the DCP and the DHP are listening to the concerns of the community. It seemed like the DCP and DHP representatives understood that the community really cared about the affordable housing and tried to make sure that the community understood that they were working with them. During their presentations they also stressed that they will be working with the community in the future, before the plan is finalized.

After the DCP and DHP representatives explained the plans, people from the Minkwon Center and the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens presented their concerns about the development plans. The Minkwon representative, James Hong, expressed the community’s desires of: “real permanent affordable housing targeted to the incomes of current Flushing residents, . . . low income senior housing for our elders and aging population, . . . good jobs for local residents and preservation and promotion of small businesses, . . . infrastructure and transportation improvements, . . . strong anti-harassment and anti-displacement policies to protect the community, . . . sound environmental restoration and preservation and access to open green spaces, . . . [and] real and meaningful community engagement and participation.” Afterwards, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens representative, Carol Blockmen, focused on the issue of affordable housing in the rezoning plans. She pointed out that the MIH proposal is not affordable to Flushing residents because “the median income for a family of three in downtown Flushing is about $34,000 . . . [but] the lowest median income addressed in the MIH proposal is $46,620. This will not help low-income residents of Flushing. Many members of City Council agree with [her]. It has been reported that there has been negotiations for a change in the MIH proposal to include 20% of apartments to be available to families with a median income of $31,080 annually. This is still not enough to adequately address the large number of low-income families in Flushing . . . [She is] actually recommending [that the developments] need 30% of new apartments to be for families making between $23,310 and $31,080 annually.” After she finished her presentation, the meeting was open to questions from the community members.

At the end of the meeting Claudia and I asked Joy Chen for her powerpoint presentation. I received her presentation on Friday, March 11th.

Interesting Findings:

No one at the meeting addressed the displacement of businesses along the now polluted waterfront. Most people seemed only to be concerned about the affordable housing in the rezoning plans. Councilman Peter Koo said at the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting that he would vote against the MIH plan if the plan did not include an option of 40% AMI for deep affordability.

The attendees of the meeting were diverse; there were Spanish, Korean, and Chinese translators for the presentations.

Challenges Encountered:

The Chinese Community Center of Flushing has not yet to responded to my email.

Tasks Remaining:

We still need to decide on the format of our popular education material and white paper. I will continue to communicate with the Minkwon Center for Community Action and other any future community contacts. I will also try to obtain James Hong’s and Carol Blockmen’s powerpoint presentations. Wilian will continue to research small business growth and workforce needs in Flushing to understand MinKwon’s desire for the developments to provide good jobs for Flushing residents. Claudia will be researching the historical background of Flushing and looking at the significance of community centers in Flushing. Attending the meeting has given us some insight as to which organizations are really concerned about the rezoning. Christine will continue to research the problem of gentrification and its relationship to displacement because of the community’s fear of the lack of real affordable housing in the new construction. Brian will continue to discuss affordable housing, issues with the current rezoning plan, and the solutions that the representative from the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens presented.

Group Dynamic:

Most of the group was able to attend the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting. We are currently working together to split up the work evenly, including deciding on who will be posting the weekly report for each week.

Fixing Flushing: Waterfront Ripple Effects

Future of Flushing West, Project Brief - Flushing West

Update:

We have decided to find out the potential effect of gentrification from the development Flushing West on the community. To explore these effects we plan to research the placement of Skyview mall in Flushing and its effect on the property values around it using Social Explorer, which has an option of looking at house values. Skyview mall is in the vicinity of the site for development along the waterfront. Big cooperate stores such as Target, Forever 21, Nike, and Adidas have stores in the mall. We predict that our research will show that the presence of Skyview increased property values. From that, hopefully, we can predict that the presence of the waterfront promenade will also Flushing property values, which would lead to gentrification and displacement. Besides using resources like Social Explorer, we also would like to attend Town Hall meetings to talk to community members  to be aware of the community’s feelings and knowledge of the waterfront development.

Timeline

3/30/16

  • Update project brief
  • Discuss research findings
  • Weekly update 3 by Wilian

4/6/16

  • Weekly update 4 by Christine

 

Brian Auqilla, Christine Chen, Wilian Chauca, Erica Loo, and Claudia Yan

We have learned much about the history of city planning and how economic endeavors have shaped the development of our city. In many instances, these economic driven redevelopment projects have led to problems such as gentrification, power struggles, and displacement. Although more regulations for redevelopment projects now exist, the aforementioned issues remain relevant and pose a possible threat to the residents of Flushing West, one of the areas designated for rezoning. Upon speaking to a contact at the MinKwon Community Center, we have learned about the community’s opposition to the city’s plans for Flushing West. Some of our immediate goals include figuring out why the denizens of Flushing are opposed to the idea of rezoning and raising awareness of the concept of rezoning as well as the potential problems that arise due to rezoning. Achieving these short term goals will hopefully facilitate our efforts in achieving our long term goals. These include mediating between those in charge of the rezoning and those most likely to be affected by rezoning and getting more people involved in city planning efforts.

Before we can raise awareness about the problems of rezoning, we must first gain a better understanding of the roots of redevelopment projects. We plan to explore other instances of rezoning in New York City and Flushing’s development to understand Flushing’s demographics and the specific impacts that rezoning may have on Flushing. After conducting historical research on key policies and planning practices with a focus on the history of Flushing, rezoning in NYC, and community centers, we plan to have direct engagement with community contacts in order to gain insight on the various opinions and understandings of the current rezoning plans for Flushing West.

Our specific activities will include reaching out to various community centers located in Flushing and getting their interpretation and opinions on the rezoning of Flushing so that we may accurately portray the community’s concerns about the rezoning. We can also participate in events or meetings planned by the MinKown Center.

We expect to produce a white paper proposing planning practices that will give the community a louder voice in the decision making process. We also want to make sure that the people understand the implications of the rezoning and can make knowledgeable decisions concerning the future of Flushing West. We also have plans to make a public engagement flyer which would serve to capture public interest and increase attendance to the public meetings about the rezoning.

After successful contact with the MinKwon Center for Community Action, we were able to get a touch of MinKwon’s stance on the rezoning as well as learn of the upcoming Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance meeting. We plan to attend the event regarding the rezoning on Thursday, March 10th at 7pm. We are also looking into other community contacts besides the MinKwon Center for Community Action as the MinKwon center has a stronger focus on the Korean community in Flushing. Community centers such as the Chinese Community Center of Flushing and the Taiwan Center in Flushing have been contacted, but we have not heard back from them yet. Even if these community centers are not holding meetings or protesting the rezoning, it would be good to get some insight on their views on the rezoning of Flushing.

Wilian will be researching small business growth and workforce needs. Erica will be keeping correspondence with the Minkwon Center for Community Action and other any future community contacts. Claudia will be researching the historical background of Flushing and looking at the significance of community centers in Flushing. Christine will address the problem of gentrification and its relationship to displacement and attempt to depict the transformation of Flushing due to gentrification. Brian will discuss the issues with the current rezoning plan and possible solutions that community members may accept.

A Plague on Society: Bigotry

Uncategorized,

Millions of people were infected with AIDS around the world but politicians in the United States thought that the solution to the AIDS epidemic was to stop humans from engaging in sexual activities.

Similar to how abstinence-only sex education does not work to prevent unwanted pregnancies in adolescents, preaching and condemning homosexuals will not force them to accept celibacy as a way of life. They made it seem like gay people were asking for AIDS. They blamed the victims. Once Peter Staley’s sexuality was confirmed to be homosexual during a TV broadcast, Pat Buchanan seemed to attack Staley and homosexuals, saying that engaging in homosexual sexual activities is like playing Russian Roulette even though using a condom would greatly reduce the chance of anyone contracting HIV/AIDS. The disapproval of the use of condoms by the Catholic Church in the midst of an epidemic of a fatal sexually transmitted disease was  completely counteractive to saving people’s lives. Since it was many gay people that contracted AIDS, there was a lack of support for the victims until they organized. Even through the organized efforts to save human beings’ lives, there was still a stigma against homosexuals. Staley’s mentor even believed that people with AIDS should be left to die because of their sexual orientation.  At peaceful demonstrations gay protesters were called derogatory terms because of their sexual orientations. I do not understand how some people could not put aside their differences to fight a disease that was killing millions of people worldwide.

Act Up, Tag, and other activists did a great job in organizing the community to make the drug trials and testing more effective and efficient so that many other diseased individuals do not have to wait until they are dead for a treatment to be approved. Act Up’s efforts against the government and private institutions are an example of a way to counteract or stop the negative effects of top-down city planning. If enough passionate people can organize to push for an approved AIDS treatment then certainly enough passionate people can organize to help fix the housing crisis in New York City.

Discussion Questions: Can we again organize to fight against displacement and other adverse effects of city planning? What would it take? How would such a fight be different from that of the AIDS epidemic?

Racial Tensions Impacting Real Estate

The Capital of Capital

Tension between different races and social classes seem to drive the real estate market. Racial steering and blockbusting are both methods that instill negative racial stereotypes for monetary gain. The negative perception of colored people in real estate is still apparent today.

For example, in Elmhurst it was decided that the Pan American Hotel be used as a homeless shelter. However, there was much backlash from the community, which has a majority of Asians living there.  A few arguments made by Elmhurst residents were that the presence of the homeless shelter would drive property values down and that the city government decided this without consulting them. Elmhurst residents felt like the government just “dumped” this homeless shelter into the community. Many of the Elmhurst residents who organized and protested against the establishment of the homeless shelter were Asian. When Elmhurst residents held a protest outside of the hotel, racial slurs were exchanged between the homeless families, who were mainly Hispanic and black, and the protesters.

Reflecting back to our previous readings, it is evident that there is a housing crisis on our hands because of the rising property values and high rent. Usually people want the government to step in and help the poor. However, because of racial tensions and the stigma against homeless people, the opportunity of lowering property values for more affordable housing in Elmhurst was squandered.

Discussion Question: Can more affordable housing be developed with the approval of various communities if racism still exists?

What is Happening in Flushing West

What's the Problem?

Power Relations/Politics

Councilman Peter Koo’s concerns about the plans for the rezoning of Flushing are that Flushing Creek needs to be cleaned up, the capacity of the Tallman Island Wastewater Treatment Plant needs to be improved, the developments in Flushing West should be made to meet the needs of the community, and Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) needs to be made affordable to the local residents. The MinKwon Center for Community Action is also concerned with people in Flushing not being able to afford the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (Edmonds, ”Koo: Clean Creek, Then Rezone Flushing West”). To take these problems into consideration, City Planning officials have been holding community meetings in Flushing.  

What kind of knowledge are you working with?

In the area proposed for rezoning light manufacturing zones are going to be turned into residential zones, and heavy industry zones are going to be turned into light industry zones (Edmonds, ”Koo: Clean Creek, Then Rezone Flushing West”). This type of city planning also happened in Sunset Park. The development of a waterfront  property in Sunset Park has contributed to  gentrification and displacement of Brooklyn residents (Hum, “The Hollowing-Out of New York City’s Industrial Zones“). Displacement and gentrification are also concerns of Grace Shim, Executive Director of the MinKwon Center for Community Action (Jordan, “Plan to Rezone Flushing West Flies Under the Radar”).

What are our next steps?

We plan to contact people from the MinKwon Center for Community Action so that we may learn more about their stance on the rezoning of Flushing West and how the Department of City Planning is handling their input.

A Plague on the Poor

A Plague on Houses

The implementation of Rand’s models for planning the organization of fire companies is another example of the city government trying to improve living standards without accurately accessing the needs of city neighborhoods. Because fire companies were closed and spread out, many homes were lost to fires and poor people were displaced. Like with rezoning, strong community networks in lower-income neighborhoods were broken and the people were spread out, making organizing to protest rezoning and reorganization of fire companies harder to do. Perhaps that was the initial plan of city officials, to divide and conquer.

The oppression of the poor seems systematic and intentional at this point. How else could Rand’s models been approved? The formulas used for the Resource-Allocation Model and the Firehouse-Siting Model seem too simple to be used to reorganize fire companies all across the city. Even the models I created in school for how lakes fill up after precipitation and evaporation are more complicated than Rand’s models. The installation of ERS boxes were not even well thought out. How can you ask the public to use new technology to report fires without including instructions or education in languages that people can actually understand?  It’s like Ikea stores in America only giving furniture assembly instructions in German with no diagrams.

City officials seem to have no understanding of the poor and refuse to gain an accurate understanding of how to win at least one battle in the war on poverty. It is only until organized efforts are made and covered by media that the city government listens to what lower income residents need.

Discussion Question: What else can be done for the poor’s voice to finally be heard by city officials?

The Unheard Contributions to Urban Planning

“The Patron Saint” and the Git’r Done Man”

In the excerpt, “The Patron Saint” and the Git’r Done Man,” the opposing ideologies of urban planning of Jane Jacobs and Robert Moses are explained.  Moses initiated large building projects in New York City. The audience of his projects were elite business and political leaders while Jacobs’ ideas tended to focus on helping the middle and lower-income residents of New York City.

Urban planning is still a struggle between the rich and the poor. In Jacobs’ “Introduction” from her book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, and What We Can Do About It, she cites a instance of an unwanted housing project in New York’s East Harlem. Many of the affected residents are unhappy with the way the city treated them. No one asked for a new building with a “nice” lawn. No one wanted to be relocated. Unwanted city projects are still being approved without the consent of the neighborhood residents. Lower-income do not have influence over their own neighborhoods, adding to the growing tensions between the rich and the poor. Many residents are not even aware of the rezoning projects taking place in New York City. I had no idea that Flushing West was being rezoned until a few weeks ago.

How can city planners design projects without consulting the hundreds of residents that could affected by them? Is everyone still just catering to the elite business and political leaders? Where are the announcements for public forums? There should be more outrage and protests covered by the media so that more people become aware of the problem with urban planning.

Discussion Question: Is there a way that the needs of the lower-income residents and the leaders of New York City can both be met?