Willow, I loved reading your blog post because I find that you express your opinions concerning the actions and beliefs the elite of the city have when it comes to city planning very clearly. I also enjoyed that while reading your post I found myself going back and forth on many of the topics you discussed and debated what I thought was right.

When I read the article about the Community Parks Initiative I felt optimistic about what I had seen. These parks in need of repair were fixed, painted and looked brand new. I thought this was good because it was improving the neighborhood without truly altering the makeup of it as we have seen in many of the redevelopment projects we have discussed in class. However, in the fourth paragraph of your blog you raise a brilliant point. By simply painting over these parks and adding new slides and swings, what are city planners really doing? Are they removing the symbols of art and culture that neighborhoods cherish? You say that by painting them over we are ignoring the actual problems that these communities face. I say you hit the nail on the head. However, I couldn’t help but then think would those in the community agree with you? I was reminded of my initial thoughts when I saw the before and after pictures. I imagined that the people who frequented these parks would have been happy that it was improved. I began to then wonder how different perspectives can determine whether or not something is good, and how those opposing views may clash.

When discussing the High Line you say that the reading displays the entitlement of the elite in changing public spaces to obtain wealth. Who’s to say that city planners did not vehemently believe that by transforming the High Line they would be doing a service to the community? As we discussed in class they see it as an opportunity to bring new businesses in and jumpstarting the economy. They had an idea for what the city should have been and they believed this was the best way to achieve that. Some may say that the High Line served its purpose in helping the area while some would argue it changed for the worse. Now I happen to personally believe that the High Line is a prime example of how redevelopment seems geared towards a certain socioeconomic class of people, I agree with what you say in your blog but I couldn’t help but wonder about the differing perspectives about the future of the city. People of different backgrounds, classes, and areas will obviously have different opinions. Who’s to say which opinion is right and the best for the city?