Unlike some of my peers, I agree with Jane Jacob’s cynical view on the efforts that have been made to rid the city of its slums. While I realize that the gentrification of the previously mentioned Needle Park (Upper West Side) and Times Square has a myriad of positive consequences, I also find myself asking what happens to the residents of those neighborhoods once they get pushed out of their homes.
Take for example the neighborhood of NorthEnd mentioned in Jacob’s text. The first reference to this city depicts it as deplorable and destined for ruin and chaos. However, years later, the neighborhood was able to recover, not on the government’s terms (nor with its assistance), but by its own means. While the standards still mark this area as a slum in need of improvement, its citizens have implemented their own improvements to their neighborhood. Had the government stepped in and taken control of the area, the city planning strategies it would apply would ultimately force the property values and rents to increase. The text states that those living in the area are paying less than what is standard, and we can only assume that that is all they would be able to afford. If the property values suddenly increase, those dwelling in North End would be forced to relocate.
And where will they relocate? Other low income, “slum” areas around the city. This city is stuck in a vicious cycle. Although we may improve one area, we are only sweeping the issue to another area, and if we’re lucky, to an area that we don’t need to associate with on a regular basis. As Jacobs states, we always claim that we can improve the problem if we had X amount of dollars. But where has our money gotten us, if anywhere?
“But look what we have built with the first several billions: Low-income projects that become worse centers of delinquency, vandalism and general social hopelessness than the slums they were supposed to replace” (Jacobs).
And where are these low-income projects? On the outskirts of the city (much like Five Points), where the fortunate do not have to worry about it. In fact, only when Five Points became a problem for businesses which feared it kept patrons from traveling North, was much of an effort put toward improving the area.
I must conclude with a statement Jacobs makes on page 8 of her piece that states that city planners focus more on what ought to work in a city than what actually does. These planners “shrug reality aside” in hopes of finding a quick way to make things work. But they’re wrong. The people living in areas like North End, which were able to improve their situation are the ones that know it’s more than figuring out what ought to work. It’s figuring out how to make it work.
