Author: jonathankkim

It was definitely an interesting trip to the Silicon City exhibit because especially for me, a techno-optimist, visualizing how technology has been changing since the very start with Morse Code was like satisfying my thirst for knowledge on changes in technology. I call myself techno-optimist not in terms of the positive/negative cultural and economic effects technological innovation brings, (but surely there are numerous aspects of such effects to argue about), but in terms of how the flow of innovation and ideas affect the development of technology in its evolution. In 1880’s population of American have become so great that counting the census data became too slow. The 1880 census data was projected to finish long after that year and overlap with the next census. In order to effectively tabulate individual census data quickly, accurately, and cheaply, Herman Hollerith developed an electrical tabulating machine. Using this machine, people needed to just feed the machine with coded punch cards and the machine will automate the count. This simple yet effective innovation of technology revolutionized the analysis of census data for several decades. It is these causes and effects of the technology of how the problem is fixed by the simple innovative idea that attracts my interest for technology and call myself techno-optimist.

Years have gone by and now in the 21st century, in this digital age, the internet seems to be the new thing where many innovations are taking place. The government, as many might already know, often times lag behind in its updates with technology for the public. John Paul Farmer, the former senior adviser for innovation at the White House Office, founded the Civic Hall in order lead a group who has the information and experiences with civil tech to better aid the public and the government.

The visit to the Civic Hall was a great experience because we met with enthusiastic leaders in civic tech who seek to help the society. We learned about several websites and apps that allow a more efficient and easier public participation with the government. The Benefit Kitchen, for instance, allows a simple calculation for eligibility for benefits for low-income families from the federal, state and local benefits. Another interesting point John mentioned during the meeting was that many of the services we use like GPS and Weather receive data from the government. He envisions future where many other data can become accessible for public consumption. The third thing that I found interesting was the civicgraph.io. An open platform where interested parties, investors, individuals can visualize what works with what and what funds what. Such open source allows insights into the growing tech community and also allow its members to know who is working with who and what their respective focus areas are.

With its 1-billion-dollar redevelopment of Industry City, Jamestown Properties is envisioning an innovation hub of food manufacturing to clothing to technology to media – a new gathering where creativity feeds off of one another and fosters innovative economy. It is certainly interesting that these buildings will be turned into mix-use manufacturing and private business, but a question is what will happen to the surrounding Latino-Asian population as more and more skilled jobs appear and force native, hardworking residents to move out? As Tarry Hum mentions in her article, the rezoning of Greenpoint-Williamsburg waterfront had devastating effects on its Latino community. With an influx of skilled jobs and rising housing costs, many Greenpoint-Williamsburg residents were driven out by forces of unbearable financial stress.
In response to ameliorate the concerns of Sunset Park’s residents, Jamestown Properties, with partnership from New York City College of Technology, opened “Innovation Lab,” a community-based skills training center, designed to teach the local residents the skills necessary to work in their tenant’s private businesses. By doing so, the private business owners of Industry City can employ local talent, ensuring stable jobs for the nearby neighborhoods and, possibly, delay gentrification. I feel that this is a good start for the investors because instead causing gentrification by rezoning and redevelopment, a conscious effort is made to educate and integrate the community with the businesses of Industry City, causing potential commercial growth with the community. It’s a small step, but if everything works out well, then other redeveloping areas can also adopt ideas like Innovation Lab.

New York City has grown considerably over the years as financial sector’s impact alone on the economy forced other sectors to rise up. Back in the late 2000’s when the Lehman Brothers filed Bankruptcy, its effects were tremendous. As one the biggest bankruptcy filed in the US history, it has played a significant role in priming for the financial crisis in 2008. The event proved that the financial reliance on one sector is risky business and that other sectors needed to grow. Slowly but surely tech sector grew as Bloomberg administration gave support of technology, and continues to show signs of potential boom, aided by Mayor de Blasio’s appointment of Minerva Tantoco as the city’s first-ever Chief Technology Officer. As the technological innovation unravels faster and faster, it brings more and more benefit. However, city’s dependence on tech sector is being questioned whether such reliance will bring New York more harm than good.

In his article, Jason Bram presents data of New York’s tech sector how the jobs in the field is rapidly growing. One benefit of the technological innovation is the creation of more jobs. As shown in the article, New York City increased 58% in job growth, and Manhattan and Brooklyn have also increased 57% and 109% respectively. This growth of job will be available to a younger generation of students who study in fields related to tech sectors. One argument against it might be that because these jobs cater to people with a certain set of skills, average day to day retail and manufacturing workers cannot afford to work in this sector. Another downfall is that much starting pay in the tech sector is close to six figures. The jobs attract next generation of college graduates that have the necessary skills and will effectively pave a way to gentrification.

Adam Forman analyzes the data released by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to visualize how much growth tech sector have experienced over the decade. In the graph of NYC Tech Sector Employment by Borough, Manhattan’s employment increased from 53,932 to 96,717 from 2004 to 2014, a 79% growth. Other Boroughs, Brooklyn, Queens and Bronx also increased 83%, 15%, and 12% respectively. One downfall of this is the significant increase in job openings in Manhattan alone. Such high density of Tech employers will raise the revenue from the tech sector and, thus, acquire favors from the government. This increase in the relationship between the tech community and the government can lead to what is evidently occurring in San Francisco. With the government worsening already congested traffic by favoring tech companies and with the housing prices increasing in the areas with the tech community, San Francisco is daunting many residents of their future. Similarly, NYC might be, and perhaps is already, headed to a frightening future.

However, this doesn’t mean that the people have no voice. One of the beneficial reasons for technological innovation is how we can use software to our advantage, to tie community stronger with democracy. Not only does civil tech work for startup businesses, it can “transform communities, workplaces, and institution to be more equitable, resilient,” and perhaps even more transparent in government dealings with sensitive topics like affordable housings. Civil tech can also potentially empower ‘powerless’ groups such as the community boards.

A troubling issue of technological and creative innovation has come to light in a journal of Applied Research in Economic Development where the Economic Development Curmudgeon reviewed Enrico Moretti’s The New Geography of Jobs. The article clearly outlines examples of how an innovation of knowledge-based economics is causing not just economic inequality, but much broader, cultural separation of communities. One of the main theme, which the author is trying to convey, seems to be that creative innovation leads to geographical agglomeration that gravitates smarter, more innovative thinkers and in return improve the vibe of the neighborhood both in terms of community’s overall economy and infrastructure. But at the same time, this accumulation of skilled workers ends up driving out unskilled, materialistic manufacturing jobs, and instead giving rise and prosperity to “advanced manufacturing, information technology, life sciences, medical devices, robotics, composites and nanotechnology – any jobs that generate new ideas and new products.”

Innovation in technology in an economic sense seems to be a hot topic currently because of the events that are unfolding in New York City. In Williamsburg and Greenpoint, many of the manufacturing jobs that once existed due to factories along the waterfront have migrated over to the less-expensive labor force in countries like China and India. An area once lined with garbage and empty factories now holds expensive apartments and condominiums. New York City is becoming the new place for a skilled workforce where people without certain skills need to move to places that have affordable jobs and neighborhoods. It is a problem that we are facing as New York City is becoming more and more popular by venture capital investments. In the end, we never know what will happen to New York City, but be optimistic that our dependence on technology and on innovative workers will improve the economy.

Technology and innovation come with both the good and the bad, but overall it’s neutral. There are benefits and consequences. For instance, cellphones have allowed instant communication between people across the globe, further more instant messaging lead a convenient way to send and receive messages. People no longer need to figure out a free time to meet up in the midst of their busy schedules, and made traveling to meet someone obsolete. Unfortunately, on the other hand, many younger technology generations now text in broken English and fail to form proper English sentences, as some studies have shown. Also, many social and psychological research have shown that modern teenagers have difficulty in social skills because many of them sit behind their computer screens wasting away precious hours. Here is one extreme example of the good and the bad of innovation. Internet allows infinite amount of knowledge at hand. It is very simple for one person to search up whatever they are curious about and to find a relatively good answer to it. However, innovation has also led certain terrorist organizations to operate easier and more efficiently. Yes, this is an extreme example of the good and the bad of innovation but what I’m trying to say is that despite the negative impacts of innovation, there’s always positive impacts that can sometimes tilt the scale just a bit over to the other side. It is hard to predict what technological innovation will bring about in the future, but I think that improvements will outweigh consequences. I see myself as a techno-optimist, but more specifically quasi-optimist. I think technology has improved our lives better little by little despite the problems, and will continue to do so in the future.

Affordable housing seems to be an inevitable result in the end for many neighborhoods in Brooklyn and of all in New York city. With rising rents and a stagnating median household income, it has become difficult for many Brooklyn tenants such as the ones in Crown Heights to afford comfortable means of living. Residents also face “lazy or greedy” landlords who are rumored to plan on removing unwanted lower and working-class for those in middle class or young and affluent who can afford a much higher rent. These frustrated tenants experience several days without heat, and irritating phone conversations with landlord who don’t respond quickly to the problems. In order to secure the future of their living quarters with a better standard of living and treatment, tenants have come together, forming Crown Heights Tenant Union (CHTU), to dissolve their dissatisfaction. The efforts to contact the landlord politically prove the power of tenants, and may satisfy some immediate issues such as a hole in the ceiling or heating. However, those housings in the end need to be renovated completely as these buildings are already well over 50 years old. Rising rent costs and stasis median income of renters call for affordable housing as increasing numbers of households will be left rent-burdened while the demand for affordable housings continue to increase.

First, I believe that affordable housings need some sort of a manager who will receive complaints and concerns from the tenants. This person in charge should be available at least six days a week and must respond in some form of communication within two days about what will be done about the situation. Even if the issue will take a long time to resolve, the response should ensure the tenants that it will be fixed as quickly as possible. It seems that the tenants in Crown Heights does not trust the landlords that they will listen to them. And thus, in this fashion tenants of the affordable housings should be given assurances that they are being heard and something is being done about it. Second, creating commercial areas on the ground floors of affordable housings will make streets livelier and more attractive. They should also figure out some ways to put people into work, such as constructing stores that can hire workers. As seen in mayor De Blasio’s ten-year plan for five boroughs’, rent has been increasing for the past decade while median household income has stagnated. This result of rifting economic inequality and from the great recession caused numerous people out of work. Most of the money that people make are sucked up to the top 1%. Although affordable housing provides safe haven for hundreds of thousands, it is only temporally until something is done about the inequality. Last thing that I will propose in affordable housing is aesthetics. The old red-brick no longer appeals to many. By overlaying with “skins” that give a modern feel, tenants will hold pride in their living spaces and take better care of it.

Yes, many people will be dissatisfied by the construction of affordable housing, such as CHTU. Tom Angotti quotes Jacques Proudhon in this book that gentrification is like property theft. Afraid to lose what they have, people who’s about to lose their property fought back and declared, “we won’t move.” People like CHTU believe that they will lose their living spaces to someone else if something isn’t done about it. They also are afraid that construction of affordable housing will only displace them even more. In my opinion, this is simple distrust of the towns people to the government. They should have some faith that the city government is doing something good with affordable housing, instead of adding another skyscraper to the skyline. If anything, the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing Program will require developers to build permanent affordable housings available at various income levels. One disadvantage of affordable housing is that it will create denser neighborhoods. This means more children, and more children means overcrowded schools. In order to provide proper education, perhaps building more schools might be a good idea too. There are so many interconnecting issues and causes that it is difficult to fix one problem without compromising another. There needs to be a lot more extensive research done on this topic to make a stronger proposal.

In an area spanning from north, Greenpoint, to south, Williamsburg, Community Board 1 area’s ethnic makeup seems to be very diverse. Mostly white and black individuals live in this hip, cool Brooklyn. In terms of socio-economic composition of the neighborhood, middle class Bohemians predominantly live here for its authenticity followed by working class who escape the high rents of the city in search for affordable housing and lastly small portion of rich, upper class, who fight the middle and lower class in efforts to invest large amount of money in modernizing the area with high rises and commercial buildings, backed by the city governments.

Personally, the main issue that the people who are living here face is the struggle between the interests of the Haves and the Have Nots. “Have nots” are the middle and working class people who are resisting the Haves for their interest. “Haves” are the groups who have power; living in a capitalist society, money is the source of such power. These haves want to create more power by various means but one way, in this situation, is materialistically, by planning and constructing areas to “Manhattanize” to make Brooklyn more attractive to the world and to increase in revenue. On the other hand, the Community Board, comprised of more or less 50 volunteers who live and work in the neighborhood, who ultimately love the place they live, discuss and advise community issues. According to their District Needs Statement, main thing they ask for is housing. They argue that in order to create a dynamic economy of the neighborhood, the rent-burdened residents need to live in affordable housings so that they may remain viable and create a stable work force.

The pressure “from above” is from the Haves such as private investors and the city government. They wish to develop parts of Williamsburg and Greenpoint from once-empty industrial zone lined with trash and decorated with graffiti into a radically different skyline of Brooklyn shorelines. Their interest seems to be raising up towers after towers to let upper class to move in to the buildings. Such transformation may seem as improvements to the city and its surrounding areas, however, on the other side, the lower class people are gentrified as more and more buildings create neighborhoods unaffordable. The pressure “from below” are the lower class and local community boards such as Community Board 1. They think about the neighborhood they live in and figure out ways to improve the residents lives. Housing is one of their main goals of the message delivered to the “above.” Hopefully mayor de Blasio’s Affordable housing plan will do well and alleviate many of the rent and economic burdens lower class experiences.

It is true that Community boards only have the power to advise, but I think that it doesn’t mean their voices are not heard. Although city governments may dismiss their statements and fund areas that they prioritize, issues such as rent-burdening class of people are not only covered by community boards. Often times we see mass media cover stories of issues the minority and the under-represented face. Countless articles make headlines about the problems of city and each time they raise the awareness. In professor Zukin’s chapter, “How Brooklyn Became Cool,” she examines the history of northern Brooklyn, such as Williamsburg and Greenpoint, on the influx of various people and how it made Brooklyn cool. She notes that with the coming of media coverage of newly transforming Brooklyn, the place began to become new “authentic” neighborhood. The role of media was evident in that it hastened the transformation of Brooklyn into both artists’ and middle class’s new favorite place to go. Similarly, media coverage of issues like affordable housing can have a huge impact in city government’s decision.

Trip to the Museum of City of New York was interesting. Allowing me to learn the history of affordable housings and to look at examples of affordable housings existing currently, I examined each model figures of such housings. My favorite project was the Nehemiah Spring Creek Homes. Many of the other projects were already as I expected – red brick homes, anywhere from six to twenty stories high and a garden in the center of complexes or somewhere in its vicinity. Other housings were very tall and appeared similar to many skyscrapers in Manhattan. Affordable housings in Nehemiah Spring Creek Homes in Easy New York, however, took my interest because it was something different. These housings are prefabricated in single, double or three bedroom units at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Once each unit arrives at the sites they are stacked up on top of one another. The modular concept of the homes was the reason why this project was my favorite from the exhibition. The look of the neighbor was also very modern and seemed safe. One intriguing fact is that, unlike other homes, these houses have rear-parking alleys, creating a more pedestrian-oriented streetscape. New-owners can purchase these homes through a lottery sponsored by Housing Preservation and Development, HPD.

It is now certain that we need affordable housings more than ever. With the cost of the rent increasing ever steadily for a past decade while renters’ household income stagnating around $41,000, low income families are under rent burdens. Having to spend about 30% of their income just on rent alone, people just enough to spend for food and other expenses. Public housing began as a way for low income and working families to live free of financial burdens and to raise their children free from dangers of streets. As the children grow up from economically secure housings, they can achieve highest education they wish to achieve and leave. This way, their children may just return to visit their parents if they still live there. This springboard idea was the start of public housing as a way for families to move up in society. And with this idea, I support the building of new public housings. But in reality, especially in current state of economy, such notion is hard to achieve because, as mentioned before, rent prices are the only ones that are increasing.

This leads me to support rent controls. Rent control will allow low income families to afford public housings. The question then becomes how will public housing be paid for if all the other apartment market rents are higher and these affordable housings are rented out at rates suitable for low class? In 2012 it was discovered that NYCHA had been holding about one billion dollars of federal funds as maintenance services while its apartments turned unsanitary and dangerous. Such amount of money can be used as government subsidies for regulating public housings.

With more government funding for public housings and rent controls, it will also be necessary to build housings that appeal aesthetically to tenants. Co-founder of L&M, Ron Moelis, mentions that by making improvements with good designs of apartments, renters feel a stronger sense of community and thus take better care of their property. After the hurricane Sandy, L&M acquired housing projects in the Rockaways. By renovating the apartments and fixing up electrical and plumbing systems, the housings were back and running with renters.