The information provided in this Report illustrates an assignment in a course offered at Morgan State University School of Architecture and Planning and Yale University School of Architecture. We make no warranties, express or implied, regarding the work performed by students participating in this course. The reviewers of the information contained in this Report hold harmless the two Universities against any claims made in the whole or in part of materials developed by students. Efforts were made to ensure a quality product but it is important to recognize that this Report illustrates student learning outcomes conceived primarily for academic purposes.
URBAN DIFFERENCE & CHANGE YALE ARCH 4247 + MORGAN STATE ARCH 418 Faculty: Justin Garrett Moore, AICP, NOMA and Samia Kirchner, Ph.D. Teaching Assistant: Lilly Agutu Our cities and their socioeconomic and built environments continue to exemplify difference. From housing and health to mobility and monuments, cities small and large, north and south—like New Haven and Baltimore—demonstrate intractable disparities. The disparate impacts made apparent by the COVID-19 pandemic and the reinvigorated and global Black Lives Matter movement demanding change are remarkable. Change is another essential indicator of difference in urban environments, such as disinvestment, disaster, or gentrification. Cities must navigate how considerations like climate change and growing income inequality intersect with politics, culture, gender equality and identity, immigration, migration, and technology, among other conditions and forms of disruption. In Urban Difference and Change, we explored some key questions: • How are cities and their environments shaped by difference, including the legacies and derivatives of colonialism and modernism? • How do the structures and systems of difference operate in our spaces, places, and cities? • How might we better understand and find agency in the past, present, and future of urban contexts using an anti-racist and decolonial approach to design and urbanism? • How can frameworks like cultural heritage, environmental conservation, and social equity and inclusion challenge dominant narratives or unjust past and present conditions? The course operated as an online (via Zoom) trans-institutional collaboration between Yale University SoA in New Haven, Connecticut, and Morgan State University SAP in Baltimore, Maryland. This partnership allowed for interaction among students from different backgrounds and fields of study in order to share a learning environment and bring diverse experiences and perspectives to our work. The format of the course included readings, presentations, conversations, and case studies in the first half of the semester. The second half of the semester focused on the development of students’ independent research and design for place-based or issue-based projects or research focused on difference and change in the urban environment. Our collective work from the seminar is compiled, in an unedited and in-process state, in this online publication.
ALTERIN
01 ___ KOND: RETHINKING HERITAGE C 02 ___NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARY__B 03 ___ REVITALIZING FRANKLINTON, O 04 ___ CLIMATE GENTRIFICATION AND 05 ___SEGREGATED, INTEGRATED, LIBE
NG
CONSERVATIONY__Zhanna Kitbalyan Bingyu He OH__Kyle Coxe D EQUITABLE CLIMATE ADAPTATION IN MIAMI__Claudia Ansorena ERATED__Hannah Mayer Baydoun
Kond: Rethinking Heritage Conservation
Community-Oriented Rehabilitation for a Historic Urban Landscape Zhanna Kitbalyan
Aerial view of Kond. Photograph by Hrant Gulesserian. Aerial Armenia, https://aerialarmenia.com/portfolio/ kond-neighborhood/ INTRODUCTION The neighborhood of Kond stands out in the downtown of Yerevan, Armenia. While the rest of Central Yerevan was largely redeveloped in the early Soviet period, Kond largely preserved its 18th century urban fabric, pre-modern architecture, some of the city’s oldest buildings, and, most-notably, a strong sense of community and identity. Kond’s historic value and its perpetual existence on the social, economic, and architectural margin make a strong case for the neighborhood’s significance as a potential heritage site. Nevertheless, the district and its inhabitants have been largely neglected over the past century, resulting in crumbling buildings and deplorable
living conditions. A revitalization of Kond is becoming desperately necessary, but any redevelopment project threatens the status of its residents who have shaped and preserved the neighborhood throughout centuries. The complicated historic, social, and economic context of Kond provides a unique opportunity to analyze existing models of heritage conservation through a community-oriented lens. HISTORY OF KOND Kond is the oldest remaining district of Yerevan, Armenia, formed around the 17th century on a hill with Hrazdan River to the west and Kozern Cemetery to the north. By the 18th century, the urban fabric of
Kond took shape that is largely recognizable today. In 1924, a first masterplan of then-Soviet Yerevan was approved. Developed by architect Alexander Tamanian, the radial plan meant to house a population of 150,000 was largely inspired by European modernism and Haussmannian ideals of wide streets and geometric lines, as well as early Soviet socialist ideology. As a result, starting in the 1930s, the urban fabric of central Yerevan was completely transformed and “hundreds of houses and historic buildings including churches, mosques, baths, bazaars, caravanserais as well as the old Erivan fortress were demolished.”1 During the redevelopment, the media described Kond as “Yerevan’s open and persistent wound,” “an antithesis,” and “unacceptable to its new pink and modern silhouette.”2 The masterplan included a carousel-like layout for Kond, but Tamanian’s exact vision for the district remains unclear, as that part of the plan was never realized. An attempt to redevelop Kond arose again in 1984, when Kond-native late-Soviet political leader Karen Demirchyan commissioned a new masterplan for Kond to architect Arshavir Aghekyan. The new plan aimed to preserve some of the neighborhood’s distinctive features and turn it into “Yerevan’s Montmartre,” but was also never realized. 3 In a strange way, the government’s neglect of the district has been its saving grace. While a few Soviet-era structures have appeared in Kond throughout the 20th century, and it has continued being a living, changing neighborhood over the last three centuries, it remains the only place in central Yerevan where one can find virtually unaltered late-medieval urban fabric and countless works of architecture from the late 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries. Kond is also home to some of the oldest buildings in Yerevan: Surb Hovhannes Church, originally erected in the 15th century and rebuilt in 1710, and the Tepebasi Mosque built in 1687, which, although now functioning as a residential building, is one of only two mosques remaining in Yerevan. Kond’s cultural heritage value lies not only in its history and architecture, but also a tight-knit community with a strong sense of identity that resides there. It 1 “Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan,” Ajam Media Collective, 8 Apr 2014. http://ajammc.com/2014/04/08/yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city 2 “Kond: Longing in Slums,” Soviet Armenia, Yerevan, 17 May 1989. 3 Arpine Haroyan , Hovhannes Nazaretyan, “Kond: A City Within a City,” EVN Report, 13 Aug 2018. https://www.evnreport.com/ arts-and-culture/kond-a-city-within-a-city
Maps of Yerevan. Top to bottom: 1808, 1856, 1911. Kond is shown in black, other districts - in grey. Based on maps produced by Urbanlab in 2014.
combination with private courtyards and haphazard construction create a less clearly defined hierarchy between public and private spaces. Finally, the housing itself is in stark contrast with Soviet apartment blocks that constitute most of residential architecture in Yerevan. Apartment-style housing was very much in line with the Soviet ideology that placed importance on nuclear families.4 On the other hand, in Kond, you mostly see small private houses, which accommodate for a more traditional Armenian multi-generational household.
Maps of Yerevan. Top to bottom: 1950, 1988. Kond is shown in black, other districts - in grey. Based on maps produced by Urbanlab in 2014. is fair to say that Kond’s built environment has defined many social aspects of the neighborhood. First, Kond is located on top of the hill. The topographical change provides a layer of separation between Kond and the rest of the city. Second, and perhaps most important, is its pre-modern layout. Narrow, meandering streets, instead of the modern-European-boulevard inspired grid that dominates the rest of central Yerevan significantly limits car access into the neighborhood. Thus, the street becomes a space for social encounters, rather than an infrastructure for transportation. Additionally, the secluded streets in
Kond’s social fabric is of great cultural significance to Yerevan, first, due to the rich history of its demographics. Kond used to be one of the most ethnically and religiously diverse places in Yerevan, with a majority Muslim population throughout the 18th century and a number of Azerbaijanis until the 1980s.5 In the 18th and 19th centuries, the neighborhood housed many leather craftsmen and had a few businesses such as shoemaking, and Kond residents largely considered wealthy. Following the Armenian genocide of 1915, many refugees families from the Ottoman Empire settled in Kond. Notably, as bolsheviks drove out religious leaders in the early 20th century, the Tepebasi mosque was abandoned, and 16 or 17 genocide survivor families have moved into it. Descendants of five of those families live inside the converted mosque to this day. Throughout the 20th century, private economic activity in Soviet Armenia diminished and the neighborhood became almost fully residential. Additionally, Kond residents were now largely low-income, the old structures began to decay, and the neighborhood eventually acquired a reputation of a slum amongst other Yerevan residents. Second, Kond’s community is unique in its continuity. As urban planner and architect Sevada Petrossian explains, “Kond is one of the rare places in the city where generations have continuously lived.”6 Over the span of decades, even centuries, families living in Kond have continuously both transformed and preserved the place, fusing together the material or architectural heritage of Kond with its intangible social legacy. 4 “Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan,” Ajam Media Collective, 8 Apr 2014. http://ajammc.com/2014/04/08/yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city 5 Arpine Haroyan , Hovhannes Nazaretyan, “Kond: A City Within a City,” EVN Report, 13 Aug 2018. https://www.evnreport.com/ arts-and-culture/kond-a-city-within-a-city 6 Ibid.
Map of Central Yerevan. The figure ground of downtown Yerevan shows the stark contrast between the densly packed, organic construction in Kond to the West, and the modern, geomerical plan of the rest of the district.
Map of Kond.
Left: map of Kond streets. Vehicular streets are shown in pink, pedestrian - in green, and alleyways in blue. Courtesy of Lia Soorenian. Right: photogrpah courtesy of Arineh Keshishi.
Photograph courtsey of Arineh Keshishi.
Tepebasi mosque.
THREAT OF EMINENT DOMAIN Kond’s historic, architectural, and social significance in the context of Armenia’s cultural heritage is undeniable. Tragically, at present, the architecture and infrastructure of Kond are in a dilapidated state. Residents lack basic utilities and live in fear of significant structural damage, with no opportunities to conduct home repairs. Without revitalization efforts, Yerevan stands to lose both the historic urban fabric and the unique social fabric of Kond. Furthermore, the current state of the neighborhood creates unhealthy, if not unbearable, living conditions for the residents. Revitalization of Kond is complicated by many factors, from budgetary to logistic. The collapse of USSR, Yerevan “has been subjected to a complex process of postcolonial nation-building while simultaneously adopting globalized urbanization trends.”7 Armenia’s shift to capitalism resulted in complete privatization of the housing market and underfunding of government departments. As a result, urban planning and development in Armenia are generally outsourced to private development and construction companies and prioritize financial gain. Starting in the early 2000s, Yerevan’s municipal authorities turned to land expropriation in order to let such private companies realize their visions of a new capitalist, cosmopolitan city. Naturally, Kond residents fear that the deployment of eminent domain in their neighborhood may result in consequences ranging from their forced and inadequately compensated relocation to complete destruction of Kond’s architecture and urban fabric. On August 1st, 2002, the Armenian government adopted Decree no. 1151-N, “approving the expropriation zones of the immovable property (plots of land, buildings and constructions) situated within the administrative boundaries of the Central District of Yerevan to be taken for the needs of the State for the purpose of carrying out construction projects, covering a total area of 345,000 sq. m.”8 The area included a number of blocks and neighborhoods within downtown Yerevan, including Kond. This deployment of eminent domain primarily affected the now Northern Avenue 7 “Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan,” Ajam Media Collective, 8 Apr 2014. http://ajammc.com/2014/04/08/yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city 8 “PAPYAN AND DAVTYAN v. ARMENIA,” European Court of Human Rights, 29 Jun 2010. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-100094
area of Yerevan, few developments were launched in Kond, and the decree was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2006.9 Nevertheless, land expropriation still affects historic buildings in Yerevan: the neighborhood of Firdusi was declared a “priority area of public interest” and is currently being redeveloped. Since many fear that while Kond remains an urbanistically and economically vulnerable neighborhood, any redevelopment project - even a well-intentioned revitalization one - may cause eminent domain laws to resurface and subject the local community to relocation. According to Sevada Petrossian, Kond residents are split into two camps - those who prefer to stay despite its decaying state, and those who would, if offered, rather take apartments in modern buildings in the peripheral residential districts.10 Those who are attached to the neighborhood claim they “wouldn’t live anywhere else but Kond,” while others are rightfully fed up with their living conditions: “We would like to live in a place outside here that has accommodation, at least a toilet!.”11 And I wanted to say let’s switch places!” Both groups are united in their fear of the eminent domain - the status of their residency being resolved not on their own terms. While the government has made the effort to issue official property titles to residents under the 2002 decree in order to fairly compensate them for their homes, the redevelopment project for Northern Avenue (2013-2014), brought to fruition by said decree, is a rather discouraging precedent. The Northern Avenue project, even though included in Tamanian’s masterplan of 1924, encapsulates the contemporary struggle between the commercially-driven “cosmopolitan” developments and the fate of residents standing in their way: While the officials present the project as a “new image” for the city offering hundreds of houses and commercial spaces, the displaced residents continue to storm governmental offices arguing that what the government had paid them is not enough for purchasing a new house with the same amenities in any part of the city.12
9 “CASE OF HAKOBYAN AND AMIRKHANYAN v. ARMENIA,” European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg, 17 Oct 2019,) https://www.echr.am/resources/echr//judgments/603ac16eb6bacd10581c1488040648ef.pdf 10 Sevada Petrossian, Personal interview, 16 Dec 2020 11 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) pp.97–101. 12 “Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan,” Ajam Media Collective, 8 Apr 2014. http://
Northern Avenue redevelopment project (2013-2014), before and after photographs. Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan,” Ajam Media Collective, http://ajammc.com/2014/04/08/ yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city The project spraked multiple heated altercations, protests, and appeals to the European Court of Human Rights. One ECHR applicant, Satenik Davtyan, “was offered 2,000 United States dollars (USD) as financial assistance payable under the relevant governmental decree to registered persons, since the house was an unauthorised construction and she was only registered in it.”13 Another resident was captured on video claiming she received a compensation of 18,000 USD, but had to pay twice that amount for her new apartment in a remote area.14 At the same time, the government’s reliance on private companies for construction and development ajammc.com/2014/04/08/yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city 13 “PAPYAN AND DAVTYAN v. ARMENIA,” European Court of Human Rights, 29 Jun 2010. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-100094 14 “DZerrnakrriv geraka shah chanach’vats taratsk’um,” Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty, 9 Dec 2009, https://www.rferl. org/a/1968164.html
allows it to avoid responsibility for the mistreatment of homeowners. Papyan family’s ECHR case reads: “9. On 17 June 2004 the Government decided to contract out the construction of one of the sections of Byuzand Street – which was to be renamed Main Avenue – to a private company, Glendale Hills CJSC. // 10. On 28 July 2004 Glendale Hills CJSC and the Yerevan Mayor’s Office signed an agreement which, inter alia, authorised the former to negotiate directly with the owners of the property subject to expropriation and, should such negotiations fail, to institute court proceedings on behalf of the State, seeking forced expropriation of such property.”15 The same construction company reached an agreement with 50 residents of Firdusi in 2004 “by which they were supposed to be given new apartments in the buildings to be built in the place of the houses pulled down in three years’ time.” Old homes were demolished, but 15 “PAPYAN AND DAVTYAN v. ARMENIA,” European Court of Human Rights, 29 Jun 2010. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-100094
the new apartment building was not completed. In Kond, another private construction company, Downtown Yerevan, used the land expropriation decree to demolish the homes of 150 residents at the north end of Kond. The company agreed to financially assist those families with nearby rentals until the new apartment building was built. Mid-construction, the company declared bankruptcy, halted the project and the rental payments.16 Eminent domain laws approve land expropriation for “the needs of the State,” but end up serving private commercial companies and financially straining local communities. Evidently, the issue of Kond’s revitalization discussed separately from the uncertain residency status of its neighborhood. In fact, it is well possible that the logistical and financial burden of relocating Kond’s residents has been the reason Kond has been able to preserve its historic architecture. Furthermore, as we have established that the cultural significance of Kond lies as much in its community as it does in its urban fabric, revitalizing the neighborhood by means of displacing said community defeats the purpose of preservation efforts altogether. Given the complicated socio-economic factors, Kond presents a unique opportunity to rethink traditional methods of architectural heritage preservation. A comparative analysis of Kond’s specific circumstances and heritage conservation models employed in other cities offers insight into potential routes for ethical and sustainable revitalization of Kond, as well as future preservation efforts in Armenia. RESTORATION PRECEDENT - TBILISI An analysis of how other cities in the post-Soviet block have dealt with revitalizing their historic centers can offer valuable lessons to the issue of Kond’s current state and future. The similarities between Kond and the Tbilisi Historic District make the latter a particularly useful precedent. Both neighborhoods are known for their 19th and early 20th century buildings and largely unaltered late medieval urban fabric; both neighborhoods are in critical condition due to government’s neglect and the primarily low-income residents’ inability to improve their homes. Most notably, both neighborhoods are located within prime 16 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) p.65.
real estate markets - downtown areas of the capitals of newly-capitalist post-Soviet countries. The abrupt transition from Soviet-era centralized master-planning to complete privatization of the housing market and nearly unregulated construction and development by private companies determined the fate of revitalization of Old Tbilisi and has a hold on Kond today. Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc wrote that “[t]o restore a building is not to preserve it, to repair, or rebuild it; it is to reinstate it in a condition of completeness which could never have existed at any given time.”17 Le-Duc’s approach, referred to by historians as stylistic preservation, aims “to achieve an ideal form that may - or may not - have ever existed” - to reconstruct a glorified image of stylistic consistency and purity.18 It often results in drastic structural and architectural alterations to the building at hand, from demolition of additions to entire rebuilds. Traces of this 19th-century stylistic preservation approach can be found today in projects that aim to revitalize historic city centers by packaging them for export or the local elite. The ‘New Life of Old Tbilisi’ project launched in 2009 by Tbilisi’s mayor achieved significant upgrades in the formerly run-down historic neighborhoods, but left many residents and architectural historians dissatisfied with the results. Since the collapse of the USSR, Georgian government departments in charge of heritage conservation have been severely underfunded. Preservation efforts in the historic center of Tbilisi have been conducted since the 1990s by initiatives responding directly to mayoral or presidential administrations in conjunction with the World Bank and ICOMOS Georgia. Additionally, Tbilisi Historic District has been repeatedly nominated to be included in the UNESCO World Heritage List, but UNESCO has not approved the designation. The nomination of 1999 and the subsequent decision document from 2001 reveal the important aspects of the restoration efforts. First, the text of the nomination describes the property ownership context in the area: The properties were in State ownership until 1992. Since the adoption of the Law on 17 Eugène-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc, “Restoration,” from the Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle (1854-1868) 18 John H. Stubb, Time Honored: A Global View of Architectural Conservation (John Wiley & Sons, 2009), p.205.
Privatization of Dwellings, most residential buildings have been given to private ownership. Part of the buildings belong to various institutions, such as banks and commercial firms. Since 1997 a Decree of the Parliament of Georgia has prohibited privatization of listed monuments. Listed residential buildings that had not been privatized therefore remain the property of the municipality. [emphasis added]19 Similarly to Armenia, Georgia’s housing market was almost entirely privatized following the country’s pivot to capitalism. Notably here, the heritage conservation efforts of the late 1990s on one hand saved the district from uncontrolled development that would have transformed it beyond recognition. On the other hand, the same regulations prevented many residents from obtaining legal claims to their homes, thus paving the way for the complete social transformation of the neighborhood a decade later. Second, the ultimate decision illustrates the roots of not only UNESCO’s hesitation, but also larger issues surrounding preservation in Georgia: ICOMOS is satisfied with the outstanding universal value of Tbilisi in terms of its cultural and architectural significance as reflected in the urban fabric today. [ICOMOS recommends that] the site be deferred subject to establishment of an appropriate legal framework, the management structures and guidelines for the rehabilitation, restoration and control of change in the proposed nomination area.20 UNESCO’s denial of a World Heritage designation “stemmed not from the district’s lack of cultural and historic significance but rather from a lack of state and municipal competence” - specifically, from a lack of a legal framework or secured sources of long-term support for the revitalization project.21 This observation reveals a systemic gap in preservation models in post-Soviet countries. Systemic underfunding of government entities in charge or heritage conservation and the consequent reliance on individual-basis administratively-independent 19 “Evaluations of Cultural Properties,” UNESCO World Heritage Convention Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (Helsinki, Finland, 7–8 December 2001,) p.88. 20 Ibid., pp.89-90. 21 Angela Wheeler, “New Look for Old Tbilisi: Preservation Planning in Tbilisi Historic District,” Identity Studies in the Caucasus and the Black Sea Region (vol.6, 25 Jan 2016.)
programs and international grants provide rather unreliable support to projects that require decades of planning, investment, and work. The two issues identified above bring us to the state of the historic district today. A damaging earthquake in 2002, the financial crisis and the war between Georgia and Russia in 2008 caused a freeze in local and international financial investments into the district. As a result, Tbilisi’s mayor launched the ‘New Life of Old Tbilisi’ initiative in 2009 that aimed to both revitalize the historic district and generate activity for the construction industry that took a particular blow in 2008. ‘New Life of Old Tbilisi’ began with relocation of 422 families into modern apartments, considering that a 1997 survey conducted by ICOMOS Georgia revealed that “the majority of existing residents wish to stay within the historic part of the ,”city [...] despite the poor level of services and facilities as compared to the relatively newer districts where services are comparatively better.”22 Then, private construction or development companies were to submit letters of intent to City Hall, receive state-guaranteed loans from banks, and following the redevelopment, were given the opportunity to sell the properties back to the municipality for 400 USD per one square meter. Due to the highly commercial nature of the redevelopment project, Tbilisians complained that the historic buildings have been either restored beyond recognition or completely rebuilt, “replaced with facsimiles, complete with plastic ornamentation.”23 The restoration achieved a highly stylized, “standardized, homogenized version of Tbilisi’s past” packaged for tourists and not reflecting the reality of the community that has shaped the place for over a century.24 Additionally, the initiative resulted in the gentrification of the district, forcibly displacing low-income long-term residents and opening up the market to the local elite. In sum, there are multiple lessons to be learned from Tbilisi. First, evidently, the cultural, architectural, and 22 Kakha Khimshiashvili, “Old Tbilisi, Georgia,” Management of Historic Centres, edited by RObert Pickard (Taylor & Francis, 11 Jan 2013), p.97. 23 Salome Jashi, “Tbilisi – where ‘restoration’ means redevelopment,” Open Democracy, 4 Jul 2012, https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/tbilisi-where-restoration-means-redevelopment/ 24 Angela Wheeler, “New Look for Old Tbilisi: Preservation Planning in Tbilisi Historic District,” Identity Studies in the Caucasus and the Black Sea Region (vol.6, 25 Jan 2016.)
2009 Revitalization of Old Tbilisi. Highlander Travel, https://www.georgia-tours.eu/old-tbilisi-reabilitation/
historic significance of places such as Yerevan’s Kond or Tbilisi’s old district is internationally acknowledged, confirming both the importance and the attainability of their revitalization. Second, the current state of Kond calls for a robust legal and administrative apparatus equipped to handle long-term, logistically complicated preservation or revitalization projects. The support of local NGOs and foreign investors or efforts on behalf of residents themselves are incredibly valuable, but unreliable. Moreover, given the volatile political and economic situation in Armenia, a preservation model for Kond needs to be adaptable for times of crisis. (For example, many believe that Demirchyan’s plan from the 1980s was never realized due to the collapse of USSR, immediately followed by the Nagorno-Karabakh war and a devastating earthquake - for better or worse, backing of the project
by the state did not ensure its viability.) Finally, the fate of Tbilisi’s historic district shows that reliance on private commercially-driven developers and construction companies - a common practice in the Caucasus since the collapse of the USSR - may be a successful strategy for stylistic restoration and economic redevelopment of an area, but has a danger of reducing the charm of the old town to a pastiche and, more importantly, removing the very thing that makes it so culturally valuable - its community. ALTERNATIVE HERITAGE CONSERVATION MODELS - BERLIN AND RIO DE JANEIRO Alternative models for treatment of architectural heritage sites present opportunities to think how revitalization of Kond can be approached differently
from Tbilisi Historic District’s. In opposition to Viollet-le-Duc’s call for conservation of architectural heritage by means of restoration, John Ruskin considers restoration to be “the most total destruction which a building can suffer: [...] a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing destroyed.” In other words, le-Duc’s stylistic restoration binds the building to a specific point in the linear progression of history, while Ruskin considers the ongoing processes of creation and weathering or destruction to comprise authenticity of a building. Ruskin prefers preservation over restoration - taking “anxious care” of architecture to allow it to gain the patina of history without a threat to its structural integrity.25 Such preservation aims to conserve cultural heritage without resorting to a pastiched version of it.
housing market. Therefore, despite the drastically different architectural, political, and economic contexts of Berlin and Yerevan, counterpreservation can present an applicable conceptual framework for ensuring that architectural interventions in Kond are instrumental in maintaining both its character and community. As learnt from Tbilisi, designation of old residential buildings as historic monuments can cause over-bureaucratization and legally stifle their inhabitants. Treating architectural heritage as an ongoing creation can push the formulation of heritage conservation regulations to allow the residents that have shaped and maintained said heritage for generations to continue their individual efforts, regardless of whether or not those alterations are deemed stylistically cohesive.
Daniela Sandler goes even further in her view of architectural heritage as a dynamic. According to Sandler, “[c]onventional preservation treats historic buildings as immutable objects that can only be touched in order to clean, preserve, or restore the original condition.” As an alternative, she offers the concept of counterpreservation - minimal architectural or structural intervention that leaves room for “decay for social practices and symbolic statements.” Counterpreservation responded to issues that defined Berlin in the 1990s: “gentrification, historical memory, and unification.” Besides potentially offering a more authentic image of a building than restoration and avoiding demolition in the name of stylistic cohesion, counterpreservation strives to achieve “affordable living and working spaces in prime neighborhoods.” Originally, the embrace of architectural decay and dilapidation in certain parts of Berlin served to prevent the “invasion of tourists and hipsters,” consequent of the restoration of historic buildings and their conversion into “chic restaurants and art galleries, boutique hotels, touristy shops and cafés, business offices, upscale apartments for sale as opposed to cheap rental flats.”26
However, some aspects of counterpreservation would be problematic if applied to Kond. First, one wonders if the fascination with architectural decay is appropriate in Kond, where the neighborhood has been left to decay for so long that the residents’ health is at stake. Sandler herself admits not only that counterpreservation is impractical in the context of residential architecture, but also that, ironically, it is to a certain degree luxurious: “[o]nly those privileged with enough social, cultural, or material capital can afford to dwell so conspicuously, and so proudly, in the middle of shambles.”27 Counterpreservation alone cannot address the lack of utilities, modern appliances, and poor structural condition of homes in Kond that significantly aggravate the life of its residents. While they may certainly want to avoid a gentrified, packaged for consumption future of their neighborhood, significant home improvements are at the top of their priorities: as Kond resident Artur Yeganyan explains, “we’re poor and we’re not complaining but how are we supposed to live in such conditions?”28 Furthermore, while counterpreservation aims to avert gentrification and exploitative consumption, it often “is also unwillingly complicit in some of the very processes it seeks to critique or undo.”29 The intentional dilapidation of historic buildings in Berlin might have started as a subversive act, but soon became a tour-
The practice of counterpresevation in Berlin served as a tool in the struggle for affordable living space and identity within a city with a rapidly changing 25 John Ruskin, The Seven Lamps of Architecture, (London: G. Routledge & Sons; New York: E P. Dutton & Co., 1907), pp.203205. 26 Daniela Sandler, Counterpreservation: architectural decay in Berlin since 1989 (Ithaca, NY; London, England: Cornell University Press, 2016.)
27 Ibid., p.22. 28 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) p.99. 29 Daniela Sandler, Counterpreservation: architectural decay in Berlin since 1989 (Ithaca, NY; London, England: Cornell University Press, 2016,) p.22.
ist attraction. Similar catch arises in perceived slum areas around the world, Kond being no exception. Perhaps most well-known victims of exploitative consumption of low-income, informal residential zones - slum tourism - are the favelas in Rio de Janeiro. In 2012, Rio de Janeiro became the first urban landscape to be recognized a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Favelas lie within the delineated area of the protected landscape, but are largely missing from UNESCO’s description of it. The ICOMOS Advisory Body Evaluation briefly mentions that favelas “flowed onto less stable land and across watercourses, leading to land erosion, floods and the consequent collapse of buildings” and that they are target to government programs aiming to “improve their infrastructure” and “re-introduce vegetation into the surroundings.”30 Naturally, many advocate that the favelas receive more attention in the context of cultural heritage conservation in Rio. In the words of Raquel Rolnik, UN Special Rapporteur for the Right to Adequate Housing at the time of Rio’s World Heritage Site designation, There’s nothing more potent in this landscape than the presence of the favelas, a space of self-production of daily life for thousands of cariocas and migrants who, in the context of a city that excludes them and in the face of absolute precarious means, constructed a space of resistance and insertion, contradictory and complex like their relationship with the city. Now this place is protected—internationally—and its geography of informal constructions should be acknowledged and consolidated in laws that recognize rights, protecting the place from the arbitrariness of evictions and sensational projects.31 Here, Rolnik claims that the resilience and ingenuity of favelas’ residents manifested in informal architecture constitute a “space of resistance” (not unlike Berlin’s counterculture) need to be recognized and protected as integral parts of the Rio cultural landscape, rather than seen as a threat to it. 30 “Advisory Body Evaluation (ICOMOS),” Rio de Janeiro: Carioca Landscapes between the Mountain and the Sea, UNESCO, 2012. 31 “Campaign Calls on UNESCO to Recognize Favelas as World Heritage,” Rio On Watch, 2016, https://www.rioonwatch. org/?p=44598
While recognition and protection of favelas as sites of cultural heritage is crucial, it raises concerns about the methods and consequences of said protection. Romanticization of what Rolnik calls the “self-production of daily life” in the favelas turns them into targets of slum tourism and commodifies its harsh political, social, and economic realities. In Kond, examples of “self-production” are aplenty: a bed frame cast into a concrete parapet, old kitchenware inserted into a hole in a brick wall, a balcony constructed out of a whole van. Most emblematic of residents’ efforts in the absence of care from the government are Kond’s utilities. Klara Shaghbazyan, who lives in the Tepebasi mosque, recounts that when the mosque first welcomed refugee families, they requested water and sewage lines from the municipal government. The municipality did not have the resources, but promised to turn a blind eye if the residents were to tap into the city infrastructure themselves. As a result, families came together and spent months setting up water supply and sewage that Tepebasi mosque residents use to this day.32 Stories like Klara’s are a testament to residents’ resilience and ingenuity, but most importantly, they show that the residents are willing and able to invest time, money, and energy into the improvement of their neighborhood given the opportunity. Nonetheless, due to lack of both municipality and residents’ resources, the state of utilities in Kond remains subpar. Residents complain: “There isn’t even natural gas here! [...] So we only use electricity. We buy wood during the winter and it makes so much smoke and it’s so bad for the kids,” “we want to live in a place that has bathrooms and hot/cold water.”33 Such worrisome accounts remind one that a mist of fascination and mystification around make-shift living conditions is harmful, and the government must take responsibility and not rely on residents’ efforts, however impressive they are. Another lesson to be learned from the protection of favelas in Rio concerns the many stakeholders and hierarchies implied in the revitalization efforts. Nadezhda Dimitrova Savova identifies “two intermingling processes of heritage centralization” in the favela: “one carried on by the public policy and one 32 “Antsanot Yerevan: Kondi Mzkith,” 30 Mar 2018, https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=rAxQIvpjyMI 33 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) pp.100-101.
by various actor-residents of the favela, with their own multiple versions of the place’s past, present, and future.” The former, even though often well-intentioned, creates “institutionally centralized heritage narratives” and frames heritage as “an artefact to be unearthed rather than a living and lived process.”34 As a response, the author looks at ‘heritage kinaesthetics’ - a departure from architectural and material definitions of heritage and a focus on the intangible: sociability and community-based activity on the site. Given that we have identified the sociability within Kond to be a critical component of the neighborhood’s cultural heritage, it is important to understand how the municipality versus “actor-residents” hierarchy can be leveraged. In order to ensure “heritage kinaesthetics,” questions of architectural and material revitalization must be addressed hand in hand with questions of social, political, and economic activity in the neighborhood. A 2015 toolkit “Bottom-up social development in favelas of Rio de Janeiro”, prepared by Underground Sociabilities and published with the help of UNESCO, identifies institutions, social capital, and resilience as three factors that comprise the social context of a favela. Looking at their equivalents in Kond, many problematic hierarchies are revealed. First, we have already established that Kond is a goldmine for stories of resilience (defined in the toolkit as residents’ practice to “generate solutions from the materials they have at hand, working actively and creatively to improve their living conditions.”)35 However, in recent years, one cannot help but notice a growing defeatist attitude among residents: Tepebasi mosque inhabitant Garoush Vardanyan complains that any of his small-scale repairs last only until the next rain or snowfall.36 Additionally, the government seems to take measures to regulate construction, often resulting in paralyzing the individual attempts at home repairs: resident Hripsime Yeganayn says that “if you build and renovate, the government comes and asks for documents and questions you…”Who let you 34 Nadezhda Dimitrova Savova, “Heritage Kinaesthetics: Local Constructivism and UNESCO’s Intangible-Tangible Politics at a “Favela” Museum,” Anthropological Quarterly (vol. 82(2), Spring, 2009, pp. 547-585) 35 Sandra Jovchelovitch, Jacqueline Priego-Hernandez, Bottom-up social development in favelas of Rio deJaneiro: A toolkit, https://en.unesco.org/inclusivepolicylab/sites/default/files/learning/document/2017/2/ToolkitSocialDevelopmentLSE2015.pdf. 36 “Antsanot Yerevan: Kondi Mzkith,” 30 Mar 2018, https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=rAxQIvpjyMI
build this?”37 Kond residents’ willingness and ability to preserve their resilient spirit is further and further diminished by lack of support and top-down approach from the municipal authorities. The top-down relationship between Kond residents and Yerevan authorities brings up the other development factors described in the “Bottom-up social development” toolkit: institutions and social capital. Under institutions fall the following stakeholders or participants: resident families, state/municipality, local organisations (eg. churches), outsider organisations (eg. NGOs), and local professional or social support networks. Social capital, in turns, refers to grassroots efforts of community organisations.38 Kond evidently has a long and robust history of support networks among residents. Resident Armen Grigoryan speaks both of the sociability: “my kids have grown up here and it’s my home and I don’t want them to tear it down. I don’t care if my house is small, but there’s a community here and that’s what I love,” as well as financial camaraderie: “You borrow money from your neighbor and return it the next day and that’s how it goes.”39 Nonetheless, despite the strong sense of identity and community, there seems to be a lack of more formal organisations among residents. Organised initiatives or projects that advocate for revitalization efforts in Kond tend to stem from NGOs, planners, or artist collectives (such as Urbanlab, #YerevanTropics, and Fund for Armenian Relief.) While the outsider advocates tend to do their due diligence to fairly represent Kond residents and their concerns, establishing formal professional and social networks and cultivating a culture of grassroots organizing in Kond may give its residents more leverage in their relationships with municipal authorities. NEW REVITALIZATION ATTITUDE FOR KOND From an analysis of heritage conservation efforts in other cities and their applicability to Kond, one can draw conclusions about steps necessary to revitalize 37 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) p.101. 38 Sandra Jovchelovitch, Jacqueline Priego-Hernandez, Bottom-up social development in favelas of Rio deJaneiro: A toolkit, https://en.unesco.org/inclusivepolicylab/sites/default/files/learning/document/2017/2/ToolkitSocialDevelopmentLSE2015.pdf. 39 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) p.101.
Conceptual Master Plan
Economic empowerment of residents
Pro-bono or subsidized required professional assistance
Individual revitalization efforts
the district while ensuring the preservation of both material and intangible qualities that make it culturally significant. First, revitalization and preservation of any historic urban site in Armenia requires administrative changes. According to Art and Architecture historian Heghnar Watenpaugh, current attitude toward cultural preservation in Armenia very much adheres to the traditional “an artefact to be unearthed” treatment of heritage, prioritizing static monuments rather than dynamic urban landscapes.40 Lack of a framework for preservation of urban landscapes, as well as the post-USSR privatization of the housing, construction, and development industries, leaves many historic buildings and neighborhoods vulnerable to commercially-driven redevelopment by private companies that destroys heritage and displaces residents. Furthermore, as demonstrated in Tbilisi Historic District, lack of robust government apparatus that deal with issues of preservation results in unreliable investments, short-term gain projects, and skepticism among international preservation organizations. While I strongly believe that Kond needs to receive an either local or international heritage site designation, such designation is meaningless without adequate legal systems to support it. In addition to heritage conservation apparatus, local municipal structures need to be transformed in order to ensure Kond’s future. As of right now, Kond lies within Kentron (Central Yerevan) administrative district. Besides a heritage site designation, Kond needs distinct representation within the municipal government. The large population of the rest of Kentron and its drastically different socio-economic status essentially prevents Kond residents’ issues from coming to the forefront. For example, Kond residents are counted as Kentron residents in Armenia’s population census, making information that could be crucial in estimating budgets, timelines, and scopes for any redevelopment projects there virtually inaccessible. Furthermore, administrative representation of Kond can inspire grassroots community organising and allow for a less oppressive and hierarchical relationship between Kond natives and municipal authorities. This change would cultivate social capital, necessary for the social development of Kond and preservation of its culture. Following the creation of legal and administrative 40
Heghnar Watenpaugh, Private interview, 11 Dec 2020.
frameworks, a revitalization project for Kond can be developed by means of participatory planning. The precedent of Tbilisi warns one against the risks of models reliant solely on private developers, while Berlin and Rio de Janiero demonstrate the importance of individual and community agency. Therefore, Kond requires an overarching yet not restrictive masterplan devised with the input of many stakeholders: residents, government, surveyors and structural engineers, and independent planners, architects, builders, and developers. The aim of a centralized scheme would be to ensure general principles of health, safety, and historic preservation, as well as conduct large-scale interventions such as provision of utilities. Within the conceptual masterplan, the residents would need to be financially and legally empowered to ameliorate their surroundings in accordance with their needs. The participatory revitalization model would ensure the community’s concerns are prioritized, while holding the government accountable for the long-term viability and sustainability of the project. The empowerment of Kond’s residents requires financial assistance, economic and social development efforts, and professional architectural expertise. Micro-financing is one way to provide residents with the resources necessary to conduct individual home repairs and thus conserve the neighborhood as a whole. In the early stages of Old Tbilisi restoration efforts, an Emergency Repair Works Programme allowed “owners of properties of historic significance” to “apply for grants to carry out urgent repairs” with grant amounts of up to 1,500 USD per unit or up to 4,500 USD for multiple families living in the same unit.41 Kond resident Alex Asadouryan estimates that a complete renovation of his house would cost between 40,000 and 50,000 USD,42 while planners at Urbanlab suggest 15,000 USD loans over 10 to 15 years for the purposes of home repairs. Evidently, micro-financing requires extensive demographic, economic, and architectural surveying, as well as agreements with local financial institutions. Additionally, individual restoration efforts must be conducted with oversight from professional architects, engineers, 41 Kakha Khimshiashvili, “Old Tbilisi, Georgia,” Management of Historic Centres, edited by Robert Pickard (Taylor & Francis, 11 Jan 2013), pp.107–108. 42 Lia Soorenian, Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014,) p.97.
and builders, to ensure their safety, efficiency, and accordance with the overarching revitalization framework. Reliance on the local community to spearhead development ensures that it happens on their terms, without en masse evictions or gentrification. CONCLUSION While traditional approaches to historic preservation view heritage as monumental, frozen in time, or stylitistically pure, many cities have seen recognition of the informal, intangible, and social processes that comprise heritage. As we learn from such models, it is evident that the revitalization and preservation of Kond cannot be accomplished without economic and social development of its community, both from bottom-up and top-down. Legal, administrative, and fincancial frameworks that empower Kond’s residents are necessary to secure the neighborhood’s and the community’s future, and thus ensure the preservation of both architectural-material and intangible-social heritage in Kond.
“DZerrnakrriv geraka shah chanach’vats taratsk’um.” Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. 9 Dec 2009. https://www.rferl. org/a/1968164.html “Evaluations of Cultural Properties.” UNESCO World Heritage Convention Bureau of the World Heritage Committee. Helsinki, Finland, 7–8 December 2001. Haroyan, Arpine, Nazaretyan, Hovhannes. “Kond: A City Within a City.” EVN Report,. 13 Aug 2018. https://www.evnreport.com/ arts-and-culture/kond-a-city-within-a-city Jashi, Salome. “Tbilisi – where ‘restoration’ means redevelopment.” Open Democracy. 4 Jul 2012. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/tbilisi-where-restoration-means-redevelopment/ Jovchelovitch, Sandra, Priego-Hernandez, Jacqueline. Bottom-up social development in favelas of Rio deJaneiro: A toolkit. https://en.unesco.org/inclusivepolicylab/sites/default/files/learning/document/2017/2/ToolkitSocialDevelopmentLSE2015.pdf. Khimshiashvili, Kakha. “Old Tbilisi, Georgia.” Management of Historic Centres, edited by Robert Pickard. Taylor & Francis, 11 Jan 2013. “Kond: Longing in Slums.” Soviet Armenia. Yerevan, 17 May 1989. “PAPYAN AND DAVTYAN v. ARMENIA.” European Court of Human Rights. 29 Jun 2010. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-100094. Petrossian, Sevada. Personal interview. 16 Dec 2020.
WORKS CITED “Advisory Body Evaluation (ICOMOS).” Rio de Janeiro: Carioca Landscapes between the Mountain and the Sea. UNESCO, 2012. “Antsanot Yerevan: Kondi Mzkith.” 30 Mar 2018. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=rAxQIvpjyMI. “Becoming a Post-Soviet City: Social Housing and Urban Planning in Yerevan.” Ajam Media Collective. 8 Apr 2014. http:// ajammc.com/2014/04/08/yerevanbecoming-a-post-soviet-city. “Campaign Calls on UNESCO to Recognize Favelas as World Heritage.” Rio On Watch. 2016. https://www.rioonwatch. org/?p=44598. “CASE OF HAKOBYAN AND AMIRKHANYAN v. ARMENIA.” European Court of Human Rights. Strasbourg, 17 Oct 2019. https:// www.echr.am/resources/echr//judgments/603ac16eb6bacd10581c1488040648ef.pdf. Dimitrova Savova, Nadezhda. “Heritage Kinaesthetics: Local Constructivism and UNESCO’s Intangible-Tangible Politics at a “Favela” Museum.” Anthropological Quarterly, vol. 82(2), Spring, 2009. pp. 547-585.
Ruskin, John. The Seven Lamps of Architecture. London: G. Routledge & Sons; New York: E P. Dutton & Co., 1907. Sandler, Daniela. Counterpreservation: architectural decay in Berlin since 1989. Ithaca, NY; London, England: Cornell University Press, 2016. Soorenian, Lia. Navigating Yerevan’s Kond District: Democratizing Urban Planning. Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, May 2014. Stubb, John H. Time Honored: A Global View of Architectural Conservation. John Wiley & Sons, 2009. Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène-Emmanuel. “Restoration.” From the Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle. 1854-1868. Watenpaugh, Heghnar. Private interview. 11 Dec 2020. Wheeler, Angela. “New Look for Old Tbilisi: Preservation Planning in Tbilisi Historic District.” Identity Studies in the Caucasus and the Black Sea Region, vol.6, 25 Jan 2016.
Photograph courtesy of Arineh Keshishi.
Kond: Rethinking Heritage Conservation Zhanna Kitbalyan
Kond is the oldest neighborhood in Yerevan, Armenia, and the only part of downtown that has remained virtually unaltered since the 19th century
While the lack of development has preserved its old character, it resulted in poor living conditions of the residents
Preservation of Kon by logistical and l surrounding issues o and property owne fears of slum touris or other results of re that could disrupt
nd is complicated legal questions of eminent domain ership, as well as sm, gentrification, estoration efforts community life.
Revitalization of this neighborhood has to center around the community living there
Kond presents a great opportunity to rethink existing models of historic preservation.
Neighborhood Boundary In Chicago’s Bronzeville Neighborhood BingYu He
Introduction The concept of the city as a whole, containing a group of component neighborhoods is not new, nor is discussion of neighborhood related problems a recent advent to planners, sociologists, traffic engineers, realtors and others closely involved in the patterns of urban land use. Though planning neighborhood was designed as means to redistribute social resources and administer efficiently, the other side is that often the neighborhood concept was being used as an instrument for the segregation of racial, ethnic, religious, and economic groups.
Neighborhood Delimitation There is a basic difference in applying “neighborhood� concepts to newly developing areas and to established sections of the city. In working with the new areas, the planner and the developer have the advantage of shaping the neighborhood to their desired end product with relatively few limitations. The function takes on the characteristics of a design problem. On the other hand, plotting a neighborhood pattern over an existing layer of established urban improvements often can take on the proportions of trying to bailout a rowboat with a sieve. Fitting even, regular boundaries to an irregular, overlapping, ill-defined grouping of elements comprising total neighborhoods becomes a frustrating task. More than a design problem, the task becomes a social problem, a political problem, and an economic problem. Physical Delimitation: Natural / Man-made Social Delimitation: Racial, Ethical, Cultural, Religious
Ciutat Vella, Barcelona Man-made, Historical
San Diego City, CA Natural, Typographical
Chinatown, Chicago, IL Natural, Man-made, Water, Transportation
Bandra Kurla, Mumbai Man-made, Wealth, Class
Six Principles of Neighborhood Delimitation Six basic principles of neighborhood delimitation by Clarence A. Perry, “The Neighborhood Unit,� Neighborhood and Community Planning, (VII), (New York: Committee for the Regional Survey of New York and its Environs, 1929). 1. Major arterials and traffic routes should not pass through residential neighborhoods. Instead, these streets should provide the boundaries of the neighborhood. 2. Interior street patterns should be designed and constructed through use of cul-de-sacs, curved layout and light duty surfacing so as to encourage a quiet, safe, low volume traffic movement and preservation of the residential atmosphere. 3. The population of the neighborhood should be that which is necessary to support its elementary school. 4. The neighborhood focal point should be the elementary school centrally located on a common or green, along with other institutions that have service areas coincident with the neighborhood boundaries. 5. The radius of the neighborhood should be a maximum of one quarter mile, thus precluding a walk of more than that distance for any elementary school child. 6. Shopping districts should be sited at the edge of the neighborhood, preferably at major street intersections.
The Neighborhood Unit as Seen by Clarence A. Perry Reproduced from New York Regional Survey, Volume 7
Reproduced from Up Ahead, A Regional Land Use Plan for Metropolitan Atlanta, courtesy of Atlanta Metropolitan Planning Commission
Scheme for a Settlement of 5,000 People, Illustrating the Organization of Social Spaces and the Principle of Circumferential Traffic Reproduced from Architectural Forum, April 1941, courtesy of Hermann Herrey and Architectural Forum
Reproduced from Comprehensive Planning for The Whittier Neighborhood, courtesy of Minneapolis City Planning Commission 1. https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/legacy_resources/pas/at60/pdf/report141.pdf
Chicago Race Riot of 1919 On July 27, 1919, a 17-year-old African American boy named Eugene Williams was swimming with friends in Lake Michigan when he crossed the unofficial barrier (located at 29th Street) between the city’s “white” and “Black” beaches. A group of white men threw stones at Williams, hitting him, and he drowned. When police officers arrived on the scene, they refused to arrest the white man whom Black eyewitnesses pointed to as the responsible party. Angry crowds began to gather on the beach, and reports of the incident–many distorted or exaggerated–spread quickly. Violence soon broke out between gangs and mobs of Black and white, concentrated in the South Side neighborhood surrounding the stockyards. After police were unable to quell the riots, the state militia was called in on the fourth day, but the fighting continued until August 3. Shootings, beatings and arson attacks eventually left 15 whites and 23 Blacks dead, and more than 500 more people (around 60 percent Black) injured. An additional 1,000 Black families were left homeless after rioters torched their residences.
Lasting Impact In the aftermath of the rioting, some suggested implementing zoning laws to formally segregate housing in Chicago, or restrictions preventing Blacks from working alongside whites in the stockyards and other industries. Such measures were rejected by African American and liberal white voters, however. City officials instead organized the Chicago Commission on Race Relations to look into the root causes of the riots and find ways to combat them. The commission, which included six white men and six Black, suggested several key issues —including competition for jobs, inadequate housing options for Black people, inconsistent law enforcement and pervasive racial discrimination—but improvement in these areas would be slow in the years to come. 2. https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/chicago-race-riot-of-1919 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_race_riot_of_1919
A white gang looking for African Americans during the Chicago Race Riot of 1919.
The Boundary of Bronzeville, Chicago Bronzeville, also known as the “Black Metropolis” and the “Black Belt,” is the center of African-American history on Chicago’s South Side, just 10 minutes south of downtown. While the boundaries of Bronzeville are debatable, there is general agreement that the heart of Bronzeville is from 31st Street south to Pershing Road and east from today’s Dan Ryan Expressway to Lake Michigan. Many consider Bronzeville to stretch from 18th Street south all the way to 67th Street. 1916 marks the beginning of the Great Migration when African Americans left the American South for Chicago with the promise of better jobs and reduced oppression. The reality, however, fell far short of this promise as conditions were still repressive and segregated. African Americans were restricted to live in the Black Belt in white-owned housing that was largely dilapidated and densely populated yet more expensive than housing in white areas.
The Great Migration Chicago
From the turn of the twentieth century until after World War II, the term “Black Belt” was commonly used to identify the predominately African American community on Chicago’s South Side. Chicago’s South Side African American community expanded over the century until it stretched between 12th and 79th streets and Wentworth and Cottage Grove avenues. Approximately 60,000 blacks had moved from the South to Chicago during 1940-44 in search of jobs. The Black Belt
The Stroll
The Stroll was the name given to State Street between 26th and 39th Streets. In the 1910s and 1920s, thanks to the publicity efforts of the Chicago Defender, it was the best-known street in African America, rivaled only by Seventh and Lenox Avenues in Harlem. In the evening the lights blazed and the sidewalks were crowded with patrons attending the jazz clubs and those just gazing at all the activity. During daylight hours it was a place to loiter, to gossip and watch the street life.
4. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1212.html
Illinois Tech (IIT) and Bronzeville, Chicago Beginning in the 1940s, the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) had begun erecting “residential towers” in primarily African-American neighborhoods throughout the city. This was a public-policy extension of racially restrictive covenants, which were in place from 1927 to 1948, and continued to limit African Americans in moving into other neighborhoods. Additionally, the police were participating in selective enforcement of illicit activities and this, combined with economic segregation, further contributed to a living environment in Bronzeville in which both crime and poverty flourished. Changes in such public policy fostered disenfranchisement and isolation among African Americans on the South Side. One notable example of this decline in Bronzeville housing was the once-vibrant Mecca Flats, which stood on the site of S. R. Crown Hall. Built in 1891, the Mecca was considered the epitome of a great apartment residence and attracted residents who reveled in its luxurious touches. By the 1920s it was a dilapidated tenement, its residents unable to move in part due to restrictive covenants and the economic devastation of the Great Depression. Beginning in the late 1940s, Armour Institute, incorporated as Illinois Institute of Technology, razed buildings that were once the home to Bronzeville residents and businesses to expand the campus per Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s master plan. Mecca Flats, one of the last to fall, was razed in 1952. Why didn’t Bronzeville’s residents turn against IIT when the university purchased large parcels of land in the community?
Mecca Flats Apartments
Mecca Flats Apartments during demolition
Recent archaeological findings unearthed in IIT
Newly exposed tile of the Mecca Flats
University Archivist Ralph Pugh, who also teaches courses in Chicago history at IIT, says that there are several reasons why the university and Bronzeville survived this seminal period. “Historic preservation was not foremost in the community’s mind,” he explains. “The African-American middle class and civic leaders left the area as soon as they could. Getting out of sub-standard housing was the goal of those who were left behind in these tenements. The center of Bronzeville had also moved away from IIT—slid past it from 35th and State to 47th Street. So in a sense, IIT was razing buildings and developing land no one in the community felt passionately about claiming.” 5. https://magazine.iit.edu/summer-2015/bronzeville-and-illinois-tech
Survey 1. What is your current status in IIT? a) Student b) Faculty c) Staff d) Visitor e) Alumni 2. How long have you been in IIT? a) Less than 1 year b) 1 - 3 years c) 3 - 5 years d) More than 5 years 3. How many hours do you spend on campus averagely per day? a) Less than 2 hours b) 2 - 4 hours c) 4 - 6 hours d) More than 6 hours 4. Did you ever go across the 35th Street? a) Always b) Most of the time c) Sometimes d) Never 5. Mostly, for what purpose did you go across the 35the Street? a) Food/Drink b) Living c) Transportation d) Entertainment e) Other 6. Do you have a strong connection with Bronzeville? a) Strongly Agree b) Somewhat Agree c) Undecided d ) Disagree 7. What is the “safe zone� you think in Bronzeville? a) 31st St - 35th St b) 31st St - Pershing Rd c) 31st St - 43rd St d ) 31st St - Beyond 43rd St 8. What is your ethnicity? a ) White b ) Black or African American c ) American Indian or Alaska Native d ) Asian e ) Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander f ) Other SURVEY LINK: https://yalesurvey.ca1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_b8XAcEb4Jc4D6S1
Data Analysis The outcome data straightforwardly shows interviewees’ feeling about their relationship with the neighborhood and specifically, 35th St. Most of interviewees passed the 35th St. at least sometimes, and about half of interviewees feel they have some kind of connection with Bronzeville. However, there are still 1/3 of people don’t think they have enough connection with Bronzeville. In addition, most of interviewees believe the “safe zone” only remaining in school region. What are reasons that interviewees only perceive the campus as the “safe zone”? In following discussion with some of interviewees, they brought up various assaulting incidents happened in the neighborhood. There even used to be many incidents of gunshot happened near 35th St, also robberies, attacking and so forth. School members can always receive alarms of emergencies in the neighborhood. Those are reasons why they think Bronzeville is not safe enough. How to enlarge the conceptual “safe zone” for school members? First, administers must do their best to ensure the public safety within and surrounding the neighborhood. Second, school members should try to communicate with occupants in neighborhood. We need to have some stronger movements to strengthen the trust between the school and the neighborhood.WW
Folded Map Project Though Chicago is always infamous for its historical social segregation, many people are contributing to desegregate the city. Tonika Lewis Johnson’s Folded Map Project visually connects residents who live at corresponding addresses on the North and South Sides of Chicago. She investigates what urban segregation looks like and how it impacts Chicago residents. What started as a photographic study quickly evolved into a multimedia exploration with video interviews. The project invites audiences to open a dialogue and question how we are all impacted by social, racial, and institutional conditions that segregate the city. Her goal? For individuals to understand how our urban environment is structured. She wants to challenge everyone to think about how change may be possible and to contribute to a solution.
North XX ST/AVE
Madison Street
South XX ST/AVE
6329 S. Paulina
6329 N. Paulina
6900 S. Ashland
6900 N. Ashland
Address Pair: Tonika started the Folded Map Project as a visual investigation of Chicago’s neighborhoods, using the grid system to identify and directly compare photographs and videos of North and South side blocks (such as the 6900 block of North Ashland in Rogers Park and the 6900 block of South Ashland in West Englewood). The next natural step is establishing conversations with neighborhood residents,
Nanette, South Side Englewood resident and Wade, North Side Edgewater resident
6900 North Paulina residents, Shu Chan and Anne and 6900 South Paulina resident, Tina
6400 North Hermitage residents, Jon and Paula and 5600 South Hermitage resident Maurice
6500 North Winchester resident, Brighid and her son and 5600 South Winchester resident, Carmen
6. https://www.foldedmapproject.com/
Design Project Proposal The Goal of the Project: The project aims to soften the boundary within and outside the Brozeville neighborhood. Specifically, it is proposed to strengthen the partnership between IIT and surrounding neighborhood area. The Overall Strategies: 1. Cooperating with nearby schools and creating a weekly visiting program that invites students from nearby schools to visit IIT and participate interested classes. 2. Cooperating with nearby schools and creating a volunteer program that encourages students in IIT to go into classes in elementary or high schools and provide academic support to young students. 3. Cooperating with nearby schools and creating mentoring program that establishing a long-term one-to-one partnership between undergraduates/graduates in IIT and younger students in nearby schools.
Revitalizing Franklinton, OH Gentrification ‘Without the Negative?’ Kyle Coxe INTRODUCTION
Construction, par. 8).
Franklinton, OH is the first area settled in Columbus, OH, the state’s capital. An article by The Atlantic in 2014 titled “Gentrification ‘Without the Negative’ in Columbus, Ohio,” views the neighborhood through a lens of positive growth efforts. The previous executive director of the Franklinton Development Association, Jim Sweeney, claimed: “We have the opportunity to do what people would call gentrification, only without the negative component of it…the displacement of an existing population.” He continues to say, “The existing population is gone already. They went decades ago” (Gentrification ‘Without the Negative’ in Columbus, Ohio, par. 2). Franklinton, OH, offers a case study of revitalization efforts in neglected urban areas in the United States Midwest. The idea that the population of Franklinton is “already gone” does not account for the lives of the individuals and families that still reside in the area. Franklinton currently holds a total population of 8,132 (Franklinton Target Area Plan). Franklinton retains a small, embedded community vulnerable to the significant changes that gentrification efforts historically bring. The following research and analysis of the historical events, past intent, the current situation, and future endeavors in Franklinton, OH, offers insight into a case study of the revitalization of a Midwest community undergoing the rapid change touted as positive that avoids the negative connotations historically tied to gentrification efforts.
A brief history behind the land troubles behind Columbus’ first settlement provides a clearer understanding to the historical degradation of Franklinton and renewed desire to revitalize the community in recent years. Built on the west side of Columbus’ Scioto River, Franklinton exists within a flood plain. Two floods, one in 1913 that killed 93 people and left 20,000 people homeless and another in 1959 drove another 10,000 people from their homes. Not until 1983 did the Federal Emergency Management Agency declare the area a floodplain which subsequently ceased all construction and development efforts in the area. “In 1993, the city of Columbus and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers started a joint city/federal project to build a floodwall along a seven-mile stretch of the Scioto River, protecting Franklinton from future floods. It took eleven years and $129 million, but the floodwall’s completion was surely the most important single step toward to the revitalization and redevelopment of the Franklinton community, because it’s now possible to get flood insurance and construction permits there” (Tierney, pars. 8-11). The redlining map, courtesy of Mapping Inequality: Redlining in New Deal America, depicts the majority of Franklinton as a ‘hazardous’ area and explains the history of disinvestment until the flood plain issue was addressed in 1993 and rectified in the following years Fig. 2). FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Map depicts the areas of concern, the vast majority of Franklinton and neighboring areas, are now of reduced risk to the construction of the levee (Fig. 3).
CONTEXT Franklinton, OH, is immediately west of downtown Columbus. It is bounded by the Scioto River to the east and north and I-70 to the west and south including a portion, South Franklinton, just below I-70 to the south along the Scioto River. Franklinton is separated by three major transportation infrastructures running north and south: two railways, an east and west railway, and a highway (Figure 1). Of these three, Ohio State Route 315 is the most notable, intrusive divider. With construction complete in 1980, OH Route 315 effectively bisected an already neglected neighborhood (Feel the Berm: A Half-Century of Route 315
The construction of the levee offered opportunities to the City of Columbus and Franklinton to revitalize previously destroyed, neglected area. As summarized in the West Franklinton Plan in 2014, the Columbus Planning Division launched a series of planning efforts to rectify the area. This series of plans began in 2000 with the McKinley Avenue Plan to address entry to Franklinton. The 2003 Franklinton Plan followed the McKinley Avenue Plan. The Franklinton Mobility Plan in 2008 discussed transportation and mobility efficiency. The 2003 Franklinton plan
was superseded both two new plans: a 2012 East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan and a 2014 West Franklinton Plan. In 2010, the Columbus Planning Division also approved a Downtown Columbus Strategic Plan that detailed the intent with the east most portion of Franklinton known as the Scioto Peninsula. More on the details of each of these plans follow, however, the initial development of these plans and the subsequent actions in the years following are critical to understanding the current situation of the speed and magnitude of change Franklinton has seen in just the last twenty years. To fully round out the community Franklinton, it is vital to know the demographics of the people that call it home. Franklinton’s current population of 8,132 consists of a racial breakdown of 59% White, 28% African America, 5% two or more races, 4% Hispanic, 2% Asian, and 2% other. The median household income is $15,000 compared to the median household income of Franklin County at large is $56,000 (Franklinton Target Area Plan; Franklinton Demographics and Statistics). It is notable based to provide statistics closer to time in which the Franklinton East and West master plans were developed in 2012 and 2014, respectively. In 2016, the community insight was recorded in more detail. In an article by Massarah Mikati on Medium.com, “Franklinton is the lowest-income area in Columbus. The median income of households in East Franklinton is $10,000 per year, and 40 percent of households in West Franklinton earn an income of less than $15,000 per year (Mikati, par. 21). The 2010 racial dot map of Franklinton, OH, reflects the broad demographic mixture of the population in Franklinton, though conspicuously in East Franklinton is a high concentration of African Americans, adjacent to the river and notable flood plain areas (Fig. 4). THE APPROACH TO REVITALIZATION: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT, DESIGN, AND ISSUES Franklinton’s revitalization planning efforts and actions in the recent two decades yield three distinct ideas for the three divided areas of Franklinton. Each of these plans will inevitably bring change to their adjacent areas of Franklinton, though to ensure revitalization occurs while retaining the original populace and attracting new residents, myriad stakeholders and parts must work in harmony for the community of
Franklinton to regrow. The following design analyses focus on the three prominent areas of Franklinton: West Franklinton, East Franklinton, and the Scioto Peninsula. The current and future harmony and planning between these separate efforts are critical to defining the crux of the issue: to revitalize Franklinton without the negative immediate and long-term effects gentrification usually entails. WEST FRANKLINTON The bisection of Franklinton by the construction of OH State Route 315 effectively split Franklinton into west and east areas. The core facets in the development of West Franklinton’s master plan relied heavily on community outreach, including resident surveys and long-term resident interviews. The requests of the community were evaluated by the planning team and the particular findings guided the path forward for the master plan recommendations. From this initiative, the stakeholders’ top response was the desire for a grocery store (The West Franklinton Plan, 18). Additionally, emergent themes from the interviews yielded Franklinton to be an area rife with opportunity but full of negative perceptions including residential vacancy and high crime rates. Other themes from the public outreach initiative included solving the abandoned housing issues, increasing densification in strategic areas, and addressing the transportation network issues as “approximately 30% of the more than 3,000 households in West Franklinton do not have a car” (19-20). An important note of employment in West Franklinton includes Mount Carmel’s role in employment of the local community. “Nearly 45% of the jobs are in the health care and social assistance field. Mt. Carmel West hospital plays a large role in this area…” (32). Absent from the 2014 West Franklinton plan are significant changes to the Mount Carmel Franklinton Campus, where the hospital announced in 2015 plans to eventually open 19.4 acres of land as they close and demolish portions of their in-patient care facilities (Fig. 5) (Warren Mount Carmel Unveils pars. 1-2). With the announcement of Mount Carmel’s in-patient facilities closure only a year after this planning effort was published, the future of job reliability West Franklinton had for the short term remains unclear. With the new facilities in Grove City announced to replace the closure of some of Mount Carmel’s Franklinton facilities, the 9-mile, 15-minute commute to the new location may not be
entirely feasible or sustainable for residents in West Franklinton that do not have reliable daily transportation. Continued investment and development of local businesses is vital to the retention of residents and revitalization effort in West Franklinton as select Mount Carmel Franklinton demolition efforts continue to open new developable parcels (Fig. 6) (Warren Project Update pars. 1-3). The prominent recommendations from the West Franklinton plan follow as priorities for development to revitalize the area based on community input: OH State Route 315 Gateway, the Town Street Avondale Neighborhood, the Broad Street Downtown Franklinton Corridor, and the West Gateway. The recommendations for these areas followed the design research conducted by the planning team, such as the identifying key areas of redevelopment to claim a “heart” of West Franklinton (Fig. 7) and identifying desirable areas for deliberate greenspace development (Fig. 8) (West Franklinton Plan Appendices 2). Depending on the recommended scenario, the OH State Route 315 Gateway plan recommendations are summarized into large development of commercial use, at 50,000120,000 SF, office use, at 75,000-200,000 SF, and residential apartment complexes, at 700-1000 units, that fall into the planning analysis for this district (Fig. 9). The exact proposals in this plan now require adjustment due to the newly available parcels of land with the phased closures of parts of the Mount Carmel Campus. The Town Street Avondale Neighborhood, identified as what most call the heart of West Franklinton, includes a recommendation to develop “a residential village” by way of infilling vacant lots with town-house scale residential units to create a densified condition to better reflect a thriving, populated heart of West Franklinton. Additional infill includes incorporating small-scaled park spaces and local-scale neighborhood services and commercial spaces (The West Franklinton Plan, 94-95). The plan for the Broad Street Downtown Franklinton Corridor includes densification by way of implementing mixed-use two to four story buildings as infill to the existing commercial fabric and modification of the existing traffic pattern to slow vehicular speed (Fig. 10) (96-101). The visualization depicted to the people of Franklinton from the masterplan in 2014 is unfortunately slow to actualization. Though a handful of new businesses have occupied the existing buildings, little signs of effort to infill the existing fabric or modify the
traffic pattern are evident today (Fig. 11). The request for greenspace in the West Franklinton plan offers opportunity for more in-depth review based on the questionable recommended implementation methods. The plan calls for the demolishing of vacant houses and possible land acquisition of adjacent properties to effectively create enough space for the development of an attractive park (Fig. 12) (54-55). While a solid strategy on paper, the development of any sizeable greenspace in the way fails should any of the existing property owners refuse the request to leave. The greenspace proposal for Lucas Park as an extension of Avondale Elementary School’s open space shows little evidence of fruition, let alone initiative today (Fig. 13) (103-104). Despite the planning team’s literal implementation proposal to follow with the community survey of putting more greenspace adjacent to existing elementary school open space, the plan acknowledges the difficulty of actualization due to the existing residences. Despite the numerous other mass lot vacancies, especially near the OH State Route 315 Gateway, the planners included a proposal for a much-desired park that offers little hope of execution or advocacy. It is questionable whether the literal interpretation from the public outreach surveys offers the due diligence required to actualize a park, rather than “check the box” on including a proposal for a park, albeit one that fails on arrival. The West Gateway connects West Broad Street to I-70, the western-most border of Franklinton. A mid-density retail district, the area finds brings little attention to the other portions of West Franklinton and the plan acknowledges this area will not function nor look like any of the proposals for West Franklinton. Rather, with the particular retail and commercial facilities at this location, the redevelopment cycle calls for anticipated rebuilds or renovations of the existing structures in a 15-year cycle with recommended transportation infrastructure upgrades as able (111). Little evidence of the infrastructure improvements in the proposal are seen today as the only improvements are the predicted one-off retail renovation efforts. Part of the specific community outreach efforts reveals high demand for a full-service grocery store. The grocery store request was evaluated by the planning team and they uncovered a lack of adequate demographics, spending patterns, and market conditions to facilitate attracting a large, full-service grocer. The plan states, “Household growth and
income diversity in Franklinton are key to attracting a full-service grocery store and even more resident-specific retail. The average household spending on food and beverage (F&B) at home for Franklinton residents in $2,100, nearly half that of the average City of Columbus household ($4,000). If neighborhood growth continues to be concentrated at the same income level, the household base in Franklinton would have to more than double (from 3,600 to 8,500) to support the average supermarket which has gross annual sales of $17.8 million” (Fig. 14) (The West Franklinton Plan Appendices 20). The plan notes several alternatives to the lack of a major grocer in the short and intermediate term such as starting a cooperative, sell fresh, locally grown produce, incentivizing small-format grocers, and seek federal funds available for “food deserts” (21). The subsequent plans for the revitalization of housing in West Franklinton and regrowth and development in East Franklinton and the Scioto Peninsula to attract new residents may create favorable market conditions to meet the need of attracting a larger grocer in the future. Throughout these various specific area efforts in West Franklinton, the desire and advocacy for affordable housing throughout the holistic area of Franklinton at large remained a prominent theme. These housing efforts hold strong today by way of the advocacy of a number of local organizations like the Franklinton Area Commission, the Franklinton Development Association (FDA) and the Central Ohio Community Land Trust (COCLT), a subsidiary of the Central Ohio Community Improvement Corporation (COCIC) focuses on blight removal and Intervention. The 2014 West Franklinton Plan identified 3,058 households with 723 owned units and 2,335 rented units (The West Franklinton Plan 33). Additionally, the planners identified the sizable amount vacant residential lots in the neighborhood as vital for the vitalization of the community as a whole. At nearly 40% of the land use in West Franklinton, addressing the vacant lots with a cohesive strategy is critical (33). The plan identifies four conditions and actions based on the location and home condition: (1) minor home repair to substantial rehabilitation, (2) minor home repair to moderate rehabilitation, (3) minor home repair and/ or demo with green re-use of lot (add block amenities), and (4) critical mass redevelopment opportunities (Fig. 15) (52-53). The FDA and COCLT have continued the development of this cohesive housing
strategy in order to create conditions to attract and retain residents in the vacant properties of West Franklinton. In a Franklinton Area Commission meeting on December 16, 2020, streamed via Facebook Live, the COCLT announced the homebuyers in the recently developed homes fall within a diverse range of socioeconomic status and income. Additionally, the COCLT announced 10 new single family housing revitalization efforts beginning in 2021 (Fig. 16) with 6 other single family houses nearing completion with a few already under contract with future homeowners (Fig. 17) (Monthly Meeting of the Housing & Development Committee). In addition to single family homes on individual lots, the Franklinton Target Area Plan, published in April 2020, details the Franklinton’s involvement in the FHAct50 Building Opportunity Fund. This “fund provides access to a pool of $3 million in low income housing tax credits to further the creation of diverse and accessible communities within the boundaries of a TAP identified by the City of Columbus” (Target Area Plan iv). This study identified a series of single-family homes in offering variable rates of affordable housing for future homeowners (Fig. 18) (33). The study also proposed three new housing developments and garnered input from the community on each (Fig. 19) (50). The Target Area Plan clearly defines each project’s intent and gages community input on each proposal about scattered locations within Franklinton (Fig. 20). The three distinct proposals capable of being funded by the FHAct50 Fund consist of the following: (1) Franklinton Senior Housing I (Figs. 21, 22), (2) McDowell Place (Figs. 23, 24), and (3) Warner Junction (Figs. 25, 26). According to the FHAct50 Fund stipulation, “Projects selected will offer units to households who earn up to 80% of the area median income and rents will be affordable to those at 30% to 80% of area median income” (48). To round out the housing picture of both East and West Franklinton, a point of reprieve and possible contention is the relatively novel implementation of the land trust model. Advertised as the “anti-gentrification tool” the land trust “permanently affordable home ownership” (Warren Land Trust par. 6). Unlike “the traditional land bank model, where homes or vacant lots are sold at a low price on the condition the buyer invests in the property in timely manner,” the land trust allows “‘homeowners to own their homes,
but the land underneath it stays in the trust’” (par. 5). Restrictions may be enacted to confirm the homes do not appreciate “beyond a certain, fixed rate. So, while a land trust house can be bought for a modest price, the homeowner is required to sell it for a modest price as well. This limits how much money they can make on the property, but also guarantees a reasonable price for the next buyer” (par. 7). Jim Sweeney, the former executive director of the Franklinton Development Association commented in the article, “‘It’s great to see the city and county come together with such a creative program,’ he said. ‘Franklinton, being so close to Downtown, is starting to really feel gentrification pressure…this should help’” (par. 11). New City Councilmember Shayla Favor shared similar sentiments about the land trust program, “’This is an innovative and creative long-term urban planning option to address affordable housing in the city…This concept can stabilize communities by guaranteeing mixed-income housing and help mitigate the impacts of property tax growth’” (par. 14). As a double-edged sword, the land trust protects new homeowners and the community, but the traditional wealth building found in the rapidly increasing property values in the land bank model is now lost. EAST FRANKLINTON The vision for East Franklinton was defined in the 2012 East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan. The plan directly highlighted the mayor’s vision for the district to guide the planning effort: “In his 2011 State of the City address, Mayor Michael B. Coleman announced the goal of nurturing an organic character that promotes creative energy, arts, and innovation in East Franklinton by attracting creative businesses and residents” (East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan 12). The plan expounded upon the vision for East Franklinton; it is to serve “a mix of uses that promote vitality…walkability…encourage interaction and active lifestyle…and [offer] options for living and working that foster diversity” (26). The existing land use for East Franklinton depicts a disjointed effort at best (Fig. 27) and a series of vacant parcels (Fig. 28). The proposed future land use consolidates the plan into the three distinct neighborhoods, to the north the West Broad Street Neighborhood, to the west the Dodge Park Neighborhood, and to the east the Arts and Innovation Neighborhood (Fig. 30). Stakeholder engagement, in the form of
focus groups, one-on-one interviews, and meetings with local business leaders, and played a critical role in the process to develop the East Franklinton plan. Planners learned the communities top priorities were affordability, ample amenities, artistic character designed into the neighborhood, diversity, walkability, and the desire for increased safety. Though diversity and affordability are presented as the key desires of stakeholder concern, these two aspects are not fully realized in the plan or actuality in all three neighborhoods of East Franklinton. As noted in the research for West Franklinton, housing concerns and issues are reciprocal in East Franklinton. The 2012 East Franklinton plan denotes a lack of residential density due to vacant lots and establishes a vision to attract 186-230 households per year (16) based on a market analysis conducted in January 2012 by Laurie Volk of Zimmerman Volk Associates on potential demand for housing in East Franklinton (37). The plan also alludes to using a private developer, the Columbus Downtown Development Corporation (CDDC), to take the lead on efforts redeveloping the Scioto Peninsula. The Arts and Innovation Neighborhood and West Broad Street Neighborhood strategies are clear in creating a vibrant, competitively priced urban housing market, while the most residential single-family homes in the Dodge Park Neighborhood focuses on “affordable housing, home-improvement assistance, real estate tax abatements, and similar tools to promote economic diversity and benefit existing residents” (42). While affordable housing is present in East Franklinton, it appears the plan mostly reserved the housing to only a third of the district. The stakeholder engagement process revealed clear concerns over traditional gentrification negatives. “Participants…raised concerns about protecting current East Franklinton residents from the market forces that will attract new investment. The city will pursue creation of a tax-abatement district that will provide a tax abatement for existing residential properties rehabilitated under the program, whether owner- or renter-occupied” (43). The announcement in the 2019 article by Brent Warren aforementioned concerning the land trust initiatives is the solution to this 2012 “safety from gentrification” promise. The development strategy also acknowledges a number of mechanisms are in place to ensure long-term housing remains affordable. “Targets are intended to provide affordable housing for
households earning 60% to 80% of the area median income…but city policy may provide additional flexibility as appropriate. The plan recommends the provision of around 665 units of affordable housing based on the noted targets over the next 20 years. Development agreements, memoranda of understanding, and other legal mechanisms should protect this affordability in perpetuity” (52). In addition to the tax-abatements for existing residents, additional measures are noted in the 2012 East Franklinton Plan to offer several additional incentives to attract developers and promote rapid growth. The City of Columbus offered tax increment financing (TIF) in East Franklinton in which all new property tax revenues are captured and re-invested in that same area. The City of Columbus also designated East Franklinton as an enterprise zone, an “area of land in which a business can receive a tax exemption related to eligible new investment in real property. Enterprise Zones allow local officials to negotiate exemptions on new tax from investment of up to 75% for 10 years…Eligible businesses must create new investment in building construction and/or improvements in existing land and buildings” (55). Several prominent projects have already taken advantage of these incentives, albeit not in the affordable housing district of the Dodge Park Neighborhood. Contrary to the 2012 master plan establishing clear zoning height restrictions, modifications have been made to account for new projects to be introduced into the “competitive, thriving urban development districts.” The zoning height in the 2012 plan specifies a five-story limit to buildings (Fig. 31), yet two major developments, the Gravity and River & Rich have each announced a phase-two proposal for a 12-story mixed use building. Gravity 2.0 (Fig. 32) is proposed to site across from the northeast corner of the West Broad Street Neighborhood (Warren Changes Proposed for Second Phase of Gravity). River & Rich’s second phase (Fig. 33) is proposed to site in the Arts and Innovation District and is said to include affordable housing: “Materials submitted to the City of Columbus indicate that 20 percent of the apartments would be affordable, although the level of affordability is not defined” (Warren 12-Story Building Part of New Franklinton Proposal par. 4). The Gravity 2.0 project did not announce an affordable housing component. In turn, this development received negative press from by way of the Theodore Decker, who
wrote a piece for The Columbus Dispatch and captures some of Franklinton’s residents’ voices: Rents start at $835 a month and rise to $1,940. The floor plans have names like Karma and Lavender. The one called Limitless has 719 square feet… “Yeah, Franklinton is coming up a little bit,” she said, “but in the middle of a drug epidemic, you guys could be worried about $1,600 apartments?” Her mom’s mortgage is $550 a month. She doubts that anyone in her part of Franklinton could afford even the cheapest studio at Gravity, the $835 model called Amber. “Drug dealers, maybe,” she said. So much money so close to home boggled the mind of neighbor Patricia Craig. Her family pays $550 a month for three bedrooms and two baths. “To me, we got more condominiums than we need,” said Paul Kindell, another resident. “People like me can’t afford ’em.” Kindell, 74, leaned on his cane and pulled a utility cart to a nearby carryout, where he must shop because there is no grocery store nearby and he doesn’t own a car. For most of his life he worked in maintenance at an Italian Village nursing home. His wife was a housekeeper there. That’s how they met. Their rent is $625. He likes his landlord. But his wife has health problems and sleeps downstairs. He hopes to find a home for them someday with everything on the ground floor. An affordable home of her own is high on ReyesPark’s list of wants. So is a place for her children to play that is free of dirty needles. The closest park or playground is a third of a mile away, across Broad Street at Avondale Elementary School. (Decker pars. 5, 11-19) In addition to these two large mixed-use developments projects, local business owners readily recognize the tax incentives in the revival effort. Prior to acquisition, Bob Althoff, the owner of A.D. Farrow Co., America’s oldest Harley Davidson dealership, revealed intent to delay “a 2017 expansion in Franklinton to take part in a new federal tax break…The site is in a federal opportunity one, a savings on capital gains taxes inserted in the 2017 tax-cut law to encourage property and business investment in neighborhoods with the highest poverty rates” (Ghose New Federal Tax Break pars. 1, 3). Carrie Ghose continued
to expound upon the new tax-cut law in another related article titled “Opportunity Zones Calling: Here’s How the Tax Break Works.” She writes, “Opportunity zones, a new investment vehicle that can reduce capital gains taxes, could significantly boost redevelopment of low-income neighborhoods. To get the tax savings, investors put money in a qualified fund that in turn invests in businesses or real estate within a zone” (pars. 1-2). She continues, “The savings come in two stages…First, a delay and potential discount on taxes on the initial amount of capital gains invested in the qualified fund, then after 10 years, a possible erasure of the tax bill for the net new value that fund creates.” The City of Columbus website further explains “Qualified Opportunity Zones are a new community development program established by Congress in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. This program encourages new, long-term investment in property or businesses in specific areas around the City through federal tax incentives for investors. To take advantage of the program, investors must reinvest new capital gains into Qualified Opportunity Funds which are spent in Qualified Opportunity Zones” (Opportunity Zone Program in Columbus par. 4). Jim Weiker, a writer for The Columbus Dispatch, further expands upon the direct effect these specific tax breaks have had on Franklinton revitalization. He writes, “Investors, including central Ohio’s largest developers, stand to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal capital gains taxes by investing in “opportunity zones,” which were created by the Trump administration in December 2017 to encourage investment in poor neighborhoods. They also receive an immediate 10% state tax credit” (Weiker par. 1). He continues in the article to mention the specific development of the Gravity projects: While the program was designed to spur investment, some Columbus developers acknowledged that their projects would have happened without the program, although they might have happened at a slower pace. “Without the opportunity zone designations, projects like Gravity would not be happening the way that they are, and possibly not happening at all,” said Brett Kaufman, founder of Kaufman Development, which is building the eye-catching mixed-use Gravity projects on West Broad Street in Franklinton. “We certainly would not be able to build some of the components into the project that we are excited
about, including a large amount of office space that will bring new jobs to the city, and our efforts to create affordability through our partnership with Homeport and our co-living apartments.” (pars. 21-23) These tax incentive programs offer insight to the speed of the development of the east-most portion of Franklinton, the Scioto Peninsula. SCIOTO PENINSULA The 2010 Downtown Columbus Strategic Plan specifies the intent to continue development of the Scioto Peninsula. The plan calls out 31 acres City-owned stretch of land just east of the East Franklinton railway. The development of this area is touted to “encourage the revitalization of the adjacent Franklinton neighborhood that has suffered from disinvestment” (2010 Downtown Columbus Strategic Plan 64). The 2010 Downtown Plan calls for a “mixed-use sustainable neighborhood” (Fig. 34) to be developed by the private Columbus Downtown Development Corporation (CDDC). In this strategic plan, the CDDC was charged to “undertake a real estate market, conceptual design, infrastructure and financing study to fully explore this recommendation of a mixed-use neighborhood that includes cultural institutions, office, and research, and residential uses” (70). This plan accounts only for the vacant land that resides within Franklinton but is owned by the city and retains the intent to help catalyze redevelopment in Franklinton. In a 2017 conceptual proposal for the buildout of the Scioto Peninsula, the CDDC released a series of renderings by Robert A. M. Stern Architects to provide the city an idea behind the large development undertaking (Fig. 35) (Warren 21 Acre Downtown Development Plan Unveiled). Updates since the 2017 proposal were released in late summer of 2019 to reveal the removal of the two 30-story residential towers from the original proposal (Warren Plan Revealed for First Phase of Scioto Peninsula Development). Phase one (Fig. 36) of the project is moving forward with buildings 8-11 stories high, though still flanked by 16-story buildings in the overall, updated concept rendering (Fig. 37) (Warren Commission Weighs In On Scioto Peninsula Plan). In a comment to ColumbusUnderground, “Commissioner Danni Palmore raised concerns about a lack of “architectural diversity” on the downtown-facing sides of the building on Belle Street,
although she joined other commissioners in praising the overall concept” (par. 9). Though the first phase of the project claims includes “240,000 square feet of office space, 550 residential units, 180 hotel rooms, and an unspecified amount of street-level retail” the project conspicuously excluded a clear plan for integrating affordable housing into the large development project (Warren Plan Revealed for First Phase of Scioto Peninsula Development par. 7). “Ten percent of the phase one units will be reserved and priced for households making 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), while another 10% will be at the 100%-of-AMI-level” (par. 13). The timeframe and scope in determining the AMI is unclear, as the adjacencies to the new development are other higher priced downtown residential units and the aforementioned costly priced Gravity units in East Franklinton. Attracting new residents daily that can afford the increased rental prices, at the Gravity and River & Rich developments the AMI is skewing higher and higher. With these areas as possible players in determining the target AMI, the term “affordable housing” looks ever distant to the residents of Franklinton with a median household income of $15,000 let alone the median household income of Franklin County at $56,000. CONCLUSION Franklinton is at a unique moment in its history. The wide-spread development efforts across the community are prominent yet unbalanced. The investment in an existing community is strangely is slow to redevelop and revitalize, yet a community which does not exist receives investment and attention from the city at large at uncanny speed. West Franklinton has seen little development or wide-spread improvements since the 2014 master plan with the exception of the slow-moving single-family housing developments led by the Franklinton Development Association. West Franklinton, aptly named even formally during the planning effort, operates like a separate town of East Franklinton. It is worth highlighting, this could be exactly the multi-phased, slow approach West Franklinton needs; however, in East Franklinton, it could also create an urban land-grab situation that may turn into pushing out the local populace over time. Crossing OH State Route 315 into East Franklinton yields an equally strange urban condition, rapid revitaliza-
tion amongst a series of vacant homes, businesses, and lots with a scattering of improved single-family homes, similar to West Franklinton. Affordability, though once deemed a priority, doesn’t full appear possible to a new low-income renter east of Route 315. Crossing the railway bisecting East Franklinton, the din of development only increases, at a rate faster than East Franklinton. Affordable housing and diversity are even more absent. Without the proper policies in place through the city and other localities to enforce actual, solidified solutions of affordable housing, the revitalization of Franklinton is rapid but shows signs of extreme, continued socioeconomic division. The disparity of demographics of various socioeconomic status in Franklinton does not offer financial mobility for those of low socioeconomic status. Rather than integrate affordable rental options into the new developments, Franklinton appears to form housing options of micro-division that leaves the future unity of the community uncertain.
WORKS CITED “2010 Downtown Columbus Strategic Plan.” Columbus Planning Division, 2010. Decker, Theodore. “Theodore Decker: New Apartments Miss the Gravity of Franklinton’s Situation.” The Columbus Dispatch, 23 Aug. 2018, www.dispatch.com/news/20180823/theodore-decker-new-apartments-miss-gravity-of-franklintons-situation. “East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan.” Columbus Planning Division, 2012. “Feel the Berm: A Half-Century of Route 315 Construction.” Worthington Memory, 2 Aug. 2017, www.worthingtonmemory.org/exhibits/2017-8-1/feel-berm-half-century-route-315-construction. “Franklinton Demographics and Statistics.” Niche, 2020, www.niche.com/places-to-live/n/franklinton-columbus-oh/residents/. “Franklinton Target Area Plan.” The Neighborhood Design Center, Apr. 2020. “Gentrification ‘Without the Negative’ in Columbus, Ohio.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 10 Nov. 2014, www.theatlantic.com/video/index/382568/gentrification-without-the-negative-in-columbus-ohio/?gclid=CjwKCAiAnIT9BRAmEiwANaoE1YSjljVfoLgp-VPo7P08RQfde2B6Jalj1sw2WShbmqZLTaGjHs3oshoCdI8QAvD_BwE. Ghose, Carrie. “Opportunity Zones Calling: Here’s How the Tax Break Works.” Columbus Business First, 11 Feb. 2019, www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/02/11/opportunity-zones-calling-heres-how-the-tax-break. html. Ghose, Carrie. “Opportunity Zones: New Federal Tax Break Could Make Franklinton Development Even Hotter.” Columbus Business First, 11 Feb. 2019, www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/02/11/opportunityzones-new-federal-tax-break-could-make.html. Mikati, Massarah. “Bottoms up: Gentrification in Franklinton.” Medium, 6 Aug. 2016, medium.com/@sfmikati/ bottoms-up-gentrification-in-franklinton-b9389ad04bcd. “Monthly Meeting of the Housing & Development Committee, December 2020.” Franklinton Area Commission - Housing & Development Committee via Facebook, Facebook Watch, 16 Dec. 2020, www.facebook.com/ franklintonareacommission/videos/430712751269053. “Opportunity Zone Program.” City of Columbus, www.columbus.gov/development/economic-development/Opportunity-Zone-Program/. Tierney, John. “Remaking Columbus’s Most Downtrodden Neighborhood.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 16 Mar. 2015, www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/10/remaking-columbuss-most-downtrodden-neighborhood/380860/. Warren, Brent. “12-Story Building Part of New Franklinton Proposal.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 17 Sept. 2019, www.columbusunderground.com/12-story-building-part-of-new-franklinton-proposal-bw1. Warren, Brent. “21 Acre Downtown Development Plan Unveiled.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 10 Feb. 2017, www.columbusunderground.com/21-acre-downtown-development-plan-unveiled-bw1.
WORKS CITED, CONTINUED Warren, Brent. “Changes Proposed for Second Phase of Gravity.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 21 May 2019, www.columbusunderground.com/changes-proposed-for-second-phase-of-gravity-development-bw1. Warren, Brent. “Commission Weighs In On Scioto Peninsula Plans.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 22 Oct. 2019, www.columbusunderground.com/commission-weighs-in-on-scioto-peninsula-plans-bw1. Warren, Brent. “Land Trust Touted as Anti-Gentrification Tool.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 4 Feb. 2019, www. columbusunderground.com/land-trust-touted-as-anti-gentrification-tool-bw1. Warren, Brent. “Mount Carmel Unveils Latest Plan for Franklinton Campus.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 21 Dec. 2017, www.columbusunderground.com/mount-carmel-unveils-latest-plan-for-franklinton-campus-bw1. Warren, Brent. “Plan Revealed for First Phase of Scioto Peninsula Development.” ColumbusUnderground. com, 21 Aug. 2019, www.columbusunderground.com/plan-revealed-for-first-phase-of-scioto-peninsula-development-bw1. Warren, Brent. “Project Update: Mount Carmel West Development in Franklinton.” ColumbusUnderground.com, 25 Nov. 2019, www.columbusunderground.com/project-update-mount-carmel-west-bw1. Weiker, Jim. “Big Central Ohio Developers in Line for Opportunity Zone Tax Breaks.” The Columbus Dispatch, The Columbus Dispatch, 23 Jan. 2020, www.dispatch.com/business/20200122/big-central-ohio-developersin-line-for-opportunity-zone-tax-breaks. “The West Franklinton Plan Appendices.” Columbus Planning Division, 2014. “The West Franklinton Plan.” Columbus Planning Division, 2014.
Figure 1. Franklinton, OH Attribution: Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/place/Franklinton,+Columbus,+OH/@39.9531531,-83.0365989,14.98z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88388f73310aa0e5:0x32af6a56a88322d5!8m2!3d39.9537272!4d-83.0280816
Figure 2. Redlining of Franklinton, OH Attribution: Mapping Inequality: Redlining in New Deal America https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=14/39.955/-83.05&city=columbus-oh
Figure 3. Floodplains in Columbus, OH Attribution: FEMA National Flood Hazard Map https://fca.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=109781407ce74e6dabf31c8b04d1ad3d
Figure 4. Racial Dot Map of Franklinton, OH Attribution: Demographics Research Group http://racialdotmap.demographics.coopercenter.org/
Figure 5. Mount Carmel West Campus Plan Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/mount-carmel-unveils-latest-plan-for-franklinton-campus-bw1
Figure 6. Mount Carmel West Updated Plan Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/project-update-mount-carmel-west-bw1
Figure 7. Public Outreach Mapping Exercise: Where Do you Consider the Heart of West Franklinton? Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan Appendices
Figure 8. Public Outreach Mapping Exercise: Where Would You Build a Park in West Franklinton? Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan Appendices
Figure 9. OH State Route 315 Gateway District Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan
Figure 10. Visualization the Projected Downtown Franklinton Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan
Figure 11. Photo of Franklinton on Broad Street Attribution: Primary Site Research
Figure 12. West Franklinton Infill Strategy Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan
Figure 13. Lucas Park Proposal Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan
Figure 14. Grocery Store Market Requirements Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan Appendices
Figure 15. Vacant Property Strategy Attribution: The West Franklinton Plan
Figure 16. COCLT Housing, New Developments Attribution: Monthly Meeting of the Housing & Development Committee, December 2020 www.facebook.com/franklintonareacommission/videos/430712751269053
Figure 17. COCLT Housing, Developments Nearing Completion and Sale Attribution: Monthly Meeting of the Housing & Development Committee, December 2020 www.facebook.com/franklintonareacommission/videos/430712751269053
Figure 18. Single Family Home Typologies in Franklinton Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 19. Proposed Affordable Housing Developments in Franklinton Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 20. Sites of Proposed Affordable Housing Developments in Franklinton Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 21. Franklinton Senior Housing I, Part 1 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 22. Franklinton Senior Housing I, Part 2 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 23. McDowell Place, Part 1 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 24. McDowell Place, Part 2 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 25. Warner Junction, Part 1 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 26. Warner Junction, Part 2 Attribution: Franklinton Target Area Plan
Figure 27. Existing East Franklinton Land Use, 2012 Attribution: East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan
Figure 28. Existing East Franklinton Vacant Parcels, 2012 Attribution: East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan
Figure 29. Proposed East Franklinton Land Use Attribution: East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan
Figure 30. The Three Neighborhoods of East Franklinton Attribution: East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan
Figure 31. East Franklinton Building Height Zones Attribution: East Franklinton Creative Community District Plan
Figure 32. Rendering of the Gravity 2.0 12-Story Building Proposal Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/changes-proposed-for-second-phase-of-gravity-development-bw1
Figure 33. Rendering of the River & Rich Phase II Proposal Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/12-story-building-part-of-new-franklinton-proposal-bw1
Figure 34. Requested Mixed-Use Sustainable Neighborhood Aerial Rendering Attribution: 2010 Downtown Columbus Strategic Plan
Figure 35. Rendering of the Scioto Peninsula Development Proposal Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/21-acre-downtown-development-plan-unveiled-bw1
Figure 36. Updated Scioto Peninsula Rendering Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/commission-weighs-in-on-scioto-peninsula-plans-bw1
Figure 37. Updated Scioto Peninsula Aerial Rendering Attribution: ColumbusUnderground.com https://www.columbusunderground.com/commission-weighs-in-on-scioto-peninsula-plans-bw1
Revitalizing Franklinton, OH Gentrification ‘Without the Negative?’ Kyle Coxe
FHAct50 Fund Projects
Projects selected will offer units to households who earn up to 80% of the area median income and rents will be affordable to those at 30% to 80% of area median income.
Why the Growth Now?
FRANKLINTON POPULATION: 8,132 FRANKLINTON MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $15K FRANKLIN COUNTY MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $56K
Franklinton is classified as a Qualified O o A temporary tax deferral for capital g Fund. o A step-up in basis for capital gains rei 10% basis increase if the investm if held for at least 7 years. o A permanent exclusion from taxable i exchange of a qualified fund investment
No mention of affordable housing requi
Ri
Ma of tha ap aff of
Opportunity Zone since 2017 gains reinvested in an Opportunity
invested in an Opportunity Fund: ment is held for at least 5 years and 15%
And for Affordable Housing...
Ten percent of the phase one units will be reserved and priced for households making 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), while another 10% will be at the 100%-of-AMI-level
income of capital gains from the sale or t if it is held for at least 10 years.
irements.
iver & Rich Phase II
aterials submitted to the City Columbus indicate at 20 percent of the partments would be ffordable, although the level affordability is not defined. Source Image Attributions: Google Maps Niche.com ColumbusUnderground.com Franklinton Target Area Plan 2020
Climate Gentrification and Equitable Climate Adaptation in Miami Three Approaches: Policy, Advocacy, and Scholarly Claudia Ansorena
Figure 1. Storm surge in Miami Beach following Hurricane Irma in 2017; Image Source: Siralbertu INTRODUCTION Miami, like many coastal cities, suffers from a variety of water-related threats brought on by climate change. The global rise of seas, along with an increase in the intensity of hurricanes, and more frequent yearly occurrences of high-tide or “sunny-dayâ€? flooding, have been a wake-up call for coastal communities. New data projects the global rise of seas to be between 2 ½ to 5ft.1 These alarming figures and in-situ observations present a challenge for coastal cities, namely, how to survive, and how to do so equitably and consciously. As a way to understand the forces involved in mitigation and 1
Kopp et. al (2017)
adaptation efforts, three approaches to climate resilience were studied: policy, advocacy, and scholarly. The intent is to assess whether planned improvements will result in equitable change for all inhabitants of Miami given the existing decisionmaking framework, modus operandi, and interdisciplinary tendencies of each approach. In order to examine resilience, one must first establish the parameters by which these topics are discussed. Definitions are integral to the study of climate change, as scientific terminology must be translated into useful descriptions able to be implemented into the practice of planning. Language also serves to communicate with the public; it is a tool for garnering support, lending clarity, and keeping all
interested parties aware of changes in their city. As a point of departure, the term resilience is defined in relation to each approach. In the case of policy, urban resilience is described by the Resilient Cities Network as “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.”2 Due to the involvement of the Resilient Cities Network as a key consultant in the generation of Resilient 305, a crucial planning document used by South Florida, this broad, but hopeful definition removes prioritization of any one challenge, instead providing the local government with a foundation from which various goals and strategies can be set. Furthermore, Jim Murely, the Chief Resilience Officer for Miami-Dade County provides a more tangible description of resilience, to mean “ investing in preparing and training staff, investing in buildings and infrastructure so that they can withstand a shock from a tropical hurricane, storm surge, or a weather event, or even an infrastructure collapse.”3 In either case, the attitude of government bodies remains optimistic and confident, a characteristic afforded by the vague goal of sustaining life in Miami amidst impending change. In the realm of advocacy, definitions of resilience are more nuanced and intersectional, oftentimes weaving in existing issues plaguing Miami. Such is the case for the Miami Climate Alliance, a coalition of over 80 organizations and individuals engaged in climate justice through the education and empowerment of communities. Although not explicitly defined, the Alliance describes resilience in relation to justice and equity, highlighting “climate change as a threat multiplier to all forms of justice, especially for Miami’s low-income black, Caribbean and Latinx communities.”4 Following the emphasis on education, one of the Alliance’s collaborating organizations, Catalyst Miami, breaks down the concept of resilience to the public through one of their leadership training programs, Community Leadership on the Environment, Advocacy, and Resilience (CLEAR). In a workshop environment, resilience is dissected through simple statements as seen in Figure 2, ulti2 “Urban Resilience,”Resilient Cities Network, https://resilientcitiesnetwork.org/urban-resilience/ 3 Jim Murley, “Resilient 305 Overview,” YouTube Video, 0:06, MiamiDadeTV, January 3, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=2avbYRPk2tE&feature=emb_title 4 Miami Give Day, “Miami Climate Alliance”
mately expanding the term to include access, safety, and affordability. The third outlook on resilience as seen through the lens of a scholarly approach is both idealistic, like the policy-based description, and practical, relating to the specificity provided by advocacy groups. Professor Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, principal and co-founder of DPZ Co-Design, describes a framework from which to assess the overarching topic of “Global Climate Change.” Divided into two strategic strands, “Mitigation and Sustainability,” and “Adaptation and Resilience,” the framework separates efforts made in curb the anthropogenic deterioration of land and resources from those made to address existing and impending symptoms of climate change. The latter consists of four stages: 1. Defense, 2. Accommodation, 3. Retreat, and 4. Cleanup.5 The academic basis and study of previous civilizations allows for perspective and introduces a temporal component missing from the other two iterations of the definition for resilience. The scholarly approach values the physical form of the city as the primary vessel that will absorb the 5 Interview with Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk which took place over Zoom on December 9, 2020.
Figure 2: From the CLEAR Toolkit (pg. 8) outlining an suggested activity to create awareness about resilience and establishing the importance of civic engagement in planning for climate change Source: Catalyst Miami
Figure 3. Map of Miami, Sea-Level Rise, Year 2100; Information derived from Climate Central, Surging Seas Risk Finder
Figure 4. Map of Miami, Low-Income Areas; Source: Jimin Kang, ARC Gis Story Map
Figure 5. Map of Miami, White Population; Source: Jimin Kang, ARC Gis Story Map
Figure 6. Map of Miami, African-American Population; Source: Jimin Kang, ARC Gis Story Map
blows dealt by environmental change, rather than economic viability or the livelihoods of residents. Plater-Zyberk notes that retreat in the form of migration to other parts of the state or nation is a valid option, although it is a taboo topic in most planning-related conversations.6 Another integral term useful in capturing a holistic picture of resilience planning in Miami is climate gentrification. First studied by social scientist Jesse Keenan, it is described as the process by which lower-income populations — oftentimes communities of color — living in areas less affected by symptoms of climate change are displaced by wealthier and more resourceful populations — oftentimes white — who own property in more environmentallyvulnerable areas and are seeking refuge from precarity. In Miami-Dade County, Keenan noted that populations living in such coastal areas as Miami Beach would begin to move inland to neighborhoods like Little Haiti that are on higher ground and thus, less-susceptible to sea-level rise. He refers to this form of climate gentrification as the “ Superior Investment Pathway.”7 Displacement can also be catalyzed by an influx of public investment and engineered-resilience projects aimed at safeguarding against climate catastrophe. These improvements yield positive externalities, namely an increase in the valuation, taxes, and rent amounts of pertinent properties, marginalizing those unable to afford the consequences of change.8 As it relates to Miami, it is important to interrogate the forces behind adaptation and mitigation efforts. Most substantial engineering projects are directed by the federal or local government, thus, the location of intended improvements, the process by which they are approved, and the availability of resources to protect against displacement are paramount in ensuring resilience planning is equitable. The notion of disparity in resource allocation is not a novel struggle in the City of Miami. The repercussions from Urban Renewal projects in the 1950s, the construction of the highway, and a legacy of segregationist policies characteristic of most U.S. cities, are still experienced in Miami today.9 Exacerbated by the threat of flooding along the 6 ibid 7 Jesse M Keenan et al, 2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 054001 8 ibid 9 “Local Tactics.” The Color of Law: a Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, by Richard Rothstein, Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W.W. Norton; Company, 2018.
Figure 7: Little Haiti; Source: Darcy Padilla Figure 8: Rendering, Magic City Innovation District Source: PLAZA EQUITY PARTNERS Figure 9: Residents gather in Little Haiti in protest of the Magic City Innovation District. Source: Family Action Network Movement, change.org
Figure 10: Map of Miami north of the river showing the location of Special Area Plans both approved and under construction. The Magic City project in Little Haiti has been approved despite much kickback from residents. Special Area Plans provide developers wealthy and lucky enough to hold nine contiguous acres nearly free reign over the plan. Source: Marco Ruiz, The Miami Herald
coast, the uprooting of community is once-again occurring — and it once again disproportionately affects communities of color. As seen in Figures 3-5, the comparison between a demographic map showing the location of white populations in the city and another showing the location of Black populations, alludes to the racialized categorization of land. Target Urban Areas, defined by the county as being “predominantly low-income and depressed areas that were created as a result of the Mayor’s Urban Revitalization Task Force,” are in direct overlap with largely Black populations. Along the same vein, the increasingly vulnerable coast, with a large white population exemplifies Keenan’s point concerning the impending move inland by those with means, displacing those without. POLICY There are several different documents that address resiliency in Miami at varying scales, together comprising the comprehensive resilience plan. These documents perform a variety of functions: recommend, strategize, and implement within a given budget. They often reference each
Figure 11. A case study within Action 7 under the “Places” goal expresses the availability of training to public and provate stakeholders, while the image shows a mis-representation of all members of the public; Source: Resilient 305, GM & the Beaches
other, alluding to the practice of sharing knowledge across offices, but in that pursuit and by way of vague language, are susceptible to creating redundancies. That said, the seemingly overlapping goals laid out by the varying documents which address problems at different scales are weary of duplicating efforts. The Regional Climate Action Plan 2.0 authored by the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact includes a series of recommendations, implementation information, case studies, and empirical data available to practitioners and elected officials with the intention that they be used as resilience planning tools, based on respective local contexts and priorities. Inspired by the sustained collaboration between Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Monroe counties, the framers of Resilient 305, a regional planning measure, united forces from two cities and a county to share knowledge and resources and prevent surplus efforts. The actionbased document focuses on opportunities not otherwise addressed by other initiatives or actors in the city. Funding is specific to each project, allowing for a piece-meal approach to implementation and the opportunity for both private and public funding sources to understand the parameters, as well as public sentiment towards the proposed project before deciding to invest. At the city level, residents in Miami approved a $400M general obligation bond measure in November 2017 aimed at “alleviating existing and future risks to residents, economy, tourism, and the city’s legacy.”10 Five guiding principles establish the priorities policymakers wish to communicate with the public: Modernization, Safety, Wellness and Quality of Life, Equity, and Economic Return, which all vaugely translate into funded goals, as seen in Figure 4 Although easy to understand, the compartmentalization here into otherwise overlapping facets of city life reveal deeper issues with the theoretical framework. The The Resilient 305 strategy is a collaboration between the City of Miami Beach, Miami-Dade County, and the City of Miami proposed as a way to address climate change issues that are best tackled at a regional level, such as the implementation of floodwalls along the coast, a proposal from the Army Corps of Engineers. The plan focuses on three goals: Places, People, and Pathways. However, the vision for 10 City of Miami, Miami Forever Bond, https://www.miamigov. com/Government/Departments-Organizations/Office-of-Capital-Improvements/Miami-Forever-Bond
Figure 12. Miami Forever Bond Guiding Themes and their translation to tangible financial components Source: City of Miami equitable change falls short as the document separates the physical from the social transformations of place, perpetuating a planning approach that overlooks embedded spatial inequalities. This separation is crucial as each goal area is tied to varying levels of funding, with the most allotted to physical development. For example, training and educational sessions intended to prepare the public for climate catastrophe are solely catered to planners and designers. This fullyfunded action item does not include any parameters or performance metrics that ensure all individuals are included in strategic conversations. As compared to Action 38, under the “People” goal, which calls for the development of “resilience hubs” that are able to create clear communication pathways between government and communities, especially during disasters. Although there is collaboration with key advocacy and leadership groups concerned with low-income communities on this action item, it is not given the same level of urgency or funding as the afore-
mentioned action, despite its similarity in scope and intent. This reinforces the shortcoming of the tripartite structure behind “Resilient 305,” which ultimately considers the public, especially low-income communities, as an action item to be saved, not a group of people that should have a say in the changes which will take place in their own communities. Furthermore, the accompanying timeline for each objective within “Resilient 305” leaves many critical objectives unfunded and perhaps unrealistic Such is the case for Action 40 under the “People” goal, which proposed the creation of a K-12 plan for resilience literacy and stipulates a short term timeframe (within 1-5 years). Due to the standardization and the slow pace of change of the education system in the U.S, any substantial impact will require more funding and a longer timeline. Another contentious action point under the “Places” goal, Action 9, underscores the reality of displacement and issues with affordability, but focuses on and exemplifies the Special Area Plan,
which are large planned projects in the City of Miami that have become notorious with displacing existing residents. It is allowed by the city when one single developer holds nine acres or more of contiguous land. One such SAP is the Miami City Innovation District, which has been proposed and approved for the neighborhood of Little Haiti. Taken from the project’s website, the plan touts itself as the leading model for the future of modern urban revitalization, a contentious term that recalls earlier urban blight experiments. As a primary pillar of the theoretical framework behind the plan, environmental consciousness is only present in regards to LEED certification, which in itself sets the standard for an overreliance on mechanical systems and is only feasible for those with substantial resources. Understanding the implications of displacement, Miami 21 offers developers an out from the complex issues that arise from its construction through the community benefit agreement. In the case of the Magic City Innovation project, developers pledge to invest $31 million over 30 years towards the Little Haiti Revitalization Trust.
Figure 13. Die-In Staged in Miami with the goal of pushing local officials to declare a climate emergency on the City of Miami. Source: JOSE SEPULVEDA, The Miami Herald
ADVOCACY In November 2019, the City of Miami passed Resolution 19-0477, declaring a climate emergency and pleading with the state and federal government to acknowledge it as well as requesting the mobilization of regional efforts in advancing a transition towards a safe climate. This is after a longfought battle with youth activists, who staged die-ins, hunger strikes, and protests in the months prior to its passing. A fervor for holding local government accountable was catalyzed by the rapid and effective response the city had in preparing for Hurricane Dorian in the summer of 2019, causing activists to realize the city has the capacity to do more.11 The City of Miami Beach took the climate initiative one step further by passing their own resolution, recognizing the importance of a “Just Transition’’ described therein as “a framework for a fair shift to an economy that is ecologically sustainable, equitable, and just for all.”12 In identifying the term, including information on its ties to labor unions and environmental justice groups, and providing transparency through examples, such as food sovereignty, Miami Beach holds itself accountable to equitable change. These realizations by vigile individuals have led to the creation of such groups as the aforementioned Miami Climate Alliance, which convened in 2015 following the People’s March. Given its umbrella-like organizational structure, the Alliance is able to provide members with opportunities for interdisciplinary engagement and collaboration. Its size also legitimizes concerns that are brought to the attention of governmental bodies, resulting in important steps towards holding elected officials accountable. These include the inception of the county’s Office of Resilience, which spearheads Miami-Dade County’s involvement in the Resilient 305 strategy, and the creation of the Citizens’ Oversight Board for the Miami Forever Bond, responsible for allowing residents to engage in the decision-making process. The Alliance, along with Catalyst Miami, provided recommendations for the selection criteria of members, ensuring that the demographics of the city were well represented. Despite these wins, much work lays ahead. CEO of 11 Sepulveda, Jose. “Youth Activists Stage Die-In Protest over Climate Change.” Miami Herald. 12 Mayor Dan Gelber, “Resolution F.A._10.7.2019,” City of Miami Beach, October 10, 2019
Figure 14. Natural Transect of South Florida, which inspired the 2010 zoning plan; Source: City of Miami Figure 15. Miami 21 Zoning Transect, T-3 through District are employed; Source: City of Miami Catalyst Miami, Gretchen Beesing, reported that the first $50 M dispersed from the Miami Forever Bond “was decided largely by elected officials without any input from the community. And there is no safeguard against the City to do that on every tranche of money.”13 In a conversation with Beesing, Catalyst Miami Resilience Officer, , noted that “equity is a central tenant in the model for the bond, but making a project truly equitable is complicated. Being able to show the geography—and geographic concentration—of where city money has been invested, overlaid with need, would be a helpful advocacy tool to show that the needs of a wide range of residents aren’t necessarily being met.” As her definition of equity takes into account funding tendencies that are unevenly distributed across the city, Adefris advocates for tools that are able to visualize such existing discrepancies to be able to target communities most at risk. 13 Berlin, Loren. “How Catalyst Miami Is Working to Make a $400 Million Municipal Bond a Model for Equitable Climate Adaptation.” Urban Institute Next 50, 3 June 2019.
SCHOLARLY The last approach to resilience in Miami centers around academia and research, particularly focusing on design and planning. Although ideas on resilience vary from scholar to scholar, most designers practicing in or studying coastal cities are familiar with both climate change terminology and the city’s response. Design, although not an end-allbe-all solution to larger issues of the city, can be very useful in reducing carbon emissions and addressing amorphuous possible disasters. One such scholar and practitioner interested in addressing the topic of resilience is Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. As previously mentioned, her armature for tackling cliamte change relies on necessary language able to communicate across fields. Missing from her framwork and perspective is equity component. When asked about the designer’s role in ensuring not only a resilient, but just city, Zyberk frankly admitted to not having an answer.
“Frankly I’m not sure. This is part of a larger issue that I think is part of our time; the three big issues: climate change, the pandemic, and social justice. And it’s very clear to me in the first two how architects play a role. In the thrid one, I’m still grappling with that because first of all, we haven’t gotten the right words for it.” For Zyberk, language is important in developing a way to address the problem. She went on to cite the high cost of real estate and cost of construction as being detrimental to the pursuit of affordable housing. Another aspect which limits or expands the possiblities for equitable development is zoning. Designers do not necessarily solely draft zoning documents, but in the case of Zyberk’s firm, DPZ, can have a substantial influence over the future of the city. Miami 21, the land-use ordinance in Miami authored by DPZ, draws its organizational inspiration from an ecological transect, starting at the Atlantic Ocean on one side and ending in the wetlands of the Everglades on the other. The transect is translated into zones according to intended building forms,
Figure 16: Visualization showing how South Beach would look like if seas rose 2 degrees Celsius Source: Nickolay Lamm; Climate Central
ranging from T-3 as suburban to T6 as the Urban Core.14 Although the diagrams seemingly illustrate a sensibility about relating development to nature, they are supplemental to the prescriptive text, which has very little mention of tactical, spatial parameters for environmentally-conscious planning. Sustainability is referenced once in relation to LEED certification. When discussing this oversight with Zyberk, she noted that the intention was to have the plan be re-assesed every two years in order to ensure it is working correctly, a fact that does not always occur. It is long over due for a review. CONCLUSION Although insecure about the role of designers in working towards climate justice, Zyberk emphasized three possible directions available to those interested in making an impact: “Design, Policy, and Management.” These are in line with the approaches outlined herein, where management can be considered a role of the advocate in some ways. Through the lens of planning, is it possible to acheive equitable development and progress given the varying conditions of the city and the priorities of actors residing within it? City-wide approaches to resilience planning regularly interface with other policy initiatives, advocacy groups, and scholars interested in large-scale impact. Although the result is not always just and fair for all in the first draft of legislation, there is a push to amend the problematic parts and address inclusion in the decision-making process. That said, it is both still too early, and far too late. Much of the legislation and resolutions coming from South Florida are in response to initiatives by other cities, despite our prognostics being so dire and urgent. Most strategic plans have been drafted within the last couple of years, which doesn’t offer much time from which to reflect on. The problem remains: Is survival possible in coastal cities? If so, how do we do so in a manner that is inclusive to all residents? How is equity measured? Although there is no clear solution or direction, the relationship between these three approaches — the policy, the advocacy, and the scholarly — provide a basis from which all three can be held accountable for efforts made towards a resilient future.
14
City of Miami, Miami 21, May 2010.
Climate Gentrification and Equitable Climate Adaptation in Miami Claudia Ansorena
Policy
Advocacy
Policy falls short of creating equitable development in the city through its dissociation between people and place, evident in the Resilient 305 separation of goals. The image above shows a proposed floodwall, ranging from 13ft. In some areas to 36ft tall in others — one of the many technocratic proposals for resiliency in the city.
Displacement by individuals living tle Haiti Policy falls short of creatin city through its dissociation betwe the Resilient 305 separation of go proposed floodwall, ranging from 1 others — one of the many technoc the city.
Magic City Innovation District - Little Haiti
in desirable areas, such as Litng equitable development in the een people and place, evident in oals. The image above shows a 13 ft. In some areas to 36 ft tall in cratic proposals for resiliency in
Scholarly Researched planning and zoning policies that resulted in the introduction of a form-based code into the city of Miami has its caveats, on of which is the Special Area Project. This tool is used by developers to bypass otherwise limiting regulations in favor of large-scale development. As summarized by designer and educator Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, we have three tools to combat the issue of equity as it relates to resiliency efforts: design, policy, and management.
Why are cities like New York City putting more Segregated, Integrated, Liberated attention and funding to well-known parks?
Exploring Alternatives to a Binary Narrative
Garrett Hicks Hannah Mayer Baydoun
New York City is a well-known metropolis for travel and enterprise. Its tourism is one of the town’s number one supply of economy with it havinga complete profit of 34.6 billion. The metropolis’s park finances are $468 million from a 2019 study. That is a tiny proportion of the town’s standard price range of ninety-two billion. The branch employs around 7,500 to 8,000 humans and the New York City authorities’ direct employees in general of 390,000. With the money it makes from this New York City will spend it on businesses and parks that will assist the income with tourism since travelers wouldn’tvisit low end neighborhoods that barely have sufficient green area and urban masses which might be parks. With the corona pandemic it made the income from tourism lessen to where the maximum of the money it does get is going to large named parks like Central Park in Manhattan and Bryant Park in Midtown. While the well-known park receives attention and renovation from the city, parks in low-income neighborhoods don’t get the equal treatment because the parks cited earlier than. According to the New York Times, “city officials are extremely joyful on the generosity of the public toward conservancies which includes Central Park, as it ensures that New York’s signature parks have the assets to house thousands and thousands of tourists and their wealthier citizens. “But the donations havePhoto also highlighted the Foundation. disStony Island Arts Bank. credit: Rebuild parity between parks in Manhattan’s excessive hire districts and people, like Flushing Meadows Corona or Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx, which are in less INTRODUCTION prosperous groups. In those parks, conservancies and businesses should conflict to elevateintegrated, any moneyand at Focusing on the terms segregated, all”. liberated as they relate to space and ideas about urban practice, this research project looks at the power of narrative and builds off a trajectory of research previously developed in the class. Summarized as follows, the first area of research focused on mechanisms of segregation in the suburbs (i.e. redlining) promoted and proliferated in the United States by developer J.C. Nichols. The second area of research showed that while laws abolished the use of redlining, the lasting effects of segregation continue to be recreated today in our neighborhoods and school district boundaries. In a comparison of two Detroit
Many parks have been left preservation or in want of a redesign to preserve up with the growing metropolis and the main question rise up “why doesn’t the city positioned investment into small lesser acknowledged parks” the solution is to not ship too money on an area that is now not going to carry in the equal level of earnings as if a visitor in which to go to central park concerning the residents of the neighborhood. Although New York City parks make up 14 percent of NYC’s land, the Parks Department gets most effectively 6 percent of the City’s overall budget which is set at 85 billion. This disparity has left parks and gardens overlooked and ignored as important infrastructure for a hit and healthy neighborhood. This hassle of New York City neglecting its town parks in lower regions can be dated to go as returned to the Nineteen Seventies. During New York City’s tax disaster within the 1970s, parks had been left unkempt and substantially degraded, which caused the introduction of nonprofits that nowadays assist, keep and help the metropolis’s public green spaces that the town overlooks. The document says there are extra than 25 non earnings organizations for parks and nearly 600 formal and public high schools, Ecorse and Wynandott, stark informal collectives across the metropolis. differences in the physical manifestation of school facilities coincided with a difference in racial and Parks in city regions offer financial benefits to economic makeup of the two adjacent school districts neighborhood governments, residents, and business and neighborhoods. Interestingly, research suggested businesses. An examination by means of the National that the same policy tools that segregate our schools Recreation and Association could be used toParks integrate them (1).did a record on the financial effect of parks in the course of the United Statestwo andareas foundofthat parks established aren’t just public facilThese research a narrative ities or segregated enrichmentsspace to theversus best of lifestyles space. in their binary: integrated neighborhoods and parks provide financial benefits While this binary does exist, it is useful to consider to the community. take a look atother” how they condistinctions outsideThey of this “one or the mentalcentrated indirect, and results ity. Spurredon onthe by direct, a comment made bycaused Dr. Lawrence that local parks have on their local and nearby finanT. Brown in a guest lecture stating, “Black communicial don’t system. ties need to integrate to thrive”, the third and According to the document, again in 2013, “America’s
neighborhood and nearby public park companies current area of research seeks out alternative modes generated almost $140 billion in monetary interest of thinking manifest in both mental space (i.e. writing, and supported almost 1 million jobs from their operdialogue, commentary, media) and physical space (i.e. ations and capital spending on my own”. Therefore, urban and architectural projects). urban parks maintain terrific economic cost by facilitating economic pastime. Urban Planners and Organizers Towards Liberation, a resource guide created by Sabrina Bazile and an Economic Community article titledand “Spaces of Co-Liberation” by Ana María For the various residents in INew York in‘mental low earnings León, both examples of what am calling neighborhoods, the covid 19 hasthe made it hard for space’, offer a third term outside binary: liberatthem to visit the nearest because of the small ed space. Equipped with a park deeper understanding of parks overcrowding. Some of these parks don’t have these ideas, further research led to a specific urban enough room for a few‘physical humansspace’, to work out or project example of quite liberated namely socially distance. City officials have additionally statTheaster Gates’ vision for the South Side of Chicago. ed following that they’d expanded right Gates’ of entrywork to parks The pamphlet willthe discuss after incurrent years by refurbishing parks and remaking some commentary on the accompanying video projlarge ect thatparks holdsintocommunities. a mirror up to a sampling of ongoing There are nonetheless many parks that were left segregated, integrated, and liberated narratives. untouched via the metropolis. Many small community parks have been overlooked decades, while CenACCOMPANYING VIDEO ONfor NARRATIVE tral Park and different well-known parks have conservancies assist pay for their operations The focus of the that accompanying video is to mirror, and preservation. In current New York City many large parks juxtapose, and curate narratives to showcase are heavily used by black groups but, throughout divergences and similarities across comments and the metropolis, in terrible black neighborhoods over time. Forparks example, in an episode of Explained are smaller+ and to serve longwhite way interview more human (Netflix Vox),have a dated blackaand clip than in wealthy neighborhoods. There inbeings a suburb shows a woman saying, “I think that are the many that lackwill andimmediately actually quantity of inexperiproperty values go down if they’re enced space within theinparks in low profits neighborallowed to move in here any number”(EXPLAINED) hoods. when asked if she had a problem with Black residents moving in next door. Judging by the visuals, this clip was the midBenepe, 40s to alate 50s, commissioner yet these senti-of city fromAdrian former ments in narratives A recent parkscontinue and senior vp on the told Trust,today. told the New York 2020 Trump perpetuates these Times,tweet “Notby allDonald parks are created identical”. Small same “I am inform all ofofthe people parksideas: do not nowhappy have to room for lots human beings living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will to exercise or socially distance. A report from the IBO no longermaps be bothered or financially having shares of park areas with thehurt aid by of residents. It low income housing built in your neighborhood...your changed into a location where parks cover more than housing go up...and crimethe willcity, go down... 16,000prices acreswill of land throughout however Enjoy!” (2). they aren’t similarly allotted. Analysis discovered that neighborhoods like Bensonhurst and Borough Drawing on a variety of two sources suchfeet as studies, Park in Brooklyn have square of park area course syllabus, articles, videos, interviews, TV consistent with residents. The parks in lowand profit shows, the video displays several narratives, con-smallneighborhoods throughout the town are often versations, and thoughts about space, ownership, er, making it greater hard to spread out and keep a neighborhoods, and schools. From a Joint for distance from others. The common park Center size Black Housing Studies Harvard study that further defines neighborhoods is 7.9 acres whilst white neighborcategories integrated space as “no majority space”a hoods, theofaverage is 29.8 acres. Howard Frumkin, and “shared space” to Kelsey Blackwell’s writing, professor of environmental and occupational fitness “Why People of Color Needof Spaces WithoutSchool Whiteof sciences at the University Washington
Public Health, stated in the Trust for Public Land docPeople”, to marketing materials about an urban effort ument. “The statistics are obvious parks and greenscalled Reimagining the Civic Commons, a range pace soothe and console us, loosen up and repair us, of narrative tones is gleaned and digested. Sara lessen our tension, depression, and pressure. In this Ramirez, an architect in NYC, discusses the dearth and in future pandemics, we’ll want to combine bodily of diversity at her son’s school, but the abundance distancing and other contamination-control measures of it at their neighborhood playground, suggesting with customary get admission to parks and greena disconnect between where people are living verassist everyone getchildren thru tough susspace, wheretothey areabsolutely choosing to send their asInterspersed accurately as possible.”are Northern Manhattan to times school. throughout clips from an is the house of on beautiful parks, butTheaster many much less episode of Home Apple TV about Gates’ visible obstacles continue to be, restrictingspace people’s work in Chicago, weaving ideas of liberated right of entry to those areas for surrounding citizens. across the video. Juxtaposed, this collection of voices Another latest some evaluation foundcan outbe, “parks serving show how varied narratives and rather primarily nonwhite populations are half of the than seek a definitive conclusion, the video aims tosize of parks that serve majority white populations and are call attention to how powerful narrative is in forming crowded.” This poses large protection challengourextra mental and physical spaces. es to city residents of coloration who’re turning to those public inexperienced areas to exercise social LIBERATED SPACE: THEASTER GATES distancing amidst the covid 19 pandemic. Theaster Gates is a renowned international artist, but also trained as an urban planner. A recent episode
SUMMARY In a metropolis with some of the most well-known inexperienced areas within the world, many low-profits New Yorkers live in park deserts and are largely close out of a sprawling network of extra than three hundred parks that has emerged as greater essential than ever for physical and intellectual well-being. Many black and hispanic families which might be in cramped apartments within the South Bronx, one of the poorest sections of the metropolis I might upload, need to combat for each little bit of inexperienced space, at the same time as much less than 5 miles away, residents of the Upper West Side of Manhattan Archive House, Space Cinema have both theListening lawns and ball(top) fieldsBlack in the 840-acre House (bottom) Photo credit: Rebuild Foundation principal park, and the playgrounds, canine runs and
waterfront inside the 310-acre riverside park. of Home onviews Apple TV showcases several projects During the pandemic, greater than one million New Gates created in the South Side of Chicago -- Black Yorkers have right ofHouse, entry to toArchive any park Cinemadidn’t House, Theget Listening The inside minutes’ walk of where they lived, according House, to name a few --, and in total Gates, “owns to evaluation theSouth (TPL)Side] or the Trustfinanced for Publicby 25an properties [onbythe ...none Land, a conservation organization thatOne helps debt…[and] employs 240 people” (4). of create Gates’ public parks across the United States of America. projects, The Stony Island Arts Bank, has been deMany of as, those without access have beenconvention...a in densely scribed “a place that proudly defies packed and occasional earnings black and hispanworld-class arts center in the middle of a greatly icunder-resourced neighborhoods community,”(5) out of doors Manhattan. going on toNearly say that these of New try, Yorkers misplace thethese only rarely outside while kinds civic leaders projects such as space they’d while the city close down playgrounds materialize through conventional methods. In 2013, and small exercise to saveneo-Classical you the virus buildfrom Gates, “bought theareas dilapidated spreading. Since then, playgrounds have formally ing, formerly the Stony Island Trust & Savings Bank, reopened, butfor many stated they’ve stayed from the city $1,” parents (6) and proceeded to find fundaway crowding. They have parks ing forbecause the $4.5ofmillion renovation. Theadded cultural and to public housing complexes and pressed more schoolarts center houses the, “magazine and book collecyards providers as neighborhood parks. The tion ofinto John H. Johnson, founder of ebony and Jetpandemic also allowed the city to open sixty-seven miles magazines; the record collection of disc jockey Frankof for strollingWilliams’ and cycling to shield health ie streets Knuckles...Edward collection of the negrobiand safetycollectibles...and once they had toslides temporarily shut down lia, racist of the University of playgrounds and different park services, but opened Chicago’s and Art Institute of Chicago’s collections” up of streets across the townand for archive pedestrians (5),miles creating a space to celebrate Blackto revel in, with a focal point on neighborhoods that culture and history. In connection with a national did no longer havecalled get entry to open space. Reimagining the Civic Commons, urban project which has Evenprovided though New City’s network of parks someYork funding across Gates’ other isprojects one of the USA’s largest, intoofcreated on the South Side,itaturned collection buildings piecemeal as real estate builders constructed up form a “master plan”, and, “help build cultural infraneighborhoods. The end result changed into some structure faster than any developer would consider,of the town’s most crowded neighborhoods hadbeen particularly in Grand Crossing.” (4). Theaster Gates changed the narrative of “left behind” spaces with his work on the South Side of Chicago, definitively saying that under-served communities deserve good cultural space and that forgotten buildings and urban sites can be useful. Through his work he created space for local residents and artists to stay within their community, rather than travel outside of it, for cultural experience and community enrichment. (1) Chang, Alvin. “We Can Draw School Zones to Make Classrooms Less Segregated.” Vox, Vox, 8 Jan. 2018, www.vox.com/2018/1/8/16822374/school-segregation-gerrymander-map.. (2) AssociatedPress. “Trump Pleas with Suburban Women: ‘Please like Me’.” YouTube, Associated Press, 13 Oct. 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebsapm04flQ. (3) Harris, Melissa. “First Look inside Theaster Gates’ New Stony Island Arts Bank.” Chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune, 15 June 2018, www.chicagotribune. com/business/ct-harris-theaster-gates-arts-bank-0906-biz-20150904-column. html. (4) Weiner, Aaron. “Common Goals Different Approaches: How Five Cities Reimagined Their Public Spaces.” Civic Commons, Civic Commons, Apr. 2019, civiccommons.us/app/uploads/2020/03/Common-Goals-Different-Approaches.pdf. (5) Jobson, Christopher. “Artist Theaster Gates Bought a Crumbling Chicago Bank for $1 and Turned It Into a World-Class Arts Center.” Colossal, 22 Jan. 2018, www.thisiscolossal.com/2015/10/stony-island-arts-bank/. (6) Harris, Melissa. “First Look inside Theaster Gates’ New Stony Island Arts Bank.” Chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune, 15 June 2018, www.chicagotribune.com/ business/ct-harris-theaster-gates-arts-bank-0906-biz-20150904-column.html.
left with no parks or with handiest pocket size parks and playgrounds squeezed among buildings. Small parks regularly lack the facilities which might be discovered in larger parks, like athletic fields, strolling and biking paths and natural areas like woodlands and many small neighborhood parks continue to be overlooked for many years. According to the Trust for Public Land or TPL, almost all New Yorkers live inside a 10-minute walk to an inexperienced space. While this may appear equitable, better costs of White residents generally tend to live close to large parks with a more degree of desired functions and in comparison, low-earnings and groups of color are much more likely to lack access to inexperienced areas of great and to face disinvestment in nearby parks, which often do no longer encompass basic amenities like lavatories or basketball courts. Even without thinking about the multiple influences of the cutting-edge health disaster, getting right of entry to parks and open areas of pleasant are not identical for New York’s diverse groups. The use of city green area depends on more than just who’s inside bodily proximity to parks, but what services the ones areas provide, how properly they in shape the needs of the network, and who feels secure and welcome to apply the park. In a Citywide Social Assessment conducted with the aid of NYC Parks and USDA Forest Service in 2014, researchers confirmed that park visitation correlates with park length, centers, and the ability to participate in recreational sports and interact with the nearby environmental and in a observe analyzing NYC park utilization through social media statistics, researchers found the key determinants of visitation are linked to park centers, get admission to public transportation, the scale of the park, and socio demographics of the community. INTERVIEWS AND SURVEYS In the South Bronx, Rick Francis said he had to look at 3 of his 8 grandkids play at the concrete pavement due to Arts the fact was no top park close Stony Island Bankthere library (top) pre-construction by. “You’re ofatrium simplyspace stuck strolling across the (middle) andtype main post-construction community,” he said. (bottom) Sources: Tom Harris for Rebuild Foundation (top) Sarah Leaders of some of theFoundation city’s signature parks Pooley for Rebuild (middle) have recounted the inequities in park right of enKevin Nance for Chicago Gallery Newsget (bottom) try to. The Riverside Park conservancy has changed its annual spring gala with a month fundraising
marketing campaign for applications and sports in the north give up of the park, which attracts nearby residents of decreasing profits communities inclusive of Harlem and Washington Heights. The park additionally reached out to coordinators to work with those groups. Further south, Hudson River Park runs unfastened technology and generation camps which have long gone virtual this summer season for children from two public housing projects. Though the island attracts human beings from all around the city, a substantial percentage comes from affluent neighborhoods, along with Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope in Brooklyn, and Lincoln Square and the Upper West Side in Manhattan, in keeping with recent surveys. Urban inexperienced spaces have long been a refuge for city dwellers, in particular in times of disaster, however the covid 19 pandemic affected the use and the significance of urban inexperienced areas. In a metropolis like New York, which had the hardest influences of the pandemic. Reports of accelerated park use in a few areas signaled a shift in mobility and called for offerings as communities tailored to new social distancing policies and mandates. With some parks and natural regions closed, while others partly confined, the Urban Systems Lab in collaboration with The Nature Conservancy in New York, Building Healthy Communities NYC, and the New York State Health Foundation released a social survey from May 13 to June 15 to higher understand the shifts in use, significance, andperceived get right of entry to city green areas across the five boroughs. In overall there have been 1,372 responses to a NYC survey with 1,145 human beings completed over 70 percent of the survey questions used for the analysis.
variety of methods. First, city parks genuinely construct an extra livable social environment to inner town neighborhoods. They are locations wherein low-income children may have an area to play and take part in recreational activities. Many parkshighlight an urgent want for additional investment, and regular and realistic guidelines to meet transferring needs, and to ensure the protection of the citizens. Urban green areas offer a host of intellectual and physical fitness benefits. Multiple researches show how they promote and increase bodily interest, enhance air excellent, and reduce respiration contamination, and enhance widespread intellectual fitness, and lowering pressure and mental issues. This is in particular for communities living in dense urban regions with multiple and interdependent influences of the pandemic that have introduced new means to the concept of urban green spaces as a sanctuary or area of refuge. What changed into discovered specifically thrilling in the results of the take a look at changed into that the respondents commonly considered urban spaces to be more critical for mental than physical fitness. This turned into to signify the many exclusive roles that urban green areas can provide for communities particularly as a covid spreads via the state. Urban green spaces can be critical for decreasing intellectual pressure and fitness, and factor to the need of providing continued entry to those areas for the duration of instances of crisis to prevent in addition inequities in public health.
Approximately seventy five percent of the respondents said that they had “safe and easy” admission to a city inexperienced starting from 53 percent in Staten Island to having 20 percentage in Brooklyn. In Queens and Brooklyn, it has lower per The results of the survey display New Yorkers ceived park right of entry to, as well as receive less continued to apply urban inexperienced and open of their favored functions from city green spaces. areas for the duration of the pandemic and considThis is especially concerning as research points to ered them to be greater essential for intellectual and neighborhoods in Queens being disproportionately physicalhealth. Urban parks add social blessings to impacted by way of the pandemic, which is likewise their neighborhoods. Facilities within urban parks at better risk and occurrence to conditions which can bethe utilized as network improvement gear through diabetes, hypertension, publicity extreme Above map shows the collection of projects in Theaster include Gates’ “master plan” on the South Side of to Chicaconstructing a sense of community andindelight for warmth, air and great, and heart failure. As go. These projects together let residents the community know that negative they matter that their spaces matter, nearby residents. “In addition real property, many current reports advocate, thespace increased use particularly in an area with hightopoverty rate andtourhigh disinvestment. Below a photo shows the filled with ism, and environmental benefits, additionally of city Foundation), inexperienced taking a tollfor onBlack the people attending the Black Artists parks Retreat (image source: Rebuild anspaces annualisevent meant provide community or social, “direct institutional use” renovation and ability parks meet the evolving artists to fitness, come together outside of anyand particular setting. Below and toofthe sideto is the cover of the benefits”. Urban generate in aprojects, wishes customers. Even though visitation to urban Reimagining Civicparks Commons 2019social reportbenefits on current one ofofwhich is Gates’ work in Chicago.
Segregated
Hannah Mayer Baydoun
Integrated
Hannah Mayer Baydoun
“Sh
“No-Majo
te paces, pat s d e t a r g “In inte e inevitab r e c n a in white dom well “Time ck a l B y e s l Ke Black moves
Liberated
Hannah Mayer Baydoun
hared Neig
hborhoo
d”
“Tipping Point”
ority Neigborhood”
erns of ble” -
e between wh k moves in en the first an s out” - Sa d last white ul Alinsk y