Schermerhorn Row, South Street Seaport. |
Continued from here.
In 1968, the same
year that the replacement for New York's old Pennsylvania Station (Pennsylvania
Plaza and Madison Square Garden) was completed, Schermerhorn Row on the
southwest tip of Manhattan was designated an historic landmark by the Landmarks
Preservation Commission to save it from destruction. It would eventually become part of a larger redevelopment: the South Street Seaport.
From the beginning
the planning of the South Street Seaport was divided between a variety of interests
including the mayor's Office of Development, the Seaport Museum and affiliates,
the Maritime Museum, the state of New York, various financial institutions, the
Rouse Company, and several design firms. However, as the developer, the
Rouse company set much of the agenda for the site, and on the tail of recent
successes James Rouse proposed a festival marketplace.[1]
The festival
marketplace is an animal unique to its time—from the mid 1970's to late 80's. Blending mall
style shopping with entertainment venues and restaurants—wrapping it all in an
historic, urban, vaguely European themed environment—festival marketplaces
cropped up from Boston to San Francisco and even abroad. They were developed as public-private
partnerships, heavily subsidized by government grants and loans,[2] and mostly
out of the purview of city planners. Public
interest capitalism replaced public interest planning. Again, the effects
of Jane Jacobs revolution are felt.
Thomas Campanella
recently reconsidered Jane Jacobs impact on the planning profession. While he
attributes to her positive changes in the profession, he points to unintended
side effects in the loss of disciplinary identity, professional agency, and
vision.[3] To be fair, Jacobs implored planners to be more cognizant of the
reality of the city in their work, however the backlash against planning went further. Planners
have become bogged down in red tape intended to restrain them. Abuses of the kinds
perpetrated by Robert Moses are past, but so are the possibilities exemplified by
City Beautiful.
Also past is the
festival marketplace. As the economic transformations promised by these
developments came up short, the concept was abandoned and several such
developments were shuttered. Due to the structure of these kinds of
partnerships—where the city acts as a landlord collecting rent from the
developer—as economic conditions deteriorate, the city is left holding the bag.[4]
Cities can and
have been shaped to meet the needs of residents, if only the power to do so can
be rendered effectively. Jane Jacobs legacy can be channeled to ensure that
powers are not abused but also that expertise and authority are retained. When
planning takes a back seat, private interests who have little accountability to
the public will move in. And when change is resisted in one form (NIMBY-ism) it
will find outlet in another (gentrification). Heeding Saint Jane's arguments on
the complexity of urban issues goes hand-in-hand with formulating a new vision
on what the city may be.
Notes:
1. John T.
Metzger, "The failed promise of a festival marketplace: South
Street Seaport in
lower Manhattan," Planning Perspectives, issue 16 (2001), pg. 32.
2. Ibid, pgs.
25-46.
3. Thomas
Campanella, "Jane Jacobs and the Death and Life of American
Planning," The Design Observer Group, 25 Apr 2011, Accessed 27 Oct 2011.
<http://places.designobserver.com/feature/jane-jacobs-and-the-death-and-life-of-american-planning/25188/>
4. John T.
Metzger, "The failed promise of a festival marketplace: South Street Seaport in lower Manhattan," Planning
Perspectives, issue 16 (2001), pg. 44.
No comments:
Post a Comment