Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Carl Nightingale has just published an ambitious book on the global perspective of segregation, how cities have been stratified according to various criteria for millenia. Another book, which has Exclusion/Inclusion in the title, is in the pipeline and should be out later this year. It was inspired by an exhibit in Baltimore last year created by students of the Maryland Institute College of Art (MICA) on ways which cities have used to exclude/include various elements. That exhibit, for its part, was inspired by a previous one in Amsterdam that looked at some of the material Nightingale covers and also called attention to the federal government's mid-1930s redlining of Baltimore and 238 other U.S. cities, a mapping exercise that begot the two-tier mortgage lending market that begot blockbusting that begot the subprime mortgage crisis.
Antero Pietila's Not in My Neighborhood: How Bigotry Shaped a Great American City discusses those phenomena in detail, focusing on Baltimore. (See Antero Pietila HOME). Baltimore, in 1910, happened to be the first city that required by law that each residential block be segregated, a concept that some 40 other cities followed, mostly in the old Confederacy. Baltimore was also a forerunner in the use of legally binding restrictive convenants, which development companies and homeowners used to exclude any group they did not like, mostly blacks and Jews.
So from Baltimore comes news about a modern device that is used to exclude elements seen as undesirable. A recent neo-Victorian homeownership townhouse development in Bolton Hill, which kept blacks out as long as that was legal, has constructed a fence to exclude those who do not belong.
The history of this development, called Spicer's Run, is interesting. It is bordered by North Avenue, a "bad" thoroughfare, and Eutaw Place, which from the 1870s until World War II, was a fashionable neighborhood. During the war, the area deteriorated and was overrun by out-of-state defense workers who overcrowded formerly sumptuous mansions that were subdivided into warrens. In the mid-1950s, those Victorian houses were demolished, and a garden apartment complex was built at the site as part of an agreement that the Bolton Hill Protective Association and the Baltimore Urban League worked out to restrict blacks a certain area of Bolton Hill.
By the 1990s, that subsidized garden apartment complex had become a nuisance. It was now demolished, and Spicer's Run constructed at the site. The addition of middle-class homeowners -- representing various races and faiths -- gradually led to a cleanup along Eutaw Place, where prostitutes and obvious drug-dealers were chased out. Some of that activity continued on the "other" side of North Avenue. The city recently tried to have another garden apartment complex demolished there and replaced with gentrified housing a la Spicer's Run. That attempt failed, resulting in the construction of the fence.
All this, of course, is in keeping with the teachings of the late architect Oscar Newman, who advocated various design interventions in order to create defensible spaces. One of his models is a neighborhood in Dayton, Ohio. Among Baltimore neighborhoods that have followed his teachings is Guilford, Baltimore's most expensive residential enclave. Oneway streets run into Greenmount Avenue, a "bad" thoroughfare, making access from there to Guilford nearly impossible. You have to enter from a "good" neighborhood.
Guilford was among many Baltimore neighorhoods that kept blacks and Jews out through restrictions. Today it has Jewish and black residents. But segregation by class continues through other devices
These are some of the items the forthcoming Exclusion/Inclusion book will presumably cover.
a) the OP is practically unreadable due to formatting. You need to hit "enter" a couple of times if you want anyone to read it.
b) Having not read the OP, I'll just comment on the topic - and IMO the solution is simple: convince the "desirables" that it is worthwhile to live in the city.
I mean, if you think about it, it should be pretty easy to just "buy out" the "undesirable", many cities are much cheaper to buy housing in than the suburbs. Or at least here in Michigan. In Detroit, Flint, and Lansing especially you can buy a house right in the heart of downtown for dirt cheap. If you get enough people who commit to "urban living" you can easily buy up blocks and create nice neighborhoods that are also close enough to all the main attractions and things to do. This pushes the "undesirables" out of those areas, since the only reason they hang around is for the cheap housing. If there is no more housing available, they obviously have to go elsewhere.
I encourage all to ignore the absence of line breaks... Barante is a good poster with decades of knowledge about the Nexus of discrimination and planning.
This pushes the "undesirables" out of those areas, since the only reason they hang around is for the cheap housing. If there is no more housing available, they obviously have to go elsewhere.
Generally into middle class neighborhoods in the fringes of the city or inner ring suburbs, I've noticed.
You should hear the new yuppies of fells point and harbor east pray for the demolition of the Douglas Homes projects. When they do come down, there will be dancing in the streets. The former residents will scramble to occupy the few "market rent" places made available in the new development while more will seek section 8 rentals in neighborhoods that house what is left of the middle class.
Pietila's book on Baltimore has been on my "I should get that book" list for a while. A lot of urban history books deal with these issues but I haven't read many that focus so specifically on it.
Pietila's book on Baltimore has been on my "I should get that book" list for a while. A lot of urban history books deal with these issues but I haven't read many that focus so specifically on it.
The Exploding Metropolis written about issues cities were facing during the 1950s and all the postwar changes is a very good read. Especially interesting in hindsight. I never finished it, got buried in my shelves and forgot it.
I encourage all to ignore the absence of line breaks... Barante is a good poster with decades of knowledge about the Nexus of discrimination and planning.
I lived in Bolton Hill in the 1980s and Eutaw Place was being gentrified, in spots, already.
and there was a serious crime problem. People close to me were mugged, shot, etc. Thats not pleasant whatever the race of the perpetrators.
And there is still lots of market affordable housing in Baltimore, which may be why committed affordable units are not as high a policy priority as in NY or DC.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am slow. . .
