please write a 200 words discussion paragraph and a 150 words response or comment

Please write a 200 words discussion paragraph around the description below and a 150 words response or comment of the world file. Thank you.

We are analyzing the relationship between the state and rezoning this week. It can be argued that the relationship between the state and rezoning is a supportive relationship to each other. The literature on state formation is vast; we will not be mapping out different theoretical arguments on state formation here. We will use a very narrow definition of the state: the state is an instrument to protect, reproduce, and represent the interest of the capitalist class. We will also use a restricted definition of rezoning and will discuss rezoning only in the context of New York City. As provided by Angotti, we will define rezoning as the Zoning Resolution that controls: “how land may be used (either for residential, commercial, or industrial purposes, or a combination of these); how much can be built on the land (mainly through a formula that sets a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) the built floor area divided by the total land area); ad how much land must remain unbuilt.” The relationship between the state and rezoning is: the state through its institutions carry out rezoning in order to protect, reproduce and represent the interest of the capitalist class; likewise, by being protected, reproduced and represented, the capitalist class acquires a political character. The relationship is supportive in such a way. We will use this definition for the following discussion.

Hackworth and Smith: the authors outlined three waves of gentrification. Each wave of gentrification has a distinctive character. However, the trend of the development of gentrification is that the state has been becoming involved in directly organizing gentrification in several areas of New York City – particularly during the last two waves. This pattern can be seen in areas of Clinton, Long Island City and DUMBO. The argument for state intervention is: the federal government (since Reagan) had been reducing federal redistribution of resources to local government; as a response, local state had to come up with ways to increase tax dollars; one way to do so was to intensify gentrification and make alliances with capital, but subsequently, capital demanded city governments to “maintain a businesslike ledger sheet.” “With the decline in federal outlays to cities, the need to borrow funds for redevelopment has increased during the third-wave. In order to retain the fiscal viability necessary to keep receiving such loans, many cities have, more unabashedly than in the past, turned to the attraction and retention of the middle lass to increase tax revenue” (p.470; in Hackworth and Smith). New York City became supportive of gentrification as a result.

DePaolo and Morse: residents and businesses felt the developmental pressures in Williamsburg/Greenpoint. They fought and created community-based plans in 2001 to protect the neighborhood. The city indeed official adopted the plans, which recommended “increasing the availability of low-rise affordable housing, improving access to open space and the waterfront, promoting non-polluting industry, and reducing the concentration of noxious waste facilities.” The community did not want luxury high-rise towers on the waterfront. Few years later, the city launched its own rezoning plan that promoted high density residential development. In the 2005 Williamsburg rezoning intensified gentrification. Three elements to this rezoning: “residential uses were permitted in formerly industrial areas, buildings with significantly larger height and bulk were allowed, particularly on the waterfront, and new “mix-use” zones were introduced, which permitted either industrial or residential uses in the formerly industrial zones” (p.78; DePaolo and Morse). As a result of the rezoning, new upscale residential development came and there had been a loss of affordable housing. The Latino population in Williamsburg (18% decrease) was displaced and was replaced by a 44% increase of white population. Industrial employments also dropped.

Stein: Chinatown, Lower East Side and East Village are all within the boundaries of Community Board 3. However, in 2008, NYC rezoned East Village which is predominantly white and wealthy neighborhood by excluding Chinatown and the Lower East Side, which are predominantly low-income and with a mix of Latino, Asian, Black and poor White communities. The 2008 rezoning protected the white and rich areas of EV by restricting the height limits of the areas. Big and tall buildings could not be built in the area. However, this racist exclusion pushed developments into Chinatown and the Lower East Side. Since 2008, the communities across the area have been facing displacement. Chinatown/LES saw a boom of hotels and mega-towers being proposed along the waterfront – with one that is about to be completed. The working class communities from Chinatown and the LES came together and created the Chinatown Working Group (CWG) rezoning plan; the plan calls for height restriction that EV had. The communities want equality and the same protections that the wealthy white communities had since 2008. However, the City called CWG too ambiguous and refused to implement the plan. The City perpetuated the racist treatment started in 2008; racist impacts to the communities was created by Mayor Bloomberg and has been transferred and perpetuated by Mayor de Blasio who claims to be progressive.

Sites: Sites’ argument is different from the previous three arguments. In the same context of federal budget cuts, local government was forced to create tax revenues. NYC held a number of properties in the LES area and wanted to auction them off. This triggered a resistance against privatization. There were three tendencies among the organizations that fought against gentrification: advocacy and planning, tenants organizing and direct housing provision. These three tendencies could interact with each other in the period of 1980-1995. This period is divided into three phases: 1980-1985, 1985-1990 and 1990-1995. The first phase is called “saving the neighborhood.” This is when organizations came together with tactical differences and tried to stop displacement in the area. The second phase is characterized by “defending the neighborhood.” It was no longer the city that is the target of various strategies but the neighborhood is the target – not to be eliminated (of course) but to be “defended.” This created the problem of competition of available city-owned properties (to be developed by non-profit organizations). The third phase could be an intensification of the competition. The organizations that tried to stop displacement were then competing with each other to control the lands of LES; they wanted to develop the city-owned properties and competed for city contracts. The aim was to build affordable housing. However, as Sites highlighted, the “affordable housing” builders ended up supporting the City to evict squatters. Therefore, the argument is not on the State’s direct involvement in organizing gentrification; the state selectively promoted and supported local community organizations that could support compromises in low-income housing development and evictions. In other words, the state manipulated the organizations to focus gentrification at a neighborhood level (to acquire land and city-owned properties) and pushed the same organizations to not to create strategies that target the state.

This week’s discussion will be based on the above arguments and the required films. Your responses should be referencing the assigned videos.

Why are there mega-towers at the LES waterfront? Why the Chinatown tenants were being pushed out? What is the role of the state in the gentrification of Spanish Harlem and Williamsburg? (In other words, what did the City do in Spanish Harlem and Williamsburg in order to create gentrification?)

Video links:

Gut Renovation: Gentrification in Williamsburg

http://binghamton.kanopystreaming.com/video/gut-renovation

East Village Rezoning (David Tieu Narrated)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw4dJs7sa58

83-85 Bowery, Manhattan Chinatown

https://vimeo.com/229398210

Towers on the Waterfront

https://vimeo.com/231275193

Whose Barrio: Gentrification of Spanish Harlem

http://binghamton.kanopystreaming.com/video/whose-…