An article on LinkedIn recently caught my attention because it is titled “Transformative placemaking: a framework to create connected, vibrant and inclusive communities”. Since our class discussions have recently been focused on public space and access to public space, I wondered how “inclusive” this proposed framework could be.
In September, media headlines announced that Pittsburgh is a “most livable city, but not for Black Women”. This is because much of the city’s growth is concentrated downtown but only in a few specific neighborhoods. This part of the article indirectly refers to gentrification since the ignored neighborhoods are home to primarily people of color and high-poverty households. To try to address this issue, Bookings Metro established the Bass Center for Transformative Placemaking. This program recognizes that place-led policies are essential to fixing long-standing spatial divides. It also attempts to address the question of how can the residents trust that the benefits of investments will reach them? The framework that this program address is designed to provide stakeholders in urban, suburban and rural areas with a “holistic template for creating, connected, vibrant and inclusive communities”(Vey and Love, 2019).
This framework is comprised of three essential components: scope, scale and level of integration. The scope of this framework is more expansive than traditional placemaking in that it strives to create destinations for work, commerce, recreation, and residential life that generate economic value for the broader city and region. The scale of this framework “demands a geographic scale larger than a block or public space. It instead centers on specific subareas of cities or regions where economic and/or infrastructure assets cluster and connect—but where the reach and impact of those assets are limited by varying place-based challenges”(Vey and Love, 2019). Lastly, this framework brings “together actors from varied disciplines—including those that might not consider their work explicitly “place-based”—to advance a shared, goal-oriented community vision” (Vey and Love, 2019). Overall, this framework is about creating livable places for everyone, not just those at the top of the ladder. It encourages places like Pittsburgh, and other cities and towns facing place-based inequities, to take a hard look at who has benefited from investment in the past, who is benefiting now, and how leaders can partner with communities to ensure that more people benefit in the future.
However, this framework fails to include a step that would monitor the success of implemented programs. While this framework appears great, it is important to question how it would function in reality. Just because governments and developers are encouraged to work with minority groups, doesn’t mean that they will listen to their thoughts. It is also important to remember that a space is not always used the way it is designed. This relates to the concepts of “planned spaces” and “used spaces” which we have discussed in class. The pictures used in this article show spaces that people can make their own. For example, the picture below shows moveable chairs and different social areas. Just because an area is designed with different groups in mind, doesn’t mean that it will be used by all groups.
There are many factors that contribute to Pittsburgh not being a livable place for Black women. A study found that “for Black girls and women, who suffer from higher poverty rates, birth defect rates, death rates, unemployment rates, and school arrest rates than black girls and women in just about every other city examined in this study” (Mock, 2019). Black women are also overpoliced in Pittsburgh. These women feel that they need to be re-humanized. This study emphasizes the fact that gender isn’t always the root of fear for everyone. In this case, these women can’t freely use public space because they are over policed and discriminated against. In this case the framework mentioned above would not be able to create public spaces where these women could feel safe. A change in social constructions would be needed as well as gentrification and poverty being addressed, instead of being ignored.
Mock, B., (2019) Pittsburgh: A “most livable” city, but not for Black Women”. Citylab. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/09/black-women-pittsburgh-mortality-poverty-racism-jobs-police/598291/
Vey, J., Love, H., (2019), Transformative placemaking: a framework to create connected, vibrant and inclusive communities. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/transformative-placemaking-a-framework-to-create-connected-vibrant-and-inclusive-communities/
Swell post, Ally!
ReplyDeleteI thoroughly enjoyed your critique on Vey and Love’s (2019) framework as implementation is just one component of change; monitoring achievements of such programs is helpful in concluding their effectiveness. With that being said, they also should be taken with a grain of salt as context vastly influences social structures and processes. There might be practices that contribute to an overall trend, but they do not speak for every landscape. Thus, applying Vey and Love’s (2019) framework in Pittsburg might look different than Chicago and Cleveland, leading to varying (hypothetical) reasons why such program was either a success or failure; what works/doesn’t work in Pittsburg may not be the same for Cleveland. This further supports your analysis of other factors fostering unlivable conditions for Black women in Pittsburg. Indeed, context is important!
Your post also reminded me of the Design Studio for Social Intervention’s piece we read earlier in the semester, identifying various approaches for spatial justice. Instead of being prescriptive, this organization’s article served as an outline to enact change. A crucial component to this is continuous action and reflection which serves as Freire’s praxis (1970). Otherwise, oppressive measures go unquestioned and unchallenged, allowing Pittsburg, for instance, to still be unlivable for Black women.
--Amie
This comment is from Ritika - her computer won't let her comment:
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your thoughtful and insightful writing Ally. I am glad that you bring into questions of how buzzwords like "diversity and inclusion" are actually being navigated by developers. They may have become considerations in the recent past in a city's landscape but don't necessarily translate into the actual plan of the city. - Ritika