Stony Brook University
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... Appropriating Abandonment: DIY Urbanism, Real Estate, and Community Gardening in New York City A Dissertation Presented by Adam Charboneau to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Stony Brook University August 2016 Copyright by Adam Charboneau 2016 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Adam Charboneau We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Wilbur R. Miller – Dissertation Advisor Professor of History, Department of History Christopher Sellers - Chairperson of Defense Professor of History, Department of History Nancy Tomes Distinguished Professor of History, Department of History Themis Chronopoulos Lecturer in American Studies, University of East Anglia, UK This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School Nancy Goroff Interim Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Appropriating Abandonment: DIY Urbanism, Real Estate, and Community Gardening in New York City by Adam Charboneau Doctor of Philosophy in History Stony Brook University 2016 Do-It-Yourself urbanism, a catchall phrase for bottom-up city-building, is theorized as a set of movements—from guerrilla gardening and urban homesteading to pop-up skateboard parks and critical mass cycling—that allow everyday individuals to reimagine the city as an oeuvre—a work. DIY urbanism is conceived as a countervailing, grassroots force against the opaque, unequal weight of global capitalism: in local appropriations of space, citizens can realize their right to the city, their right to participate in its design and not simply live in a world created from above. This dissertation complicates traditional narratives of DIY urbanism, using community gardening in New York City as a prism for understanding the complex ways in which local appropriations of space are a product of, and guided by, bottom-up and top-down forces. New York’s community gardens are enmeshed in the messy, intertwined and contradictory politics of sustainability, urban renewal, and the festive rebranding of post- industrial cities. iii I argue that, rather than sprouting from the ground like the flora in their lots, the origins of New York’s community gardens are more complex. Fighting images of urban decline, the John V. Lindsay administrations (1966-1973) attempted to repackage Gotham as “Fun City.” Through the exciting, inclusive design of urban space—from vest-pocket parks and community gardens to street closings and “happenings”—the Lindsay administration hoped to reinvigorate a citizenry thought detached and apathetic while steering New York into a hip, post-industrial future. But as urban crisis moved to fiscal crisis, and liberalism to conservativism, appropriating abandonment, for authorities, became a temporary means to promote “boot-strap” self-reliance while rethinking neglected areas. Further, during the Ed Koch administrations (1978-1989), local reclamation campaigns were coordinated in ways to spatially deconcentrate the urban poor. Meanwhile, attracted to the opportunities found in abandonment, young white “urban pioneers”—through a combination of their cultural capital, municipal policy, and media intrigue—came to dominate leadership in preservation movements for New York’s appropriated spaces. But in crafting community gardens as public and park-like, many became, for City Hall and developers, interchangeable, property-appreciating “green amenities,” largely devoid of their grassroots empowerment. iv Dedicated to my parents, Robert and Kathi Charboneau v Table of Contents Introduction DIY Urbanism, Real Estate, and New York’s Community Gardens…….………..1 Chapter 1 John Lindsay’s Fun City and New York’s Open Spaces, 1966-1973……………21 Chapter 2 Cleaning and Greening New York City During a Fiscal Crisis……………...…...60 Chapter 3 The Koch Administration, Private Foundations, and the Greening of the South Bronx……………………………………………………………………………...98 Chapter 4 Crafting Community Gardens: The Growth of a Preservation Movement for the Lower East Side’s Community Gardens……………………………………...…138 Conclusion Giuliani’s War and the Continuing Institutionalization of the Gardens…………187 Bibliography ...………………………………………………………………………………...201 vi Acknowledgments The completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the encouragement, guidance, and patience of numerous individuals. Support from my family and that of my wife’s have kept this ship afloat even in the roughest of waters. So too have the friendships formed while at Stony Brook. I too must thank the University for leading me to my partner, wife, and walking thesaurus, Elisabeth Capece, who, with her cat Lance, keeps me smiling, day in, day out. Many thanks to my committee members—Bill Miller, Themis Chronopoulos, Chris Sellers, and Nancy Tomes—who, over the years, provided much insight and inspiration. Through his tireless encouragement and confidence in me, Bill made me feel as if my feet were on something more solid than quicksand; Themis never hesitated to read through drafts and offer friendly advice; Chris’s thorough comments always steered me toward more nuanced approaches; and Nancy’s close editing turned up mistakes that, for the life of me, I would have never caught. I also thank the history faculty at Radford University. While an undergraduate at RU, my professors channeled my inquiries in creative directions and lit my passion for the discipline of history. I am also indebted to the staffs at the Municipal Archives and City Hall Library of the City of New York, and the staffs at the Bronx County Historical Society and Brooklyn Historical Society. And I would be remiss not to thank the staff at Green Thumb, who allowed me to sift through countless documents—and take up extra space—in their cramped offices. Finally, this project would not have come to its conclusion without the generosity of Lenny Librizzi and Donald Loggins, who provided me an invaluable crop of material from their personal archives. vii Introduction DIY Urbanism, Real Estate, and New York City’s Community Gardens In a recent New York article entitled, “The Everything Guide To: The Urban Daredevil,” readers are ushered on a tour of New York’s abandoned and most intriguing “off-limits” spaces ripe for “place-hacking.”1 From decaying water tunnels and deserted Amtrak underpasses to derelict hospitals and warehouses, postindustrial abandonment, the author suggests, offers pioneering sorts an abundance of excitement and possibility: a chance not only to witness the “authenticity” of historical change and rupture, but rethink those very spaces. Abandonment has offered up to those willing to trek about it the possibility of reimagining the city as an oeuvre—a work.2 The neglected cityscape has long been appropriated by the urban poor and, in some cases, become survival niches for the most destitute. Yet as the New York guide reminds us, and scholarship increasingly illuminates, appropriating urban abandonment has also become festive and hip.3 From artists in community gardens and sculpture parks sprouted on once rubble-filled lots to elaborate tepees housed upon defunct industrial sites in transitioning neighborhoods, the skeletal remains of yesteryear are blooming with opportunity.4 But this opportunity is not only that of everyday citizens’ encounter with the “unplanned.” Municipal authorities, developers, and real estate interests too have used, and at times actively coordinated, sites of local reclamation as a means to project New York’s postindustrial hipness—a key ingredient in global competitions over the “quality-of-life” issues attracting elites, tourists and corporate headquarters. 1 Jason Feifer, “The Everything Guide to: The Urban Daredevil,” New York (Sept. 22-Oct. 5, 2014) 72-76. 2 For a detailed study of reimagining abandoned urban spaces—in this case, the Brooklyn waterfront—and creating exciting and creative uses through the “unplanned,” see Daniel Campo, Accidental Playground: Brooklyn Waterfront Narratives of the Undesigned and Unplanned (New York: Fordham University Press, 2013). Also, see L.B. Deyo & David Leibowitz, Invisible Frontier: Exploring the Tunnels, Ruins, and Rooftops of Hidden New York (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2003). The authors are founders of Jinx: The Magazine of Global Urban Adventure. 3 For more on locally appropriated “insurgent spaces,” see Don Mitchell and Lynn A. Staeheli, The People’s Property? Power, Politics, and the Public (New York: Routledge, 2008) 95-114; Jeffery Hou, Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities (New York: Routledge, 2006). 4 Sara Beck, “A Tepee Flourishes, Temporarily, in Brooklyn,” New York Times, June 19, 2014. 1 Similar to New York’s guide to the urban daredevil, another column in the city’s cultural barometer brings readers down an abandoned sewer tunnel,