References
- We are indebted to Professor Paul Nickel, Graduate School of Public Administration, New York University, for his thoughtful suggestions in reviewing a preliminary draft of this paper. His keen observations have proven extremely helpful in further refining planning concepts and in suggesting new ways of approaching the study of conservation.
- Neighborhood conservation is known by many names, and is alternatively called “rehabilitation, redevelopment, renewal and conservation.” We will use the term “conservation” generally to designate a potential approach to “gray” area planning.
- Harris, Harry C., Some Notes on Neighborhood Conservat’ion in Ne1v York City (New York: Housing and Redevelopment Board, 1962).
- For a helpful discussion in this regard see, “The Planning Process” in Harleigh B. Trecker, Group Process in Administration (New York: Woman’s Press, rev. ed., 1950), pp. 232–245.
- Millspaugh, Martin, and Gurney Breckenfeld, The Huma’n Bide of Urban Renewal (New York: Ives Washburn, 1960), p. 3.
- Abrahamson, Julia, A Neighborhood Finds Itself (New York: Harper Bros., 1959), Chapter III.
- Hillman, Arthur, Neighborhood Centers Today: Action Programs for a Rapidly Ohanging World (New York: Privately Published, 1960), p. 193.
- Brudney, Juliet, A Prelirninary Description and Evaluation of One Neighborhood Conservation Attempt in New York City (New York: Housing and Redevelopment Board, 1962), p. 4.
- New York Times, August 6, 1959, p. 18.
- This paper deals exclusively with neighborhood conservation. The Area Services Program is regarded as a “holding operation” by the city in those neighborhoods scheduled for large–scale urban renewal. But until they are rebuilt, these neighborhoods need the kind of strict law enforcement and social improvenlent programs developed by neighborhood conservation. Area Services projects have been in effect in the West Side Urban Renewal Area, the Lower East Side Project, the Colony Area of Brooklyn and the Arvernc District of Queens.
- Brudney, op. cit., p. 20
- The exact role of the neighborhood conservation program under the new Housing and Development Administration (HDA) is presently being determined, but there is hope that its basic structure and function will be preserved even though sharp cutbacks are forecast.
- The extent of the social problem, however, can be observed from a tenant study conducted by one of the largest conservation projects. Based on a rough census of the Bloomingdale District: (1) 98% were Negro or Puerto Rican; (2) 70% were Departlnent of Welfare (Social Services) clients; (3) large families with young children predominated; and (4) fatherless haInes were frequent. (From interview with Mr. Bernard Veney, former Assistant to the Director, Neighborhood Conservation Bureau.) It should be noted, however, that evidence suggests conservation pressure simply caused crime and vice to move elsewhere in the City; it is estimated by the Police Department that such activity increased in non–conservation areas nearby as a result. In its first four years of operation (1959–1963), 633 families living in illegally overcrowded conditions were relocated to larger apartments, See Harris, op. cit.) p. 10.
- Murray Ross, Community Organization: Theory and Principles (New York: Harper Bros., 1955), p. 163 (Italics Mine.)
- An “Interim Report on Neighborhood Conservation” was published in 1963 by the Housing and Redevelopment Board. It represented the first major descriptive and statistical document on the program to appear from any source. It was, however, essentially descriptive in nature, and did not include a detailed critique and evaluation or adequate controlled techniques of research and evaluation.
- Edward J. Logue, Let There Be Cornm’itment: A Housing, Planning Development Program for New York City (New York: Institute of Public Administration, 1966), p. 14.
- Harris, Op. cit., pp. 13–14.
- Dick Netzer, Financing Government in New York City (New York: N.Y.U. Graduate School of Public Administration, 1966), p. 21.
- The Lindsay reorganization plan essentially involves the grouping of the functions previously performed by almost all line departments in New York City in ten superagencies, or “administrations,“ upon whose executve officers are imposed new responsibilities for planning, budgeting, administration and organization. At the same time, many of the specific functions of these central administrations are, in effect, decentralized operationally to field offices in key parts of the City. See, Louis A. Craco, The Mayor’s Task Force on Reorganization of New York City Government: Report and Proposed Local Law (New York: Institute of Public Administration, 1966.)
- Housing and Development Administration (HDA), Health Services Administration (HSA), Human Resources Administration (HRA), and Environmental Protection Administration (EPA).