Ashley Noyes

Final Paper

12/17/14
URBN1230

Breaking Their Own Windows: A Critique Analysis on the Redevelopment Plan of

Thayer Street
The gentrification process of an urban space entails numerous social factors and
inevitable controversial issues that result from conflicting interests of all parties involved.
As the diversity of incentive and perception of moral geographies heightens, these very
prevalent and quite common problems are presumably unavoidable. Gentrification, in a
social context, is best described as the removal or dislocation of existing communities
and residents, with the replacement of new community members by the property owners
and those in authority in order to reap the economic profits and benefits for themselves.
The figures of authoritative power who control and oversee these actions of reallocation
aim to attract the members of society who seemingly have a high degree of economic,
social, symbolic and cultural capital. The hierarchical engagement that the landowners
forcefully exert perpetuates the social consequences and serious repercussions of
gentrification.
The idea of space as a nuisance, and its incredibly superficial and subjective
meaning, is a significant factor in the ultimate enactment of gentrification. Many
authoritative figures of social control perceive a space as disorderly, unsafe, or blighted
with their own personal biases and judgments of the neighborhood through its physical,
spatial, and cultural entity. They, thus, identify these impoverished communities as an
opportunity for economic and social advancement. Gentrification of these spaces is
inevitably enforced, and its consequential social repercussions are simply obliterated
from the gentrifiers themselves. The resulting neighborhood transformation of urban
space alters the perceptions of the private and public spheres, as well as the normative
opinion of moral geographies. As a result, new types of ordinances and degrees of law
enforcement are implemented, and the existing social sphere is removed, forgotten, and
replaced.
Moreover, the argument for who, what, and why certain spaces are replaced can
be made from both sides of the spectrum. Although the perception of space as a nuisance
can be highly subjective and terribly mistaken, it can also be widely agreed on. If the
ideologies of use value and exchange value are taken into account, with the
understanding of the differences in incentives of the existing residents versus the social
authoritative enactors, there then can also be, in certain circumstances, a reached
consensus behind an appropriate decision of whether a space is a nuisance or not.
Furthermore, the areas where the majority of the residents use value of the particular
space is highly destructive, harmfully illicit, or fatally corrupt, the ultimatum to gentrify
can be rather beneficial on a community-level basis. For example, the city of Philadelphia
has been recognized as one of the most dangerous, poorest, and blighted large cities in
the nation (Jones). The city has experienced serious levels of unresolved issues pertaining
to crime, renewal development, and spatial boundaries regarding West Philadelphia and
University City. In 1996, these issues were deeply apparent when a Penn graduate student
was murdered just a few blocks from campus (Kromer and Kerman). This event aroused

the decisive initiative to establish a plan that would effectively abate the issue of safety in
University City. Philadelphia underwent a movement of gentrification, defined
specifically as redevelopment, that, although aimed at renewing, privatizing, and
implementing higher-quality businesses and buildings within the area, can also be
considered as highly progressive and mutually beneficial. While previously blighted
buildings and communities are being transformed into seemingly valuable assets to the
new gentrified space, Philadelphia law enforcers are also protecting existing low-income
residents by enacting comprehensive measures and programs that exempt them from
increases on their property tax bills. Jacy Webster, at 56, of low economic status, and
plans to remain living in Philadelphia, explains that although he has come to feel like a
stranger being surrounded by wealthier neighbors, its actually safer than its ever
been (Williams). Overall, the redevelopment plan at University City in Philadelphia is a
fairly novel concept of gentrification. Although inevitably, controversies still exist behind
the redevelopment and transformation of space, the questions and answers pertaining to
the who, what, and why of Philadelphias gentrification can be perceived as genuine,
candid, and successful on a comparative level.
University Citys case of gentrification is clearly a rather rare situation, and
represents an uncommon result of mutually effective benefits. With this being said, it can
also be used as a superlative exemplar for like-universities or other similar urban spaces
experiencing the detrimental, destructive, and fatal issues seen in previous Philadelphia.
However, with specific regard to university incentives of redevelopment, educational
institutions that do not possess the exacting sense of serious urgency and mutually
beneficial intentions should consider a completely different approach. A current and
interesting trend regarding the relationship between the universitys perceptions of the
city and their financial ability for funding redevelopment relates to an idea called the
new geography of innovation (Katz). The concept highly correlates with Americas
cities and the potential impact universities could have as an economic and authoritative
figure of social control. Over just the past decade, many universities have used their
respective cities as means of leveraging the existing urban ecosystem, as well as
strengthening their internal academic program. With specific industries such as
biotechnology and medicine, the trend for universities of relocating into the city is a
seemingly effective measure for creating a new exchange value of the city pertaining to
certain R&D functions, attraction of higher talent, and advancement of research quality.
Interestingly enough, Cornell Universitys engineering school just unveiled its plan to
build an enormous tech campus on New York Citys Roosevelt Island by 2017 (Stone).
The existing community will be dislocated and the space will be fully privatized by
Cornell. Moreover, the university incentives behind gentrifying and relocating into urban
space are for obvious reasons of gaining cultural and social capital. These institutions are
controlling the relationships between the public and private spheres, redefining the use
value of urban space, and recreating exchange value for their own personal attraction.
Although its easy to argue for the assertion that Philadelphias movement of
gentrification is not comprehensively productive, or that Cornells relocation to
Roosevelt Island is ignorant and forceful, there can also be a plea simply regarding a
sense of purpose and justifiable means for these specific community transformations.
Quite contrastingly, the Thayer Street redevelopment plan gives no apparent, urgent
purpose. The entirety of redeveloping Thayer Street is confusing, unusual, and ostensibly

unnecessary. Thayer Street, according to the Thayer Street Planning Study, is

considered the most active and well-utilized commercial corridor within the Citys
historic College Hill neighborhood. It describes Thayer Street business as vibrant,
eclectic, and attractive to both community members and visitors alike. Also to be
noted, the plan depicts Thayer Street as one of the most established neighborhoods in
Providence (Thayer Street Planning Study). Furthermore, its not unusual that Thayer
Street, having an already built commercialized environment and a densely populated
area, has the highest housing rents in the city. Looking specifically at the demographics
of Thayer Street, compared to other areas of Providence or other cities in America,
relatively, crime is less, safety is high, and the economic foundation is superior. During
my three years at Brown, I have personally never felt unsafe, threatened, or at risk while
walking on Thayer Street. It is unusual, thus, taking into the account the understanding of
gentrification and the superficial purpose behind why authoritative academic institutions
may feel the need to privatize and control certain urban space, for Providence city
planners and Thayer Street landowners to have a sense of urgency to redevelop the street.
To put it simply, it is clear that Thayer Street is not perceived as a nuisance of space. It is
a flourishing, attractive, and extremely successful environment that is already
commercialized and privatized, with no necessary means of excessive redevelopment or
gentrification enforcement. Unfortunately, the extraneous, unneeded, and accessory
Thayer Street movement of gentrification is dismally changing the perception of the
public and private spheres, which is ultimately creating new ideas of the Thayer Street
moral geographies and negatively creating consequential ordinances.
In addition to the peculiarity in the purpose of redeveloping Thayer Street, the
community that is inevitably being displaced should also be brought to attention. The
multifamily housing development, also known as 257 Thayer, required the demolition
of nine existing residential structures (Thayer Street Planning Study). Moreover, its
even more unusual that the residents living in these nine houses have been for most
likely over five years now students from Brown University. The dislocation of students,
thus, is a confusing matter in attempting to understand the redevelopment of Thayer
Street, as the existing business and its success on the street can be directly correlated with
the high activity and density of students in the area. It is described in the Planning Study
that College Hills current commercialized presence evolved from a once primarily
residential district, and is, thus, now a unique and diverse architectural mix of residential
housing and commercial buildings, which adds to [the Districts] charm, eccentricity
and attractiveness to the surrounding residential and college communities (Thayer Street
Planning Study). And so forth, the annihilation of these presumably unique and attractive
residential buildings, the dislocation of students on Thayer Street, and the replacement
with a massive four-story, 95-unit, mixed-use, multifamily residential building is a rather
self-harming and ill-advised initiative. It seems as if the development of 257 Thayer is
attempting to attract family residents, which is a surprising idea, being that Thayer Street
is currently populated predominately by college students, bars, and businesses directly
related to this youthful market. It should be interesting to see how the resulting mix of
competing interests will pan out as the development finishes.
The Thayer Street redevelopment initiative is also implementing serious measures
to control the public space from private commercial retailers. With sidewalk awareness
and the intention of allowing pedestrians more room to walk, the plan argues that at-

grade utility poles, retail signs (such as restaurant or store boards), and restaurant outdoor
seating areas are a hindrance to pedestrian mobility. Therefore, the plan is enacting new
ordinances and physical obstructions, such as trees and sidewalk benches, to prohibit
these private businesses to use this public space. By doing so, the relationship between
the private and public spheres is being completely redefined, and consequently, the
resulting matter will simply worsen when the comprehensive level of understanding this
relationship is lost. The higher degree of regulation on sidewalk policies intrudes to a
deeper, socio-spatial level as well. The performers, buskers, pan-handlers, and even the
homeless who have authentically used the public space of the Thayer Street sidewalks
and who have provided a unique eclectic mix of diversity to Thayer Street are now
being scrutinized, criminalized, and pushed out of the space by new authoritative
management enactments. The redevelopment of Thayer Street is, thus, fundamentally recreating the perceived notion of the public-private sphere, and establishing emerging law
enforcements from the resulting subjective moral geographies. The creation of the public
sitting park in front of the Brown Bookstore will provide some relevant analysis of
these controversial issues. The park is seemingly for the public, but it can most likely be
said that nor the homeless or the buskers will have the right to sit or perform there,
respectively, for very long, if any time at all.
The resulting effects of the overly subjective and ignorantly biased transformation
of the perception of the public and private spheres will ultimately hinder the individuals,
businesses, and environment of the current Thayer Street. The already apparent removal
of deviant or disruptive actors, the annihilation of student off-campus housing, and
the growing level of authoritative management control on Thayer Street is merely the
beginning of an unfortunate redevelopment mistake. In terms of the socio-spatial
imaginaries and moral geographies, the deceptive redefinition of public space by the
redevelopment plan will result in the implementation of similar oppressive ideas of the
Broken Windows Theory onto Thayer Street. The deviance of certain behaviors, actions,
and use of public space is gradually broadening through the subjective bias of law
enforcers and enactors. The sudden change in the socio-spatial conscious of criminal,
or disruptive, activity is quite apparent. The authoritative manifestations of these actions
are altering the perception of the definition of issues on Thayer Street. As a result of
the redevelopment, gentrification, and socio-spatial acceptance of what is appropriate
where and by who, activities such as riding down the street on a motorcycle or playing
the flute in front of the Bookstore are inherently deemed deviant. The proclaimed
intentions behind the redevelopment of Thayer Street are deceptive, unreliable, and lack
any sense of a mutually beneficial purpose. Surely, the Thayer Street before
redevelopment did not have as many moral, spatial, and social issues as there are
gradually emerging today. The idea of space, and the relationship between the public and
private sphere, had little controversy before the implementation of gentrification of an
already flourishing market. However, its clear that the plan to physically transform
Thayer Street is also symbolically, culturally, and socio-spatially transforming the street
as well. Thayer Street is now a space of nuisance. There are disorderly, disruptors, and
deviant actors suddenly misappropriating the public space use value. It is interesting to
see how the ignorant mistake of gentrifying a neighborhood without genuine, authentic,
and a mutually beneficial purpose can, and will, break its own windows. The quite
unnecessary gentrification of Thayer Street is a rather self-inflicting harm on its once

unique, eclectic, and attractive environment. Authority, residents, students, and visitors
alike will never view the street the same; all spatial, social, and moral perceptions have
been perpetually changed by the physical and symbolic gentrification transformation of
the street.

Works Cited
Jones, Solomon. "The Dangers of Gentrification." AxisPhilly. N.p., 4 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 Dec.
2014.
Katz, Bruce. "How Universities Can Renew America's Cities." Fortune How Universities Can
Renew Americascities Comments. Time Inc. Network, 3 Nov. 2014. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.
Kromer, John, and Lucy Kerman. "The University and It's Surroundings, 1994." West
Philadelphia Initiatives: A Case Study in Urban Revitalization (n.d.): n. pag. Community
Wealth. University of Pennsylvania, 2004. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.
Stone, Madeline. "This Is What Cornell's Futuristic NYC Tech Campus Will Look
Like." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 07 May 2014. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.
"Thayer Street Planning Study." N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.
<http%3A%2F%2Fwww.providenceri.com%2Fefile%2F5315>.
Williams, Timothy. "Cities Mobilize to Help Those Threatened by Gentrification." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 03 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.