Story of Spawl - The Early Record

I found it fascinating to read some of the history of housing reform, especially centered on the lower East Side of NYC, that occurred during the 19th Century. Good references are DeForest and Veiller, The Tenement Housing Problem (1903) and Ford, Slums and Housing (1936).

The early housing reformers mostly were the Settlement House workers, local residents, ministers, and others located in those communities. In general, they wished to improve local conditions rather than abandon these areas. The transcipt of the first professional planning conference in Washington, D.C. clearly shows the emerging distinction between these housing reform workers and those who wanted to rebuild the cities (Proceedings of the First National Conference on City Planning, 1909).

The impetus to rebuild the cities was supported by special interests such as contractors, builders, and those who owned land at the urban fringe and were able to focus their efforts on "solutions" that led to clearance and suburban development. The Congressional record of testimony for Housing Acts in the 1940s and 1950s reflects the impact of these interests on our national urban policy.

The sprawl issue is one that has been with us for a very long time and has involved, in part, those who would work with the residents, building inventory, infrastructure, and so on of existing neighborhoods v. those who would solve the problem by eliminating or ignoring these places and build anew elsewhere. It seems to me that the more radical approach of destroying (or allowing to be destroyed) and rebuilding elsewhere has done great harm to cities and their residents and is a wasteful practice at odds with needed stewardship of our resources.

I'm sure the members of this forum mostly agree with this position. My advice is to consider the resources available in the historic record related to housing reform for ideas about the alternative.