{"title":"“租客与租约不一致的地方”:伊丽莎白·科伊特与纽约市房屋管理局的规划实践(1934-51)","authors":"J. Fletcher","doi":"10.5749/buildland.28.2.0071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:The postwar period of urban renewal in the United States has been critiqued for authoritarian planning that remade the landscape of cities without consulting residents. In the literature on New York City, the clashes between Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs are often used to illustrate tensions between bureaucratic and grassroots understandings of cities. By examining the work of Elisabeth Coit, a principal project planner for New York City's Housing Authority (NYCHA), this article complicates such oppositions between top-down and bottom-up planning. Coit's overlooked practice shows how a progressive architect incorporated the wishes of working-class tenants into the design of postwar public housing projects.Coit traveled to cities across the United States to study the housing of workers during the Great Depression. On the basis of her research, she criticized prevailing trends in mass-housing design and argued that architects should plan spaces that suited how tenants used their homes. When Coit became a NYCHA planner several years later, she put a tenant-first ethos into practice in planning the Bronx River Houses (1951). This paper also argues that her deference to the wishes of tenants resulted in designs that were intended to facilitate conventional gendered divisions of domestic labor and leisure.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Where Tenants and Tenets Don't Agree\\\": Elisabeth Coit and the Planning Practices of the New York City Housing Authority (1934–51)\",\"authors\":\"J. Fletcher\",\"doi\":\"10.5749/buildland.28.2.0071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:The postwar period of urban renewal in the United States has been critiqued for authoritarian planning that remade the landscape of cities without consulting residents. In the literature on New York City, the clashes between Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs are often used to illustrate tensions between bureaucratic and grassroots understandings of cities. By examining the work of Elisabeth Coit, a principal project planner for New York City's Housing Authority (NYCHA), this article complicates such oppositions between top-down and bottom-up planning. Coit's overlooked practice shows how a progressive architect incorporated the wishes of working-class tenants into the design of postwar public housing projects.Coit traveled to cities across the United States to study the housing of workers during the Great Depression. On the basis of her research, she criticized prevailing trends in mass-housing design and argued that architects should plan spaces that suited how tenants used their homes. When Coit became a NYCHA planner several years later, she put a tenant-first ethos into practice in planning the Bronx River Houses (1951). This paper also argues that her deference to the wishes of tenants resulted in designs that were intended to facilitate conventional gendered divisions of domestic labor and leisure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5749/buildland.28.2.0071\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5749/buildland.28.2.0071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
摘要:美国战后的城市更新被批评为在没有征求居民意见的情况下重塑城市景观的威权规划。在关于纽约市的文献中,罗伯特·摩西和简·雅各布斯之间的冲突经常被用来说明官僚和基层对城市的理解之间的紧张关系。通过研究纽约市住房管理局(NYCHA)的首席项目规划师Elisabeth Coit的工作,本文使自上而下和自下而上规划之间的对立变得复杂。科伊特被忽视的实践展示了一个进步的建筑师如何将工人阶级租户的愿望融入战后公共住房项目的设计中。科伊特前往美国各个城市,研究大萧条时期工人的住房情况。在她的研究基础上,她批评了大规模住房设计的流行趋势,并认为建筑师应该规划适合租户使用房屋的空间。几年后,当科伊特成为纽约cha的规划师时,她在规划布朗克斯河屋(Bronx River Houses, 1951年)时,将房客优先的理念付诸实践。本文还认为,她对租户意愿的尊重导致了旨在促进传统的家务劳动和休闲性别分工的设计。
"Where Tenants and Tenets Don't Agree": Elisabeth Coit and the Planning Practices of the New York City Housing Authority (1934–51)
abstract:The postwar period of urban renewal in the United States has been critiqued for authoritarian planning that remade the landscape of cities without consulting residents. In the literature on New York City, the clashes between Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs are often used to illustrate tensions between bureaucratic and grassroots understandings of cities. By examining the work of Elisabeth Coit, a principal project planner for New York City's Housing Authority (NYCHA), this article complicates such oppositions between top-down and bottom-up planning. Coit's overlooked practice shows how a progressive architect incorporated the wishes of working-class tenants into the design of postwar public housing projects.Coit traveled to cities across the United States to study the housing of workers during the Great Depression. On the basis of her research, she criticized prevailing trends in mass-housing design and argued that architects should plan spaces that suited how tenants used their homes. When Coit became a NYCHA planner several years later, she put a tenant-first ethos into practice in planning the Bronx River Houses (1951). This paper also argues that her deference to the wishes of tenants resulted in designs that were intended to facilitate conventional gendered divisions of domestic labor and leisure.