A roomful of city planners, part 3

Like any Art I-level project, the final cityscape drawings submitted by students were a wildly mixed bag. There were a handful of architectural masterpieces, a broad mid-range of serviceable drawings, and the usual last-minute horrors: a tangle of unfinished lines, creases and rips. In addition to the finished drawing, I asked students to submit a written response in which they would reiterate the objectives of the project and identify various conflicts, analyze how another student resolved the conflicts, and then discuss their own choices. As noted in previous posts, resolutions of the social conflicts (scroll down for the 10 criteria) were based on assumptions made by students. Here are a few of examples [note: no spelling/grammar
corrections]:

1. The low-rent apartments were projects.
In AM's comment below, there is the assumption that the low-rent apartments are one of the "black things". This was not indicated in the criteria, but the assumption is a fair one: there are at least three housing projects zoned for our high school.

2. The white-owned chain restaurant was assumed to be upscale.
This opinion was only verbalized by a few students, but seemed to be assumed by many in the final cityscape drawings. For example, when dividing the city into rich and poor sides, the chain restaurant was often on the rich side as P.F. Chang's or Outback, when it could just as easily be on the other side as Biscuitville or Bojangles.

3.The sewage treatment plant is unsanitary or smelly.
One of the few areas where I guided discussions. The sewage treatment plant is an essential city service, but an unseemly one. How would a city cope with this potential menace, and who would have the power to decide, and where does this power come from? All agreed that the plant would be an olfactory nuisance, and that power is derived from wealth, so it would most
likely be placed near the poor side of town, where people are less inclined to protest. Some assumptions:
AB: "One big conflict would of happened if I would of put the sewage plant beside a restaurant because you would smell a bad smell when you eat so that was my conflict."
KB: "His sewage is right by a [clothing] store and the smell might leak into the clothes"
MH: "Conflicts that arose from these few items were that the hospital couldn't be by the sewage treatment plant because that's unsanitary."

4. The hospital is expensive.
For those without health insurance, the hospital is a forbidding place.
KB: "[I put] the hospital more over to the rich side b/c they can pay for it."

These assumptions led to the following compositional choices:

1. The restaurants could not be placed side by side, as they would be in competition.
MH: "The chain restaurant couldn't be by the 'mom & pop' restaurant because there would be too much competition."
DH: "One conflict I faced is to make sure I do not put the two restaurants by each other."

2. The low-rent apartments shouldn't be near the colleges.
Some students assumed that, since the low-rent apartments were housing projects, expensive colleges (such as our very elite one) would bristle at having them next door. In this case I helped to guide the choices, reminding them that college students live on a very low income and would need housing as well. This encouraged discussions about housing around nearby
NCCU.

3. The sewage treatment plant should be placed near the low-rent apartments, not near businesses.
Again, the sewage treatment plant is seen as an aggressively offensive necessity, but one that should be kept away from those with wealth.
KB: "[I put] the dump over by the cheap apartments because they can't afford to have complaints."
Anon: "I put all the white-owned businesses on one side and all the black owned store near the sewage company."
BA, referencing a student's work in which the sewage plant sidles up next to a Macy's: "I do not agree with the way he planned their city because he put a sewage next to a clothing store. Oh no."

4. Or, the sewage treatment plant should be placed as far away as possible.
AB: "I arranged my cityscape with my sewage plant looking like it was in a far distance and the rest of them was up close. I resolved my conflict by putting the sewage plant in a far distance away from all of the other buildings."

5. Buildings had to be grouped according to economic strata.
AA: "My city was arranged in a way were your lower class people lived on the side of town where there are lower class shops. I put the sewage behind everything because nobody wants to live by waste. I feel great about my work. I did a great job." And discussing another student's work: "Like myself, this artist put all the lower class together because that's the only way
business can survive.

6. And thus, wealth belongs to white people, poverty to black people.
The common thread throughout all of these works was the economic divide along racial lines. The criteria identified black- or white-owned businesses, and identified upscale and low-rent entities, but never combined the two. When creating an economically divided city, the upscale was grouped with the white, the downscale grouped with the black. This can be seen in
many of the comments throughout the project.

7. Equity and convenience, with sensitivity to business competition, were major issues for most of the city planners.
KB: "I arranged my city so that the urban could be with the urban and the rural could be with the rural. I put the bank right in the middle so both sides of the city could get to it and the hospital more over to the rich side b/c they can pay for it... I put my barber shop by the collage and hospital so they could donate hair to cancer patients and the students could get a haircut"
IK: "I arranged my cityscape very carefully. The mom + pop isn't too close to the chain restaurant. The apartments are close to the college for the convenience of students, the bank and hospital are also close by. The sewage plant is on the outer city limits so it doesn't cause problems."
AJM: "I drew the bank in the middle of the city so both sides [black and white] could have the opportunity to get there at the same time."
AP, who drew a complex, multi-block cityscape, first responded to student NM's drawing, highlighting the convenience and fairness of the city plan: "He arranged his cityscape with alot of place that are nicely grouped together. Everything is placed convenient for the 'people' of this city. I think the way that he solved the conflicts was by using an example of a real city and how its set up and just played off those factors. I do agree with his city plan because its very elaborate and well thought out. I think the only problem this city could face is that money (income) would be a major problem". Discussing her own choices, she says "I arranged my cityscape with all of the buildings that 'make sense' sitting side by side on the same blocks. I also put things together that that could benefit each other by the convenience of them being side by side. For example the mom & pop restaurant and barber shop combined bring in more business for each other and play off each others income."
IK: "Each building had to be placed carefully so not cause disturbance or competition between each business."
ED: "I gave the sewage plant some space. I put Durham Regional [Hospital] in the back b/c I know they need a lot of room. I put NCCU by apartments + condos b/c that would be like dorms for them."
KB: "This man has the hospital right in the middle of his town so both sides could get to it. But his bank is to far away from the shopping centers... But i like the fact that the mcdonalds is right by the collage because the studant can just walk to go get something to eat."
ED: "The problems will probably make someone go out of business."

I was deeply heartened by these responses, as they demonstrated true engagement beyond the simple mechanics of drawing in two-point perspective. I watched students make observations about their situation, and reflect these observations in their work. I overheard meaningful discussions about race and class, opportunity and equity. I witnessed students taking apart their city and putting it back together again. Even if it was the same as it was before, they did so with their own power.

If I had a disappointment, it was that students drew such a clear divide between white wealth and black poverty. I had hoped that, through this project, students could use their agency to design a city plan that is equitable for all citizens, or one that proposes opportunities for escaping poverty. If they identified racial, social or economic conflicts, this could be their opportunity to mend them.

This was perhaps a misguided goal, as it asked students to ignore reality. What the students gave me was a reflection of a very real city. The choices they made demonstrated what they believe to be true, and in many cases it was accurate to our city's unique situation. How could I fault them for being true to reality, for being cynical of wealth and power, for being defeatist in their own situation, for being frustrated with inequity, for simply being honest?