About | Sources | Print
<- Previous Page
Legacies
The story of urban renewal in Southwest Washington, D.C. provides insight into the city’s history, the mixed and multifaceted results of redevelopment programs, and experiences of cities nationwide after World War II.
Success or Failure?
If the success of urban renewal in Southwest D.C. were to be measured by the destruction of poor alley housing and improved sanitary conditions for its residents, it could be considered a highly qualified success. In a strict analysis, few – only an estimated 5%, according to a 1960s survey – alley residents relocated to other “slums.”1
However, according to the same survey most residents forced to leave Southwest experienced extreme alienation; most reported that, years after moving, they had failed to find any friends among their new neighbors.2 The public housing projects that housed many ex-Southwest residents deteriorated over decades. Perhaps most importantly, slum clearance could only cure a symptom of poverty, but not poverty itself.
Measuring the other goal of Southwest’s urban renewal – stimulating middle- and higher-income housing and private development – is similarly problematic. The region remains to this day a stable, economically and racially diverse area. Supreme Court Justices have resided there. The Southwest Mall continued to host cultural landmarks such as Arena Stage and annual Art-O-Matic festival. But retail options in the region were and remain weak. Contemporary residents feel somewhat dissatisfied with the area and are critical of the New Southwest built during the 1950s.3
most [survey respondents] reported that, years after moving, they had failed to find any friends among their new neighbors
Further complicating the question of success versus failure is the immeasurable human cost of urban renewal. When Old Southwest was paved, an entire culturally, economically, and racially diverse community was uprooted. Although many people returned to New Southwest, popular businesses like stores and restaurants as well as attractive, historic buildings had been destroyed. The breakup of residents and institutions resulted in a measurable social loss for the people of Old Southwest.
It is difficult to say whether or not a more streamlined government approach to urban planning would have resulted in better community resources in New Southwest or less alienation among ex-residents. To better measure the impact of the role of federal and local governments in urban renewal, Washington’s experience should be examined those in other U.S. cities.
D.C. and the Nation
In his landmark history The Making of the Second Ghetto, Arnold R. Hirsch identifies violent segregation, urban renewal, and public housing as the key contributing factors leading to the concentration of poor African Americans in U.S. cities. The story of Southwest Washington, D.C. has several parallels to Hirsch’s case study of urban renewal in Chicago’s downtown Loop. Both began by tearing down decrepit, unsuitable housing, expanded by seizing middle-class housing in the surrounding community, and involved a relocation program that guided ex-residents into public housing.
Yet there are key differences between urban renewal in Chicago and in Southwest D.C. Hirsch identifies downtown Chicago business interests as a crucial factor in starting slum clearance in the Loop;4 no such downtown business weighed heavily in Southwest urban planning. More importantly, slum clearance in the Loop took place in 1947, years before the first Southwest alley was torn down, or federal funds were delegated to such projects in 1949.
[compared to Robert Moses in New York], disagreements between government agencies in Washington resembled a quagmire
Another city’s urban renewal experience took place well before new construction began in Southwest. In New York City, legendary urban planner Robert Moses had written legislation to appropriate federal slum clearance funds even before the Housing Act of 1949 had been officially signed into law. What distinguishes Moses’ work from Southwest the most was his famously streamlined approach; in comparison, the disagreements between government agencies in Washington resembled a quagmire.
The United States government’s slum clearance and urban renewal efforts for Washington, D.C. foreshadowed a deep federal involvement in similar projects nationwide. Politicians hoped that the nation’s capital would serve as a model for cities across the country. Yet each urban renewal effort was unique, and Washington’s significance for national trends should not be overstated. Instead, the story of the fall and rise of Southwest Washington, D.C. should demonstrate that the federal government’s urban policy was not always coherent, consistent, or effective but instead marked by conflicting objectives and legacies.
<- Previous Page
