Bridging Theory and Practice Since 1974

Category: Book Review (Page 1 of 2)

Book Review from the Journal: Urban Legends, Peter L’Official

In anticipation of Volume 47 of the Carolina Planning Journal coming out next month, this week we are featuring another book review from Volume 46, The White Problem in Planning. Veronica Brown reflects on Peter L’Official’s Urban Legends: The South Bronx in Representation and Ruin.

Book Review by Veronica Brown

A few televised moments speak to their era so well that they surpass television history and stand in for an entire period in American history. Surely the 1988 World Series, in which the camera panned from Yankee Stadium to a burning building in the South Bronx as Howard Cosell announced, “Ladies and gentlemen, the Bronx is burning,” is such a moment. Except for the fact that Cosell never said his most famous line. Peter L’Official debunks this story in the introduction to Urban Legends: The South Bronx in Representation and Ruin, an exploration of how during the late twentieth century, various media constructed a South Bronx that stood in for both the concept of urban decline and for the place itself. When presidents visited the rubble of Charlotte Street, as L’Official writes, they “did not visit the ‘South Bronx’ as much as they did the site of the nation’s shorthand for urban ruin” (129). Through thoughtful analysis of the period’s visual art, books, and movies, L’Official provides a necessary reexamination of the South Bronx’s history that also serves as a compelling argument that places are constructed not only through plans but through their artistic representations.

In the strongest two chapters of the book, L’Official pairs the photographs of Jerome Liebling and Roy Mortenson and the conceptual work of Gordon Matta-Clark with examples of what he terms “municipal art” (14), or work with a function that is bureaucratic as much as aesthetic. This “art, at work” (46) includes the Department of Finance’s project to photograph every lot in New York City from 1983 to 1987 in order to standardize the city’s tax assessment system. In this “administrative mode” (77) of photography, life emerges at the corners of straight-on photos of South Bronx buildings caught in the process of abandonment. Passersby move from one photo to the next as the city photographer progresses down the block. Situating these tax photos within a rich tradition of artists depicting urban ruin, including through conceptual photography, L’Official creates a “dual-purposed ethic of viewership” (76). This mode of looking considers the art-historical canon as well as sociopolitical upheaval in the urban environment. In another inspired pairing, L’Official uses the work of Gordon Matta-Clark and the Occupied Look program, two forms of urban trompe l’oeil, to demonstrate how perception and perspective shaped understandings of the South Bronx. Through Occupied Look, the actual windows of abandoned buildings were covered with panels with painted-on windows. Occupied Look presents itself as an easy subject for derision, but L’Official rejects cynical mockery, instead comparing the initiative to Gordon Matta-Clark’s building cuts in the Bronx Floors series. L’Official’s deft exploration of these various artistic interventions in Bronx abandonment proves municipal art projects as worthy of analysis and also figures the period’s conceptual artists as key urban theorists of twentieth-century decline.

In later chapters, L’Official turns to popular media depictions of the South Bronx, including books and movies, and continues to home in on well-chosen details. In a particularly gratifying turn, the main character of Abraham Rodriguez’s Spidertown (1993) has a scavenged Occupied Look window mounted on his bedroom wall, literally reversing the direction of the faux portal and co-opting its furtive purpose as he hides his cash behind the panel. The 1981 films Fort Apache, the Bronx and Wolfen each center on Charlotte Street, a block sufficiently metonymic for urban distress that Jimmy Carter staged a photo opportunity there when he visited the borough in 1977. In Fort Apache, the Bronx, both character and setting assume the identity of Charlotte Street. Pam Grier, the ultimate blaxploitation star, plays a sex worker named after the street. The film received significant protests from the local organization Committee Against Fort Apache, which argued that the film was reductive and offensive. Charlotte Street, however, had become a studio backdrop rather than a neighborhood with residents, a transformation made clear through the construction of a new building that appeared to be burnt-out for the production of Wolfen. Although L’Official does not extend his analysis of Charlotte Street to Ed Logue’s zealous development of the corridor into a row of single-family homes in 1987, recently detailed in Lizabeth Cohen’s Saving America’s Cities (2019), the aestheticization of the street through its movie appearances demonstrates why the American aesthetic ideal of the white-picket fence would be all the more appealing as a solution to the borough’s problems.

Full of both rich detail and exciting ideas, Urban Legends is an enjoyable book for any audience interested in the South Bronx, but the book provides a particularly important meeting ground for urban planners and historians of visual culture. As L’Official argues, the South Bronx “has been hard to ‘see’ clearly beneath the layers of myths, stereotype, and urban legend” (245). Urban planners have historically failed to see the Bronx and used its representation to obscure a clear vision of countless Black and Latinx urban neighborhoods across the country. This pattern has fostered rampant exploitation of these neighborhoods, including current gentrification and displacement in the South Bronx. What is perhaps most useful for planners to take from Urban Legends is an understanding of how representations will continue to construct the space. When L’Official asks “What vision of the Bronx will live on” (247), planners should recognize this vision will not only be constituted through their efforts but also through art and popular media.

Buy Urban Legends here.

Find Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Veronica Brown is a 2021 graduate of the Master’s of City and Regional Planning program. She received her undergraduate degree from Smith College, where she studied the psychology of contemporary visual culture. Before coming to UNC, Veronica worked in communications at the Whitney Museum of American Art.

Book Review from the Journal: Golden Gates, Conor Dougherty

This week, we are featuring another book review from Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal, The White Problem in Planning. Nora Louise Schwaller reflects on Conor Dougherty’s Golden Gates: Fighting for Housing in America.

Book Review by Nora Louise Schwaller

There is no state where an individual working a full-time minimum-wage job can afford a one-bedroom housing unit without paying in excess of 30% of their income, the standard benchmark for affordability. While stagnant wage growth has contributed to this issue, an increasing imbalance between supply and demand in the housing market is a major feature of the problem. In Golden Gates: Fighting for Housing in America, Conor Dougherty focuses on the ever-growing housing shortage by sharing stories from those living in the cities of the Bay Area, California. In doing this, Dougherty lends insight into the economics, laws, history, and human experiences behind the rising housing prices and reasons why ‘The Rent is Too Damn High’.

Dougherty is well suited to this task. He is both a Bay Area native and current resident. He works as an economics reporter for the New York Times, focusing on the West Coast, real estate, and wage stagnation. His experience allows him to write with both the sober perspective of a researcher and the insight of someone who has lived in the midst of this evolving crisis. This background gives him credible authority to note that he has never seen it quite so bad.

In San Francisco, the average rent for a 1-bedroom apartment is $2,650. Dougherty delves into the history of how we got here with clear-sighted nuance. The real-life characters in his book veer to polarized ends of the debate (e.g., affordable housing advocates who don’t want to see developers make a profit, or local residents who use racist dog-whistle comments to discuss the “horrors” of new housing construction). However, Dougherty balances the risks of displacement and homelessness with the practicalities of having the means to make money in and from a competitive housing market. In doing so, he gives fair consideration to those who often become the local villains of housing scarcity – the techies in their Google Buses, the developers, and suburban natives – by contextualizing them in the biases and incentive structures of local governments that often limit dense construction.

Dougherty anchors his book with Sonja Trauss, the founder of the Yes in My Back Yard (YIMBY) activism movement. The book begins with her first appearance at a public hearing where she spoke in favor of more housing just about anywhere in the Bay Area. She was nearly 30 then, an economics PhD drop-out oscillating between teaching math and working at a local bakery. At this time of her life, she was long on passion but short on concentration – with a list of discarded hobbies that included weight lifting, role playing games, and participating in comedy troupes. Affordable rent advocacy focused her, and before long, she was showing up at any public hearing on residential construction, from affordable mid-rises to high end apartments, asking them to build anything so long as it was more.

Her organization, coined San Francisco Bay Area Renters Federation (SF BARF), gave a voice to the disparate group of people who were hurt by the non-building of homes that they could have lived in, or that could have at least put downward pressure on rents. This was a marked shift in housing advocacy that expanded the conversation around new construction far beyond local residents and the project developers, the typical stakeholders. Her ‘build everything’ position, habit of inserting herself in local fights, and colorful comments put her at odds with traditional affordable housing non-profits, local residents, city councils, and developers. But her movement was designed to get attention, and she succeeded in attracting local reporters and big time donors.

While Dougherty does an admirable job noting the privilege of the YIMBY movement, which is predominantly white and often funded with tech money, this is not the main focus of the book. Still, he contrasts SF BARF with an impactful chapter covering advocacy by and for low-income service industry employees, who are often at the greatest risk of displacement. This includes an in-depth story centered on an apartment building that was bought and flipped in a majority Hispanic neighborhood. Through this process, Dougherty describes the actions and perspectives of the developers, the residents who suddenly found themselves faced with $1,000+ increases in monthly rent, the residents’ children, and local activists and charities. This chapter is reminiscent of influential reporting from the turn of the 19th century, such as the work captured in How the Other Half Lives by Jacob Riis, or mid-century activism work, such as The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. However, in this ending, the Robert Moseses of the world carry the day.

Dougherty makes clear that the housing shortage, and the displacement, homelessness, and inequity that follows it, calls for a human rights discussion centered on the conscience of the nation. While he discusses solutions such as imposing rent control, reducing building restrictions, changes to the building industry, and increasing multi-family zoning, they do not form the central thesis of the book. Instead, Golden Gates ends on how the housing crisis is, in many ways, about what we are willing to provide for those of us who have the least when it comes at the cost of those with more affluence and power. These moral questions are contrasted with the mismatch of incentives for addressing wide-spanning issues at the local level when the responsibility for the problem is diffused across states, countries, or even the global population. This point is captured by Steve Falk, a city planner for Lafayette, California, who resigned in the face of resident outrage during discussions on increasing density near a BART (light-rail transit) stop: “All cities – even small ones – have a responsibility to address the most significant challenges of our time: climate change, income inequality, and housing affordability” (116).

Golden Gates is on Time’s list of 100 Must-Read Books of 2020, is an Editor’s Choice of the New York Times, and is on Planetizen’s list for Top Urban Planning Books of 2020. These accolades are well deserved. The book is accessible to readers working outside of this subject area, and interesting to those, such as planners, working within it. Even housing scholars will find new insights and unfamiliar stories, while those without such a background will be able to pick it up and find themselves invested in the intricacies of local planning and the friction of the democratic process.

Buy Golden Gates here.

Find Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Nora Louise Schwaller is a PhD candidate at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill in the Department of City and Regional Planning, and a registered architect in the state of North Carolina. Her research interests focus on migration, climate change adaptation, and equitable recoveries.

Book Review from the Journal: Race After Technology, Ruha Benjamin

This week, we are featuring a book review from Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal, The White Problem in Planning. Joungwon Kwon reflects on Ruha Benjamin’s Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code.

Book Review by Joungwon Kwon

Ruha Benjamin’s Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code offers past and current technology examples in our everyday life to demonstrate technology’s failures in eliminating racism. Without assessing the problems entailed by emerging technology, the public and private sectors are quickly implementing technology in different settings. Although many advocates frame technology as an unbiased tool, Benjamin asserts that technology, including AI and robots, are not neutral. Indeed, to Benjamin, the dominance of emerging technologies, and the racism underlying their design and use, constitutes a “New Jim Code.”

“Data, in short, do not speak for themselves and don’t always change hearts and minds or policy.” (p. 206)

When programmers create technological tools, they use data that reflects the systematic racism built into our society. The most common example is discrimination based on names. Research shows that white-sounding first names have advantages over Black-sounding names (Benjamin 2019, 15), and technology that uses this racially biased data reproduces this racism and continues to support White supremacy. Benjamin informs users that critical thinking is necessary, and it may be challenging compared to the past. For example, Robert Moses’s plans to build bridges in New York City so low that buses would not be able to pass underneath were an explicitly racist effort to exclude poorer people of color. In contrast, racism in technology is challenging to detect because technology is often framed as an objective tool. It is difficult for users to understand all the data and design choices that programmers have made. Therefore, Benjamin encourages users to not blindly accept what is shown on the screen, and to ask questions about programmers’ intentions and how the design of technology can disadvantage some communities over others.

“Invisibility, with regard to Whiteness, offers immunity.” (p. 14)

One of the most infamous algorithms for racial bias is predictive policing. Predictive policing tries to predict future crimes by analyzing historical crime data, which perpetuates racist historical patterns of incarceration among Black and Latinx populations.

Benjamin provides ways to flip the script for racially biased algorithms. One example is the White-Collar Early Warning System, which highlights financial crimes on a heat map and includes a facial recognition program to identify corporate executives, mostly White, who are likely to be perpetrators. It makes Whiteness and financial crimes visible.

The book also includes cases of apps focused on decarceration, especially for people who cannot afford bail money. Promise tracks individuals’ locations before trial or sentencing, thereby reducing the need for bail payments. Although the app may seem “good,” it can easily be used against individuals due to the nature of its continuous surveillance. Both systems allow technology to be abolitionist tools instead of perpetuating racism. However, the “good” apps can always be used in reverse at any moment. Another decarceration app, Appolition avoids Promise’s surveillance problems by crowdfunding donations for bail out money for incarcerated people.

“By deliberately and inventively upsetting the techno status quo in this manner, analysts can better understand and expose the many forms of discrimination embedded in and enabled by technology.” (p. 211)

Benjamin closes the book with what society can do to bring justice to technology: disrupt the techno status quo. The current status of technology embeds discrimination. Therefore, disrupting the status quo means to change and question the technology. In the first four chapters, she illustrates how technology has perpetuated Jim Crow laws, and how analysts, artists, and activists need to work to reform these systems. Moreover, new apps, programs, and data require a holistic understanding instead of an ends-justify-the-means approach. She argues that “New Jim Code fixes are a permanent placeholder for bolder change” (p. 174). A solution to one problem may bring more problems to other areas, so the fixes need to be cautiously thought through with a long-term vision that prioritizes justice.

Although Benjamin presents examples, many questions are left without answers. For instance, she states that society needs an abolitionist toolkit for technology. The abolitionist toolkit is not specific and centers data analysts and designers. For technology users, the book does not provide solutions to disrupt the techno status quo, which may frustrate some readers. However, technology is dramatically changing, and these problems do not have one-size-fits-all solutions. Benjamin’s examples are helpful in understanding the New Jim Code, but they are sometimes not described in detail. For example, the book mentions several apps, such as Promise, and their problems without offering enough context. This lack of description may leave readers perplexed. Nonetheless, the book helps to recognize emerging technology problems and bring the conversation to various settings in the public and private sectors.

Race After Technology lies at the intersection of many disciplines studies and will be interesting for those who are curious about systemic racism, technology, and cities. Benjamin’s background is in African American Studies, which presents the book with a clear racial justice lens. Benjamin poses many questions about technology’s influence on today’s societies and enables readers to imagine more equitable cities. The takeaways for readers are that technology users need to think critically, flipping the script for digital platforms and upsetting the techno status quo instead of accepting technology’s default, if they want to change the New Jim Code. In the future, specific solutions for tech users and more detailed examples would be great additions to the book.

Buy Race After Technology here.

Find Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Jo (Joungwon) Kwon is a third-year Ph.D. student in the Department of City and Regional Planning. She hopes to interweave various data sets and narratives of housing and communities together with new digital technologies. With a background in Statistics and English Literature, she received her M.A. in Computational Media at Duke University. In her free time, she enjoys watching indie films, going to live performances, and drinking good coffee.

Black in Place: The Spatial Aesthetics of Race in a Post-Chocolate City by Brandi Thompson Summers

By: Veronica Brown

Brandi Thompson Summers’s Black in Place: The spatial aesthetics of race in a post-chocolate city draws upon participant observation, interviews, media accounts, and visual analysis to present a detailed case study of the Washington D.C. neighborhood of H Street NE, a commercial corridor patronized by Black locals throughout the twentieth century that has undergone significant gentrification in the past two decades. Thompson argues that the gentrification of H Street involves using Blackness to market an authentic experience while reorganizing the landscape in service of capital. Gentrification activates race through what Summers terms “Black aesthetic emplacement,” a mode of representation that depoliticizes and aestheticizes Blackness in order to make racial markers valuable and consumable (Summers 2019, 3). Summers ultimately provides a richly detailed analysis of a particular place while also developing a useful broader framework for how race operates in the process of gentrification.

Although civil unrest characterized the 1960s across the United States, Washington D.C was widely regarded as “riotproof” before 1968 because of the city’s large Black population and Black mayor. Following the death of Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1968, however, D.C. experienced widespread uprisings. Summers argues that these demonstrations were not the irrational reaction to King’s death that the media depicted but instead reflected simmering tensions about the spatial containment and capitalist exploitation that Black residents had experienced throughout the 1960s. Summers writes, “The uprisings brought into view the notion that struggles against oppression are ultimately that struggles over space” (Summers 2019, 59). This struggle would continue throughout the ensuing decline and redevelopment of H Street, NE.

Although the significant physical damage H Street experienced during the protests was not as severe as some other neighborhoods in the city, the area was slower to redevelop in the following decades. Black business owners, developers, and architects advanced many proposals to redevelop the corridor throughout the 1970s, but the city government declined to support any plans. The construction of the Hopscotch Bridge further isolated the area. By the 1980s, H Street had become an “iconic ghetto” (Summers 2019, 53), frequently activated as a political symbol but receiving little meaningful government support. Businesses, including socially important third places, continued to close.

With the back-to-the-city movement well underway in the early 2000s, developers began to revitalize H Street through significant upscale development. Summers describes a city-funded Retail Priority Area Grant that excluded service businesses, including largely Black-owned barbershops and hair salons, but embraced “entrepreneurial and innovative” ventures, including high-end shops and restaurants (Summers 2019, 74). These development schemes gave H Street a new spatial identity as a post-racial space in which diversity functioned primarily as an aesthetic style. In 2017, a new Whole Foods opened on H Street, and the chain’s press release touted that both Whole Foods and H Street valued diversity and history. When the grocery store opened, the decor included many racialized visual references, including an ill-advised candy display case labeled “Chocolate City.” The neighborhood that had been devalued for its Blackness in the previous decades was now revalued for its multiculturalism.

In addition to the Whole Foods, a proliferation of upscale ethnic fusion restaurants on H Street made race literally palatable and consumable through food. The trendy eateries reflect D.C.’s wider embrace of Richard Florida’s creative class hypothesis (Florida 2014), which prioritizes quality-of-life upgrades to attract young, white professionals. Summers observes that the creative class strategy also absolves the government of responsibility for addressing structural inequalities as it holds that success can be achieved through entrepreneurialism. Although some culinary signifiers of Blackness remain on H Street, their presence is justified on historic grounds. A close reading of a Washington Post story on Horace and Dickie’s, a carryout fried seafood restaurant, illustrates that the newspaper adds historic and cultural value to a building that would otherwise be visually associated with blight by focusing on the historical importance of fried whiting fish to enslaved people.

Retellings of H Street’s history frequently highlight the supposedly harmonious racial history of the area while failing to address the legacy of racial subordination. Summers analyzes a planning document titled the Near NE Historical Study and a heritage tour containing brochures and signs for self-guided pedestrian tourists to show that both overwhelmingly focus on a time at the turn of the twentieth century when H Street was “diverse” before becoming “Black” (Summers 2019, 92). Neither narrative addresses segregation nor structural inequalities. The planning document does not address the 1968 uprising at all, while the heritage tour opts to depict the event as an irrational anomaly in response to Martin Luther King, Jr.’s death, rather than the culmination of ongoing tensions. These histories create an abstract space in which diversity has always been celebrated, marking the contemporary iteration of H Street as authentic according to the constructed collective memory of the space.

In the final chapter of Black in Place, Summers focuses on the corner of 8th Street and H Street in order to illustrate how blackness and space co-produce one another in the context of gentrification. Summers organizes this analysis around three themes, transit, spatial containment, and “the unseen” (Summers 2019, 148), which provide the basis of a more widely applicable theoretical framework. Transit-oriented development around the corner’s new streetcar appeals to young, white professionals, while the predominantly Black bus ridership constitutes the X2 bus, which stops at the corner, as an ephemeral, racialized microgeography. The corner is also subject to racialized surveillance, including CCTV cameras and an active police presence, and media coverage of crime on the corner creates Black spaces as geographies of fear. This hypervisibility through surveillance is in tension with how black people are unseen on the corner. Summers defines unseeing as a practice that enables different groups to coexist without interaction and without engaging with people’s lives and conditions. While Black bodies are hypervisible on the corner, Black people remain unseen.

Black in Place offers a detailed study of H Street NE that includes a wealth of carefully chosen examples that make up a thoughtful exploration of the racialized process of gentrification. Summers, however, sometimes leans too heavily on densely theoretical jargon, undermining the strength of her own research. For example, although the introduction specifies that she follows Wendy Brown’s definition of neoliberalism as a process of worldmaking, her repeated invocation of neoliberalism sometimes shortcuts a more sustained exploration of the exact issues at play. This choice may temper Black in Place’s appeal to a popular audience or planning practitioners, which is a shame because many of the book’s examples could provide useful lessons for planners and planning students.

Works cited

Florida, Richard L. 2014. Rise of the Creative Class – Revisited. Paperback of the revised edition. New York: Basic Books.

Summers, Brandi Thompson. 2019. Black in Place: The Spatial Aesthetics of Race in a Post-Chocolate City. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Featured Image courtesy of The University of North Carolina Press

Purchase Black in Place here.


Veronica Brown is a second-year student in the Master’s of City and Regional Planning program. She received her undergraduate degree from Smith College, where she studied the psychology of contemporary visual culture. Before coming to UNC, Veronica worked in communications at the Whitney Museum of American Art.

Edited by Jo Kwon

Book Review from the Journal: Superpower, Russell Gold

This week, we are featuring a book review from Volume 45 of the Carolina Planning Journal. Olivia Corriere reflects on Russell Gold’s Superpower. Superpower tells the story of Michael Skelly and his rise as one of the leading figures in the world of renewable energy.

Book Review by Olivia Corriere

Superpower follows quirky, optimistic businessman Michael Skelly from his beginnings installing rainforest canopy gondolas in Costa Rica to his stardom in the wind energy industry. Author Russell Gold tells Skelly’s professional story in a narrative style that traces the rise and evolution of renewables in the United States —a story about the electric grid that we all depend on.

In the early 2000s, technology enthusiasts and environmentalists drove the wind energy industry. When the Zilkha family, wealthy from their banking business, sold their oil company, they started Zilkha Renewable Energy the next day sensing industry growth on the horizon. They first crossed paths with Skelly when they acquired International Wind, for whom he was working at the time. It was a perfect match; the Zilkhas appreciated his ambition, his ability to connect with people, and his outright zeal for renewables.

All at once, Skelly and Zilkha Renewable shook things up in the wind industry with deep pockets and big oil business experience. As Gold put it, “Hippies were no longer running the wind business. Green pieties had been replaced by accountants’ green eyeshades” (p. 66). Skelly successfully built massive wind projects for Zilkha Renewable, like the 423.45MW Blue Canyon wind project in Slick Hills, Oklahoma. Gold decorates what could be a dry corporate growth story with anecdotes about Skelly’s positive attitude, daily bike commutes, and eclectic business and negotiation strategies. Take for example his suggestion to Michael Zilkha to wear his pink bike shorts and cycling shoes during a momentous finance meeting.

When Zilkha Renewable sold to Goldman Sachs in late 2004, Skelly took a break from the energy industry to run as a pro-energy, moderate Democrat in the Seventh Congressional District of Texas. Spoiler alert—it is challenging to beat out an incumbent Republican in the Lone Star State. After trying his hand at politics, Skelly catapulted back into energy development, co-founding his own new company: Clean Line Energy Partners would tackle the archaic 20th-century transmission lines.

The American grid transports electricity with a network of transmission lines; it accepts electricity from generators, distributes electricity through transmission lines, and sells it at wholesale to utilities. Because these transmission lines have limited capacities, congestion can become an issue when new generators (renewable or otherwise) come online, thus making the electricity more expensive and increasing strain on the infrastructure. 

His new company would build transmission lines from energy resources to load centers. It would buy electricity from generators like wind farms, transmit it to load centers, and sell it to utilities at a premium. These enormous infrastructure projects are expensive, require long-term investors, and involve lengthy stakeholder processes. Government usually leads these types of development projects because the electric grid is functionally public, interstate infrastructure. Skelly was disrupting the status quo completely, and it was not easy. There were questions and heated debate about landowner rights, eminent domain, environmental implications, and economic impacts.

Gold closely examines Skelly’s Oklahoma-to-Memphis 720-mile, 4,000 MW transmission line, the Plains & Eastern Line. Arkansas political representatives were livid that the transmission line passed through the state without providing clear local benefits. Some posed questions about whether Clean Line even had the authority to build transmission lines since it was not a utility. Politicians waxed poetic about the threats of the line, turning their constituents against it, often by wielding false information. Landowners were terrified that they might lose their land. Notorious anti-transmission line mobilizer Julie Morton put it simply, “To us, it looks like Big Oil is moving over and here comes Big Renewable” (p. 181).

Skelly went back and forth for years with individual landowners, politicians who blacklisted Clean Line projects, and potential electricity buyers—especially the Tennessee Valley Authority, a regional transmission organization (RTO) in Tennessee. Meanwhile, Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton introduced legislation that explicitly targeted the Plains & Eastern Line. All the while, Skelly was holding dozens of stakeholder meetings, offering the cheapest electricity on the market, and offering cash per mile to counties where the line would be built. This process is a long, administratively complex, technically difficult, and politically-contentious one.

Superpower clarifies several complex issues for the reader: the limitations of existing transmission lines, the politics that create roadblocks for renewables, the intense difficulty of comprehensive stakeholder engagement, and how energy policies and legislation affect developers in practice. Gold condenses and explains complex policies like the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act and the Energy Policy Act, making them understandable for the reader. These policies regulate and steer energy in the U.S., so it is critical to understand them as climate change accelerates and as the American fuel portfolio comes into focus as a major talking point in the 2020 presidential race. 

Gold chose the right character to carry the story of the renewables industry. Skelly is an interesting, likable person, and by the end, I was rooting for him. The anecdotes that Gold tells about Skelly and his business style are fun to read and add color to the picture of the renewables industry as a high stakes industry run by nimble, driven people. 

Gold wrote this book to get into the nitty gritty of what it would take to build a new energy infrastructure. He wanted to write about the experience of working in energy, especially as the sector grows and there is more demand for workers in the industry. As he hoped it would, Superpower will appeal to people interested in challenging the status quo in energy and excite them to do something different.

“‘You only get one life, right?’ Skelly once said. ‘You might as well do something that is interesting and is challenging and is exciting. If it weren’t all those things, it wouldn’t be worthwhile’” (p. 273).

Buy Superpower here.

Find past volumes of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Olivia Corriere graduated from UNC this year. She studied environmental sustainability, geography, and urban planning. She worked as Project Manager at Blue Dogwood Public Market in Chapel Hill, NC. She also served as Co-Chair of the UNC Renewable Energy Special Projects Committee, managing renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy education projects on campus. In her free time, Olivia enjoys hiking and cooking with friends and family.

Book Review from the Journal: Everything Must Go, Kevin Coval

This week, we are sharing a book review from the most recent edition of the Carolina Planning Journal (Volume 45). Doug Bright shares his thoughts on author Kevin Coval’s Everything Must Go. The collection of poetry is an ode to Chicago’s Wicker Park and also features illustrations by artist Langston Allston.


Book Review by Doug Bright

Kevin Coval’s latest collection of poems, Everything Must Go, offers a story about the “life and death of an American neighborhood”: Chicago’s Wicker Park. Coval’s words, paired with drawings from Langston Allston, illustrate the Wicker Park that Coval came to know during his time as a resident, starting in the 1990s. The pages honor institutions that made the neighborhood what it was upon his arrival, but also document the changes—physical and spiritual—that came through the process of gentrification. Coval’s celebration of diversity—of culture, of income, of thought—evolves into a eulogy lamenting the departures of his friends, the incumbent community that artists moved into, and, with those two, the soul of the neighborhood he came to know, vanquished by a wealthier and whiter demographic. The book comes at a time of political change in the city, where a new mayor’s promises to dismantle long-standing political power structures conflict with continued neoliberalism of the previous administration, buttressing economic inequality through public subsidy. While reminding us that the spirit of a neighborhood is non-trivial, Coval reflects too briefly on the role that he and his fellow bohemians played in the process.

 For Coval, gentrification is more than the loss of affordable housing, forced displacement, and the demographic shifts that come with it. He emphasizes the importance of the character of Wicker Park through a micro lens, through individual characters. Odes to personal connections and roommates, a neighbor nicknamed Mr. Rooster, fellow poets such as Denizen Kane and Thigahmahjiggee (a.k.a. Sharkula), and romantic prospects—mingle with salutes to the nameless, whose work make the neighborhood work: tamale vendors, waitresses, an incense salesman, barbers, car mechanics, and the like. He stresses, too, the importance of place, especially in its ability to create connection, recognizing the specific (cafés—Earwax and Urbis Orbis—and a bookstore called Lit-X) and the categorical (bowling alleys, dive bars, barbershops). The poems progress pseudo-chronologically, eventually revealing more and more obvious changes: fancy restaurants pop up, new construction booms, and MTV’s The Real World moves into the former Urbis Orbis space (not without protest).

Coval is a long-time player in Chicago’s poetry scene and serves as a mentor to young poets. He plays institutional roles as the artistic director of Young Chicago Authors (an organization that emphasizes youth expression through creative writing and hip-hop), is a founder of that organization’s Louder Than A Bomb youth poetry festival (the largest in the world), and has taught at both the School of the Art Institute and the University of Illinois at Chicago. He is a white man—raised Jewish in the northern suburbs of Chicago—who participates in and educates others about the traditionally black realm of hip hop, a source of conflict that Coval himself has addressed. Coval’s grandfather moved to Chicago’s Wicker Park neighborhood in 1906 as a newly arrived immigrant; the author, raised in the suburbs, began living in Wicker Park in the 1990s.

Langston Allston, a New Orleans-based illustrator and muralist, focuses on people (especially portraits) at both scales. His smaller works are consistent with the black-and-white, line drawing style seen in Everything Must Go. The illustrations alternate between direct representation of the subject of the poem (often people) and sketches of buildings in the neighborhood, creating a visual atmosphere, especially useful for non-Chicagoan readers. Allston never saw the Wicker Park constructed by Coval’s words, so his drawings are primarily derived from Coval’s poems.

Today’s Wicker Park represents yet another gentrified neighborhood radiating from the center of wealth on the Near North Side of the city. It is separated from Lincoln Park, a lakeside neighborhood synonymous with old money in Chicago, by the Chicago River, the Kennedy Expressway, and the blighted, industrial areas that line both of them. It is this missing piece in Chicago’s wealth map that is the site for a megadevelopment known as Lincoln Yards, a hotly debated topic in the city, in large part due to massive tax increment financing incentives the city has committed to the project, one which opponents argue could easily be funded without subsidy. On the west side of the river, Wicker Park was arguably the first neighborhood to gentrify and plays an analogous role to Lincoln Park, a core from which other gentrification stems into nearby neighborhoods such as Ukrainian Village, Logan Square, and Humboldt Park. With Lincoln Yards, two cores can become one, but Everything Will Have to Go Again.

Coval’s poems do not address how politics and policy impact gentrification, but by chronicling individual people and places, they add nuance and weight to the argument that gentrification destroys neighborhood culture. The author meaningfully reflects on his relationship with the neighborhood, especially whether or not he has claim to the neighborhood due to his family history, in which his grandparents were residents, but his parents participated in “white flight” to the suburbs.

The expressways were built
/& my parents remember
/they left & i return.

(A Portrait of the Artist in the Hood, lines 9-11) 

He fails, however, to reflect on the fact that patterns of gentrification, including in Chicago, often involve the influx of artists as an early transitional stage in the process, one that could be seen as catalytic.

At a time in Chicago’s history that represents nearly unprecedented potential for progress on equity, Everything Must Go provides a reflection on neighborhood change that emphasizes the up-close-and-personal, the nuance, and the sum of its parts: a soul of a neighborhood. It aims to capture, backed by emotion, a component of neighborhood change that can too easily be shrugged off as ever-changing or too ethereal. While it neglects to suggest solutions for the challenging problems of gentrification (including one that impacts health most directly: displacement), it comes as close to success as possible in explaining the potential loss that lives in the relationships between people and places and the human connections borne out of sharing those spaces.

Buy Everything Must Go here.

Find past volumes of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Doug Bright is a second-year Master’s student in the Department of City and Regional Planning, specializing in transportation and pursuing the design track. He is interested in youth planning literacy, urban food systems, the social power of place, and the intersection of technology and sustainable transportation systems. He received his undergraduate degree in Social Studies from Harvard College and is a proud Chicagoan. 

Featured Image Courtesy of HaymarketBooks

Book Review from the Journal: Race for Profit, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor

This week, we are sharing a book review that appeared in the most recent edition of the Carolina Planning Journal (Volume 45). Veronica Brown discusses author Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor’s 2019 book, Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermined Black Homeownership.


Book Review by Veronica Brown

In Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermined Black Homeownership, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor details how following the end to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) redlining in 1967 and the passage of the Fair Housing Act the following year, federal low-income homeownership programs extended mortgages backed by the FHA to Black homebuyers in urban areas. Through these programs’ reliance on unprecedented public-private partnerships, the real estate industry transformed housing discrimination from an operation of exclusion into what Taylor terms predatory inclusion, systematically exploiting Black homebuyers through their incorporation into the market. Race for Profit emerges as a necessary addition to the housing canon, expanding existing understandings of discrimination and advocating for a radical re-envisioning of our approach to housing.

Race for Profit begins as calls for improved housing conditions reached a fever pitch in the mid-1960s, with protestors occupying the chamber of the House of Representatives after Congress failed to pass a bill providing rat extermination to the nation’s cities. Amid urban rebellions and increasing demands to extend homeownership to African Americans, the Johnson administration passed the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Act in 1968 to create a series of homeownership programs targeted at low-income buyers. These programs featured low interest rates, extended terms, and monthly payments tied to owner income rather than home value. The FHA would also insure these mortgages, reversing its historically exclusionary policies. The National Association of Real Estate Boards exerted considerable influence in the drafting of the HUD Act. The White, suburban housing market had become saturated, while deteriorating houses in urban areas sat empty. The housing industry thus lobbied for the programs to focus on existing stock in cities, opening an urban market on which they could unload formerly unsellable stock.

Taylor illustrates that the low-income homeownership programs assumed a position in a market in which risk had become inextricably intertwined with race. FHA-backed mortgages recast racialized risk as an opportunity for private interests. With the mortgages guaranteed by the FHA, riskier buyers became attractive, as lenders could foreclose on houses, collect, and begin the process again with another buyer. The HUD Act had also created the Government National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Ginnie Mae, introducing mortgage-backed securities to expand the availability of mortgage funds. The bundling and reselling of mortgages created an incentive for mortgages in large volume, regardless of their viability. Taylor argues that through the surrender of housing to the private market in a nominal partnership, the federal government lost the ability to effectively regulate its programs. Homeowners discovered their purchases to have crumbling foundations, rat infestations, and faulty or absent heat and plumbing. Although the FHA-insured mortgage was contingent upon an inspection, this procedure frequently took place only on paper as real estate brokers bribed inspectors in an example of the widespread corruption in the implementation of the programs.

As the flaws of the low-income homeownership programs became apparent through legal action and media reports regarding corruption, unlivable conditions, and high foreclosure rates, HUD Secretary George Romney and other officials shifted the blame for the programs’ failures to individual homeowners. In one of the book’s best chapters, “Unsophisticated Buyers,” Taylor describes how, despite the significant structural problems documented in many of the homes, HUD ascribed blame for their condition to the owners’ housekeeping skills. The agency published pamphlets with instructions about dusting that were of little help to people whose condemned houses were crumbling beneath them. The administrators’ claim that the Black homebuyers were fundamentally incapable of the task of homeownership, however, conveniently absolved HUD for the programs’ failures while also justifying the discontinuation of government involvement in housing. Race for Profit rightly centers the experience of Black mothers as a primary site of contestation for housing policy. Taylor concludes “Unsophisticated Buyers” with a description of the legal battles these women waged, suggesting that the homeowners’ collective action embodied a meaningful form of resistance. Although sharp in its indictment of the narrative of personal responsibility espoused by Romney and others, this section feels disappointingly brief, if only in comparison to the deliberate pace of the chapters tracking the creation of the programs.

In her thorough examination of a purposefully erased chapter of housing policy, Taylor achieves a compelling history for both specialists and the general-interest reader. The concept of predatory inclusion, perhaps Taylor’s most important contribution, offers an important framework for critiques of housing under capitalism. Taylor provides a necessary rejoinder to the dominant focus on expanding the market as a remedy for historical exclusion. Although the enduring legacy of redlining is undoubtedly critical to understanding the landscape of segregation in the United States, any reading list with Color of the Law should also feature Race for Profit, which suggests a more revolutionary rethinking of our contemporary relationship to housing. If racial exploitation is embedded in capitalism, housing justice cannot be realized through homeownership. Rather than focusing on the even extension of corrupt structures, we must envision a future that divorces property ownership from a full realization of citizenship.

Purchase Race for Profit here.

Find past volumes of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.


Veronica Brown is a second-year student in the Master’s of City and Regional Planning program. She received her undergraduate degree from Smith College, where she studied the psychology of contemporary visual culture. Before coming to UNC, Veronica worked in communications at the Whitney Museum of American Art.

Featured Image courtesy of Goodreads

CPJ Recommended Book: Soft City

Sim provides a vision of an alternative urban future, where density and diversity in urban form strengthen our relationships and create a flexible city that is both efficient and enjoyable to inhabit.

Amy Sechrist, Soft City Book Review

We are pleased to announce that David Sim’s Soft City has been selected as our “recommended book” from the 45th edition of the Carolina Planning Journal. While there were many contenders, a poll of the UNC Department of City and Regional Planning identified Soft City as the book people are most excited to check out. Read Amy Sechrist’s review of the work here: http://carolinaplanning.unc.edu/2020-book-reviews/soft-city-book-review/

Featured image credit: Gehl People

Now Available Online – Volume 44 of the Carolina Planning Journal

Volume 44 of the Carolina Planning Journal is now available for free on the Carolina Planning Journal webpage. Just scroll to the bottom and click on the link!

The theme of Volume 44, Changing Ways, Making Change, was inspired by the planner’s enduring yet evolving relationship with change. Our field is inherently intertwined with change: how can we best adapt to and manage inevitable change, prevent detrimental change, and create positive change in our communities?

Here’s a sneak preview of what this edition has in store:

  • Patricia AmendErika Brandt, MCRP ’17, Leigh Anne King, AICP, LEED AP, Cheryl PlourdeCharlotte R. Stewart, and Emila Sutton provide an overview of affordable housing tools and program to address both supply- and demand-side housing needs in North Carolina.
  • Rebecca E. Kemper shares a compelling case study of artist residencies shifting from “placemakers” to “placekeepers” to counter displacement pressures in creative districts.   
  • Mia Candy, MCRP ’16 encourages us to look beyond US borders for gender mainstreaming interventions that better meet the needs of women, making cities more accessible, convenient, and affordable for all. 
  • Michelle E. Nance, AICP and Emily Scott-Cruz present a deep dive of women and transit, culminating in a robust list of recommendations for policymakers and planners.
  • Seth LaJeunesse, MCRP ’10 challenges us to rethink our current transportation safety narrative by proffering a new Safe Systems paradigm.
  • A timely commentary on the introduction of electric scooters in Indianapolis by Daniel Hedglin, MCRP ’14, is sure to resonate with many municipalities navigating policy creation fitting to a new and unexpected mode of transport.
  • In light of continually record-breaking hurricane seasons, Samantha Porter, MPA and Lindsay Oluyede, AICP propose a novel application of social media and ride-hailing for equitable evacuation that better serves vulnerable populations.

Check out the rest in the full volume available here.

CPJ’s Favorite Planning Books of 2019

In a 2019 review of Samuel Stein’s Capital City for The New Yorker, Nikil Saval writes, “The planner, after decades of irrelevance, or worse, might yet be a figure of note—and perhaps, in a time of crisis, one of purpose.” In recent years, the publishing industry has readily taken note of the field, and a host of new books offer diverse perspectives on a wide swath of planning topics. Below, the Carolina Planning Journal editorial board highlights the best planning books we read in 2019. 

Black Food Geographies: Race, Self-Reliance, and Food Access in Washington, D.C. (2019)

Ashanté Reese

Black Food Geographies isn’t the kind of book you’ll find on the syllabus of a typical planning course (Reese is an anthropologist), but it’s a must-read for anyone interested in environmental justice, public health, and urban food issues. Using ethnography, Reese examines the forces that shape food access and the relationship between urban food distribution and systemic racism in a black neighborhood in D.C. The value (and joy) of the book is that it challenges stereotypes of these neighborhoods as disadvantaged or lacking (she takes real issue with the term “food desert”), focusing instead on stories of self-reliance, resistance, and black agency. 

—Leah Campbell 

The Broken Earth Trilogy (2015-2017)

N. K. Jemisin

By far the most tangentially related to planning book here, The Broken Earth trilogy is a triple Hugo winning science fiction series about a world where natural disasters are a constant occurrence. Most towns are built to be broken and rebuilt every time one of these disasters hits, with caches for when water and food become scarce when one of these disasters inevitably lasts for several years. These Fifth Seasons (also the name of the first book) can erase entire civilizations, and the culture and architecture that evolved in this world is explored in depth. Beyond the planning aspect, it’s a perfect example of what the best science fiction can be: fully realized characters in another world that give us insight into our own. I don’t believe in spoilers, so I refuse to say more besides read it before it becomes a disappointing prestige TV show. 

—Jacob Becker

New York’s New Edge: Contemporary Art, the High Line, and Urban Megaprojects on the Far West Side (2016)

David Halle and Elisabeth Tiso 

This book offers a retrospective analysis of three interwoven transformations to New York City’s urban landscape that occurred under Mayor Michael Bloomberg: the rise of Chelsea as a world-class arts district, the creation of the much-publicized High Line, and the epic development of the Hudson Yards. Halle and Tiso—a sociologist and art historian, respectively—masterfully illustrate how these historical developments have altered the trajectory of New York’s urban and cultural development. This book will prove a worthy read to anyone interested in uncovering the inner-workings of urban development in New York. 

—Brandon Tubby

Policing the Open Road: How Cars Transformed American Freedom (2019)

Sarah Seo

In Policing the Open Road, legal historian Sarah Seo demonstrates how the automobile led to the creation of professionalized police forces and obfuscated traditional legal concepts of public and private. Recasting the car as a key site of state surveillance rather than a vehicle for personal liberation, Seo’s meticulously researched book makes a convincing case for the central role of the car in contemporary policing and jurisprudence.

—Veronica Brown

Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Explain Everything About the World (2015)

Tim Marshall

The book has ten chapters with ten distinct regions. Marshall explains each area related to its spatial components and how they strongly influence the politics in that area. His writing gives an excellent overview of political conflicts between adjacent countries. 

—Jo Kwon

Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity (2019)

Charles Marohn Jr. 

The Strong Towns organization has been a regular voice in the urban planning world for years through its website and media presence. However, the Strong Towns book is the first attempt to synthesize and condense all of the ideas into one source. In the book, Marohn outlines the failings of the current North American development pattern—namely, how our sprawled, auto-centric, infrastructure-heavy cities are unable to support themselves financially. The problems addressed in the book are both grim and substantial, yet the proposed solutions manage to be both hopeful and actionable. Additionally, for a book largely on municipal finance, the concepts are easily digestible. At just over 200 pages, this is a quick and worthwhile read for anyone who cares about the long-term stability of our cities! 

—Luke Lowry

The Yellow House (2019)

Sarah Broom

Sarah Broom’s first book is a captivating memoir detailing her family’s history in New Orleans East and beyond. Her writing deftly navigates between storytelling and broader social and political critiques, leveraging her family’s generations in New Orleans to paint a remarkably detailed picture of the ability of place to influence people’s life trajectories and vice versa. Though hardly a planning textbook, The Yellow House explores issues of transportation, zoning, community, race, political priorities, gentrification, tourism, and natural disasters, among others, from a profoundly personal perspective. It’s not only a captivating read, but a compelling reminder of the individuals who must be the ultimate focus of planning and public policy.

—Will Curran-Groome

You & a Bike & a Road (2017)

Eleanor Davis

A graphic novel travelogue about a cross-country bike trip, You & a Bike & a Road captures the pain and beauty of traveling long distance in America on roads that aren’t always built for the chosen mode. The illustrations and story are perfect together, both loose, fleeting, but still memorable and meaningful. Davis captures minor observations that fly by too quickly to notice when driving and emphasize the unique beauty of traveling on two wheels.

—Doug Bright

« Older posts