A Critical Analysis of the Racial Equity Report in Gowanus, Brooklyn
August 2021 - March 2022
Research Overview
The Gowanus Neighborhood Plan (GNP), an 82-block redevelopment project that has spanned over a decade, was finally approved by the City Planning Commission in spring of 2021 and the City Council in late November 2021. The plan proposes increased residential, industrial, and commercial development for the region. The Gowanus Neighborhood Plan is the result of over a decade of studies, plans, and community engagement.
In July 2021, the Office of the Public Advocate passed a new law, Intro 1572-2019-B, which requires Racial Equity Reports for land use changes as part of the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP). As described on the NYC Public Advocate’s website, this law now requires “citywide equitable development data tools, which would be used to study and assess the potential racial and ethnic impact of most proposed rezonings on the neighborhood in question.”
The Gowanus Neighborhood Plan is the first rezoning project to have its own Racial Equity Report under this new law. As the first report of its kind, it presents a unique opportunity for critical analysis.
Through quantitative and spatial analyses, the Gowanus Racial Equity Report contextualizes Gowanus as a white and wealthy neighborhood that will benefit from redevelopment, because, as it claims, the rezoning will increase racial diversity in the area.
To understand the Gowanus Racial Equity Report’s claims, I counter-analyze Gowanus demographic data using the 2020 Census. I select three different boundaries for Gowanus in my analyses: Community District Tabulation Area, Neighborhood Tabulation Area, and selected Census tracts. How does changing the boundaries of Gowanus yield different demographic contexts for the rezoning?
Project
How does changing the boundaries of Gowanus yield different demographic contexts for the rezoning?
Three Boundaries of Gowanus
To investigate the boundaries used in the Racial Equity Report, I selected three alternative boundaries for Gowanus: Community District Tabulation Area (Community Board), Neighborhood Tabulation Area, and hand-selected census tracts that match with the Google maps definition of Gowanus. Paying attention to the placement of Gowanus Canal within these boundaries helps differentiate their sizes and shapes.
The Community Board level is the largest geographic size, including Park Slope, Red Hook, Gowanus, Carroll Gardens, and Cobble Hill. Moving forward, I use Community District Tabulation Area and Community Board interchangeably, as well as describe this boundary and larger ones as “Greater Gowanus.”
The Neighborhood Tabulation Area is slightly smaller and includes Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Carroll Gardens, and Gowanus (excluding Park Slope).
The smallest boundary is a hand-selection of 2020 census tracts that align with Google maps and common understandings of Gowanus: Census Tracts 77, 75, 71, 127, 119, 121, and 117. I sometimes refer to this boundary as “Gowanus proper.”
Community Board 6
Neighborhood Tabulation Area
Selected Census Tracts
Context
In many of their analyses, the Racial Equity Report uses a large territory of Northwest Brooklyn, combining Community Board 2 and Community Board 6. However, Gowanus itself is relatively small and entirely located within the bounds of Community Board 6. The rezoning territory does overlap with Community Board 2, but only for half of a block. While combining the two community boards yields a lower margin of error in quantitative analyses, as reasoned in the report, it dilutes the central affected population of Gowanus with neighboring areas. In this way, the selected boundaries play an important role in shaping the demographic context of the Racial Equity Report.
While the new law enforcing the creation of a Racial Equity Report for land use changes has good intentions, quantitative data can be manipulated and are not inherently objective facts. I want to open a conversation about the objectivity of quantitative data by analyzing demographic data in Gowanus within three alternative boundaries.
Results
To begin our understanding of Gowanus as described in these three boundaries, I present total population and aggregated demographic data from 2020. If the three boundaries were representative of the population in Gowanus, the percentages of each demographic would be roughly the same.
However, we see large discrepancies. For instance, the Community Board is 59.8% white, while the selected census tracts of Gowanus are 51% white. That’s almost a 9% difference. In addition, the percent of people of color is a full 10% different from the census tract level to that of the community district.
A larger boundary inflates whiteness…
…and erases people of color.
Community Board 6
Selected Census Tracts
As is noticeable from the Community Board map, many census tracts of the neighborhood Park Slope are over 70% white.
When we narrow the boundary to the Neighborhood Tabulation Area, the Park Slope region is no longer included and Gowanus is less white.
At the selected tract level, we see a more granular view of whiteness in Gowanus.
Historical mass displacement
Over time, people of color have been pushed out of this neighborhood, including a striking 18% of the Hispanic/Latino population in a 20 year time period. In 2000, there were over 10 census tracts with more than 40% Hispanic/Latino people. In 2020, only two Census tracts have over 40%. This is a sign of displacement and indicates that Greater Gowanus was primarily Hispanic/Latino in 2000.
By using larger boundaries that lump in neighboring communities, Gowanus becomes more white. When looking at a smaller boundary, Gowanus is 51% white. By claiming that is a white space, the other 49% of the population is erased.
In this way and paired with historical patterns of displacement, rezoning can have devastating effects on communities of color.
Key Takeaways
The boundaries within which data are analyzed significantly impact the demographic and economic profile produced.
The recent implementation of the Racial Equity Report through new legislation has good intentions, but it does not guarantee equitable data
It is incumbent upon authors of future reports to expand their research approach to include direct engagement and co-research with local residents.
Quantitative data are not objective facts and can be manipulated to support a particular narrative or achieve a particular result.
In future racial equity reports, it is vital to incorporate:
increased accessibility to the report
transparency about who authors racial equity reports and who selects those authors
a well-rounded data collection and analysis methodology, which centers the voices of local residents.
“All these things like the EIS [Environmental Impact Study] and then the Racial Equity Report… they’re really designed for the decision makers, they’re not designed for the people. So it’s still representative democracy where they assume that all they need to do is put it into language that the staffers of these electeds need to understand.”
Discussion
My counter-analysis of the Gowanus Racial Equity Report’s demographic data demonstrates that Gowanus is not nearly as white as the Racial Equity Report claims. The Racial Equity Report inflates white residents and erases residents of color in their demographic depiction of Gowanus. By using larger boundaries that lump in neighboring communities, Gowanus is painted as more white than it really is. In actuality, Gowanus itself is 51% white and by claiming it as a white community, the other 49% of the population is actively erased. Unfortunately, even the media has bought in to this pervasive narrative of Gowanus as a white community, as can be seen in recent publications from the New York Times and City Limits op-eds by City Council Member and rezoning proponent, Brad Lander.
Looking at longitudinal data, I discovered the alarming mass displacement of Hispanic/Latino people from Greater Gowanus. I believe this is a result of the 4th Avenue Park Slope rezoning in the early 2000s and should serve as a red flag for upcoming rezonings in the area.
While the implementation of required Racial Equity Reports through Intro 1572-2019-B legislation has good intentions, and surely can be utilized to analyze the effects of land use change applications in New York City, Racial Equity Reports are not objective facts and can be manipulated to tell a specific story. As you can see through my analysis, the Racial Equity Report curates Gowanus as a white and wealthy community that will benefit from redevelopment, because it will create more diversity. This framing overlooks the existing people of color that live in Gowanus, and in fact, erases their existence through inflating the percentage of white people in the area.
Neighborhood Tabulation Area