http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/arch...-poor-20140828

Published August 28, 2014

Uproar over NY condo with entrances for rich and poor

Project combines condos with luxury facilities and affordable rental units that can't share the perks


[NEW YORK] A 33-storey glassy tower rising on Manhattan's waterfront will offer all the extras that a condo buyer paying up to US$25 million would expect, like concierge service, entertainment rooms, and unobstructed views of the Hudson River and miles beyond.

The project will also cater to renters who make no more than about US$50,000. They will not share the same perks, and they will also not share the same entrance.

The so-called poor door has brought an outcry, with numerous officials now demanding an end to the strategy. But the question of how to best incorporate affordable units into projects built for the rich has become more relevant than ever as Mayor Bill de Blasio seeks the construction of 80,000 new affordable units over the next 10 years.

The answer is not a simple one. As public housing becomes a crumbling relic of another era, American cities have grown more reliant on private industry to build housing for the poor and working class. Developers say they can maximise their revenues, and thus build more affordable units, by separating them from their luxury counterparts.

Even advocates of affordable housing are divided on the issue; some argue that developers who segregate apartments should not benefit from government incentives, while others say the focus should be on building more homes, rather than where to enter them.

"There are trade-offs," said Lisa Sturtevant, vice-president for research at the National Housing Conference, an affordable housing advocacy group in Washington. "It's really important that there's no discrimination, but there's a balance between what we can do and should do."

Administration officials attribute the two-door setup to changes to the zoning code in 2009 that Mr de Blasio voted for as a member of the City Council. He has said that the revisions, which allowed builders to put the affordable apartments in an attached segment of the building, were meant to increase housing units and that "it was not evident at the time the nuances of where the doors would be".

Developers say the configuration of one building with an attached affordable segment works better when the market-rate units are for sale, as in the case of condos. If that is the choice, the developer is required to provide two separate entrances under the current rules of the programme.

But Alicia Glen, the deputy mayor for housing and economic development, said that separate front doors were not in keeping with the administration's principles of equality, and that the city was working to change the rules to prohibit them. "Walking into a building should not be any different based on income status," Ms Glen said.

From the street, the luxury condominium tower in the middle of the debate, at 40 Riverside Boulevard, and its six-floor affordable segment seem to blend seamlessly and appear as one structure. But the lower-income renters, who will pay US$850 a month for one-bedroom apartments and US$1,100 for two bedrooms, according to the developer, will go through a door facing 62nd Street while the condo owners will come in through a door facing the Hudson.

New York and other cities use a variety of tax breaks, subsidies and additional incentives to encourage developers to build affordable housing. In the case of 40 Riverside, the developer, Extell Development Co, is using a programme called inclusionary housing, which allows it to build more square feet than the zoning code would otherwise allow in exchange for a certain number of lower-rent apartments. Those additional square feet can be used at 40 Riverside, but Extell plans to transfer them to another project, which the law allows.

The affordable units do not have to be in the same location, as long as they are within the same community district or, if in another district, no farther than half a mile away.

Gary Barnett, who is Extell's founder and president, said that having the affordable apartments incorporated into the condominium tower would have meant "giving away" the most valuable units. "We wouldn't be able to do affordable," he said. "It wouldn't make any financial sense."

New York has always been an economically diverse city, with everyday people rubbing shoulders with millionaires and Bohemian artists on the streets. But the poor-doors image taps into the anxiety of many New Yorkers that the city is becoming liveable only for the wealthy.

At the Edge Community Apartments, the affordable housing building that abuts the Edge, a glass condo tower on the Brooklyn waterfront in Williamsburg, renters also have their own entrance, just a few doors from that of the condos. Only one entrance offers a doorman, concierge and valet, but some renters said what they resented was not being able to use some of the condo tower's amenities.

"We can't even use the pool or the gym," said one renter, a 34-year-old bank employee who wanted to remain anonymous for fear of jeopardising her one-bedroom rental. "I've asked and offered to pay. It's kind of messed up."

But she and other tenants said they considered themselves lucky to have landed an apartment in the area, where everyone, rich or poor, steps out to views of the East River and Manhattan skyline and the cool energy of Williamsburg.

"Living here is a privilege," said Victoriano Oviedo, 59, a retiree who has a studio subsidised with a federal rental voucher. "Over there you have powerful people. Over here you have low-income people. I'm fine with that."

Aside from square-footage bonuses, residential developments like 40 Riverside can take advantage of affordable housing tax breaks, which some advocates argue should not be available for projects that do not fully integrate the affordable units.

"If you do choose to live in segregated developments, don't use my tax dollars to support that," said Moses Gates, director of planning and community development for the Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development.

But the repugnance is not universal. Among the roughly 500 cities with inclusionary zoning programmes, housing supporters have been mostly focused on having the affordable units built close to the their market-rate counterparts so that low-income households share some of the benefits of wealthier neighbourhoods, like good schools and public safety.

"It's so important to build as much affordable housing as possible and you always have to compromise," said Carol Lamberg, co-chairwoman of the New York Housing Conference, an affordable housing coalition. "I just think the need is so great, you don't need a fancy lobby."

The controversy over separate entrances may pit Mr de Blasio's social justice values against his need for private development, but the inclusionary programme that caused it is voluntary and accounts for only a fraction of new affordable units that are built. Since 2005, city officials said, it has generated about 5,000 affordable units.

Administration officials are preparing to start a mandatory version of the programme, to force developers of large buildings to take the deal if they want to build at all, with its own rules about how to incorporate affordable units. The administration is seeking to eliminate the use of separate entrances in both the mandatory and voluntary programmes.

"Years ago, people would be upset and say 'that's politics', but now people feel more empowered to change this," said Linda Rosenthal, a state assemblywoman whose district includes 40 Riverside Boulevard.

"It's such a visual separation," Ms Rosenthal said. "It gets at people when they see two separate doors. It's no longer theoretical. It looks and smells like discrimination." - NYT