ARCHITECTURE

Residents displaced by the redevelopment received vouchers
to rent from private landlords elsewhere, and those
who wished to return were asked to reapply.
As an example of how development and design
ambitions worked together, the redevelopment goal of the
ABLA Homes into Roosevelt Square on Chicago’s Near-
West Side was to create roughly 2,400 units on the 100-
acre, 35-block area in five phases. Three- and six-family
buildings were selected in reference to earlier Chicago
building types, working in accordance with New Urbanist
principles that emphasize the public realm of the street.
As one of many architectural firms involved in the project
writes: “Vintage architectural elements found in typical
Chicago neighborhoods bring a historical flavor to this
new community.” 19
Critiques of the role of New Urbanism in HOPE
VI, many focusing on Chicago, have been multiple from
its inception. Some contend its spatial determinism is no
different than that of the modern movement. 20 Others decry
its conjuring of an idea of “community” based not on
people, but on place. 21 Still others highlight its indifference
to the most vulnerable populations, populations that
public housing was aimed at helping: since the housing
vouchers provided are subject to budgetary curtailment,
permanent, deeply-subsidized housing has undergone an
overall net-reduction. 22 Evaluations of completed redevelopment
projects consistently point out that the emphasis
on the physical aspects of new development has been to
the detriment of its social aspects, ignoring, among other
things, the lasting influence of race upon the interaction
of new residents while focusing exclusively on income
[See 1.1.4, 1.2.3]. 23 Another study has analyzed the central
role of design, in particular the role of an “architecturally
appealing and marketable product,” in securing private
funding, as well as in obscuring the true cost borne by the
public sector. 24 Finally, the effects on the social mobility of
low-income residents in this new mixed-income housing
have been shown to be minimal, if existent at all. 25 The architecture—in
this case, the form-based, aesthetic codes
of New Urbanism—did not create inequality, but it did enable
and was instrumental in facilitating acceptance of a
new real estate model.
While HOPE VI was an effort to recast public
housing specifically, two of its main tenets have become
commonly accepted for all affordable housing development.
First, the private sector—whether nonprofit or
for-profit—has become the only acceptable lead actor in the
field of affordable housing development. Second, affordable
housing is not built to look “affordable” per se, but
integrated with and indistinguishable from market-rate
housing. Public housing is only mentioned if absolutely
necessary, and is today generally subsumed under
the more broadly acceptable term “affordable.” These
policies are based on a dual premise: that the stigma of
low-income housing should be removed through design,
and that low- or moderate-income households would
benefit culturally and economically from the proximity
of residents from higher economic strata. This design
and development policy of invisibility is connected to a
political strategy of invisibility: the subsidy necessary to
make new housing affordable to certain income groups—
whose income will never allow rents or mortgage payments
high enough to pay for its construction—is hidden,
and thus less open to political attack, by transferring it
from households and budgets to tax credits or property
tax abatements [See HH: 1986].
In many cities, two main strategies help to generate
affordable housing by saddling onto market-rate development:
density bonuses, which allow a developer to
build more than zoning normally permits if the development
includes affordable housing; and inclusionary zoning,
which requires the inclusion of a certain percentage
70 71