76 77
ut the separation of residents of the same publicly subsidized deal—that revealed the contradictions of a society that continues to assert that its members are created equal. The separate doors were too similar an image to the “separate but equal” policies that segregated the public spaces of black and white Americans for many decades after the end of the Civil War. Residents without the resources to “choose” to live in One Riverside Place, if they fall within precise income eligibility criteria, can submit an application to a city-run lottery. 34 Over 88,000 households did so, and 55 were accepted. 35 That is 1 in 1,600. What originated in a policy of invisibility—hiding both the cost to the public sector and the stigma of low-income housing—imploded when these issues were suddenly visible in the form of two doors. In June of 2015, the zoning policy that allowed for the poor doors was rescinded. 36 The policy debate, of course, is less about the look of housing, and much more about the underlying socioeconomic calculations. Those in favor of place-based arguments might say: This segregation-by-building is compensated for by the fact that the residents will enjoy the benefits of the Upper West Side—high-quality public schools, parks, employment, transit, and retail—all of which are the hallmarks of an inclusive society of equal opportunities. 37 Others will argue that the taxes collected on these units, had they been sold at market-rate, could have generated twice as many apartments in parts of the city with lower land prices, or alternately, through cash transfers that give recipients choices on the open market. 38 A further argument pits maximizing the number of units produced against better design, or more colloquially, “beauty” against “cost,” 39 —the old argument advanced when stripping down basic features and quality of construction in low-income housing, which returns the discussion back to a building’s “look” on the basis of its cost, or, inversely, cost on the basis of its look [See HH: 1946, 1960, 1982]. The debate about the role of David Adjaye’s non-standard exterior design in securing philanthropic funding for Broadway Housing Communities’ supportive and low-income New York housing project Sugar Hill is a case in point. 40 As a profession, architecture provides a service. 41 Whether the project in question is the HOPE VI-funded Roosevelt Square in Chicago, the 421a-tax-abatement facilitated One Riverside Park in New York, or the philanthropically enabled Sugar Hill in Harlem: architecture serves the interests of those who pay the fees. Therefore, for an architect who objects to the inequalities built into the profit-driven system that enabled all of the above-mentioned projects, the only unambiguous action available is to turn down those commissions. The movement within the profession to refuse to design prisons due to the violence of the incarceration system represents one instance of such an objection. 42 The increasingly common provocation that an architect can “subvert” the client’s brief, or creatively maneuver loopholes to create public benefit, can by definition only go so far. The same is true of the belief that architectural strategies that reduce construction cost will increase affordability. Minimizing size through efficient floor plans, or rationalizing construction through industrialization—ideas recently advanced in the “Making Room” initiative—are traditional strategies in this vein [See HH: 1918, 1946]. These efforts can, of course, reduce construction cost, but they will not lead to increased affordability if they are not also accompanied by a will to reduce the price (and hence profit) at which the product is offered. Participating in one of the many organizations advocating pro-bono work or socially relevant architecture is another option for socially oriented designers, but one that has also its limits. Initiatives devoted to this 78 79
- Page 1 and 2: In 2013, in the United States, the
- Page 3 and 4: The Temple Hoyne Buell Center for t
- Page 5 and 6: Preface The Art of Inequality: Arch
- Page 7 and 8: Introduction What is inequality? Or
- Page 9 and 10: to tangible evidence drawn from rea
- Page 11 and 12: 1.1 Defining Inequality Jacob Moore
- Page 13 and 14: ership rate, this became especially
- Page 15 and 16: 26 27
- Page 17 and 18: 1.1.4 Race in Place Since the late
- Page 19 and 20: American Apartheid (Cambridge, MA:
- Page 21 and 22: 38 39
- Page 23 and 24: Perhaps predictably, the practices
- Page 25 and 26: According to the CEA’s narrative,
- Page 27 and 28: 50 51
- Page 29 and 30: additional direct provision of aid
- Page 31 and 32: 22. U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical
- Page 33 and 34: 62 63
- Page 35 and 36: and renovated instead of demolished
- Page 37 and 38: Residents displaced by the redevelo
- Page 39: 74 75
- Page 43 and 44: 1. This was encouraged among other
- Page 45 and 46: 86 87
- Page 47 and 48: Part 2 Architecture 90 91
- Page 49 and 50: ity is challenged as a matter of mo
- Page 51 and 52: further downtown, on which stands t
- Page 53 and 54: lower end, then, the annual housing
- Page 55 and 56: of income or consumption expenditur
- Page 57 and 58: 10 ft 20 ft Lorcan O’Herlihy Arch
- Page 59 and 60: 10 ft 20 ft Broadmoor Development C
- Page 61 and 62: sanitation, maintenance, medical, e
- Page 63 and 64: 10 ft 20 ft Classic Homes, Windsor,
- Page 65 and 66: 10 ft 20 ft Dattner Associates and
- Page 67 and 68: 38. “Aksarben Village,” Robert
- Page 69 and 70: 3.1 Contracts 3.1.1 Private propert
- Page 71 and 72: 3.1.4 the will theory of contract:
- Page 73 and 74: sonal liability, generating a compl
- Page 75 and 76: so as not to include ‘peculiar ad
- Page 77 and 78: avoid conflicts buy access lawfully
- Page 79 and 80: Phase II-Expansion Rents Rise Rapid
- Page 81 and 82: 3.2.4 lative frenzies drive up asse
- Page 83 and 84: 3.2.5 Real Estate Finance & Investm
- Page 85 and 86: 3.3 Schools developments in the fie
- Page 87 and 88: 1964 1967 1970s ject field (with
- Page 89 and 90: 1996 Stephen E. Roulac, Roulac Glob
- Page 91 and 92:
25. James A. Graaskamp, “Redefini
- Page 93 and 94:
3.4.2 600 Harrison Avenue, Boston,
- Page 95 and 96:
3.4.4 TerraSol, Salt Lake City, UT
- Page 97 and 98:
1. In the foreword to a publication
- Page 99 and 100:
dictionary of real estate terms glo
- Page 101 and 102:
dictionary of real estate terms glo
- Page 103 and 104:
dictionary of real estate terms glo
- Page 105 and 106:
dictionary of real estate terms glo
- Page 107 and 108:
dictionary of real estate terms glo
- Page 109 and 110:
Appendix 214 215
- Page 111 and 112:
Botein, Hilary. “New York State H
- Page 113 and 114:
Glaeser, Edward. “There are Worse
- Page 115 and 116:
Kopczuk, Wojciech, Emmanuel Saez, a
- Page 117 and 118:
Renner, Andrea. Housing Diplomacy:
- Page 119 and 120:
Weiss, Marc A. “Researching the H
- Page 121 and 122:
1939 1937 1934 1933 1932 FHA DENIES