Fresh Eyes on the Street?

untappedcities.com/2013/09/04/new-york-city-housing-authority-will-lease-out-open-space-in-public-housing-to-developers/

Hello Everyone:

I've noticed two things lately, first we're only 175 page views away from 3000 and second, I've been experiencing an embarrassment of riches in terms of what to write about.  On the former, we're getting closer so let's keep it up, latter, I'm trying to keep up with all the material I have, so please bear with me.  On that note, let's go to today's topic, the latest move by the New York City Housing Authority.

Queensbridge Housing Projects
en.wikipedia.org

On September 4, 2013, Michelle Young of Untapped Cities reported how the New York City Housing Authority plans to to lease out open space in public housing projects for revenue generating purposes.  The concept is to make use of the underutilized and un-programmed spaces that remain in these projects.  Public housing projects are a manifestation of architect and planner Le Corbusier's theory of "Towers in the Park."  This idea guided the design and planning of housing projects during the mid-twentieth century.  They were envisioned as a Utopian solution to the tenements in industrialized of the period.  However, they failed to live up to their promised, themselves becoming euphemisms for dirty and cramped housing.  Jane Jacobs campaigned against them because of their tendency to create super blocks.  Without enough "eyes on the street" and local businesses, anything resembling self-policing by the residents could not provide a sense of safety.  Like today, the open spaces in the housing projects are essentially blank canvases.  They're seldom used and remain this through today.  However, there are places, such as Queensbridge Housing Projects in Queens that have made an effort to change this situation while provide a source of income for the residents.

Alfred E. Smith Housing Project
en.wikipedia.org

At the opposite end of the spectrum is the Alfred E. Smith Houses, part of NYCHA's plan to lease out similar spaces in eight Manhattan housing projects to real estate developers.  This begs the question, what does this mean?  In a recent issue of Next City's online newsletter (http://www.nextcity.org), the "Forefront" took a look at the implications of the plan.  The plan was announced in February 2013 and is anticipated to generate $32 million in much needed revenue as the NYCHA is facing a $40 million yearly deficit amidst reducing government support over the last ten years.  Developers would be required to set aside 20% of the units for affordable housing, however, the inclusion of market rate housing would signal a reversal of the fifties-era government policy that effectively separated middle and low income families in public housing.  Prior to enactment of this policy, the NYCHA and New York City had been the only places in the United States where the projects were not segregated by income.

In his article "Where No One Thought Gentrification Would Go," journalist Ben Adler set to examine the consequences of development in an effort to understand what it meant for affordable housing.  According to Mr. Adler, "these new high rises would thus block-or, some might say, steal-the views of some current residents."  Many of the currents of Alfred E. Smith are solidly middle class, adds Mr Adler.  He further writes, "given the city's astronomical market-rate rents, many civil servants and blue collar workers are happy to live here. "  Even more so, new housing construction is no guarantee of ground-level retail or commercial space, which would activate the streetscape.  The Community Service Society contends, "Retail  and commercial facilities are virtually excluded from  consideration (except at one development) because they would require zoning variances and increased scrutiny by community leaders under the Urban Land Use and Review Process (ULURP)."

Needless to say, the residents are quite upset by more than the prospect of a lengthy future construction project in their backyards.  Mr. Adler writes, "The plan has become a symbol for something larger.  The way New York, especially under Bloomberg seems to be inhospitable to anyone but the wealthy."  Thus the title of the article, "Where No One Thought Gentrification Would Go."  In the meantime, over the architecture world, a Parsons architecture studio was given the job of carefully imagining new uses for the untapped development rights within the Alfred E. Smith houses.  The studio posed the following questions: "How do you occupy this ground without compromising it?  How do you inhabit a village without disrupting it, altering un urban environment without simply creating defensive architecture?"  The studio's concepts tried to dispel the common notion of housing developments which Jane Jacobs labeled, "self-isolating projects," according to Untapped Cities contributor Julia Vitulio-Martin in her "Forefront" article.  Ms. Vitulio-Martin adds, "It's an accurate term for the relationship between many NYCHA projects and their neighborhoods.

We have to ask, if architecture, which created this urban typology can conceptually reverse itself, is it possible for governments and developers to do the same?  For the time being, the projects targeted for development are resisting the plan.

Like me on Facebook http://www.facebok.com/lenorelowen
Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/glamavon or on Pinterest http://www.pinterest.com/glamtroy
Google + and now on Instagram