New York City’s appalling “poor door” fiasco
HENRY GRABAR
The condominiums of Riverside South, a dull glass comb along the Hudson River in Manhattan, have hardly made an interesting contribution to New York’s architectural profile. But the development has made an impact on the global lexicon, thanks to a new building’s two entrances: one for buyers of market-rate apartments and one for tenants of subsidized units.
By now you’ve surely heard about Extell Development’s “poor door,” approved last week for 40 Riverside Drive, talk of which has reverberated unfavorably from Park Slope to Paris. It’s easy to see why the concept hits that rare sweet spot for viral architecture. The poor door opens on the tensions of the times — the housing shortage, the divergence of the rich and poor, the sense of threadbare social fabric.
It’s not an isolated case. New York has a number of mixed-income developments where facilities like pools and gyms are restricted to residents who have paid the full price. London, which has adopted a similar strategy for creating affordable housing, also has a raft of poor doors. “Even bicycle storage spaces, rubbish disposal facilities and postal deliveries are being separated,” the Guardian reports.
A perfect metaphor for our times? Perhaps. But more important, an illustration of how a common, progressive affordable housing strategy is ill suited to a city’s needs.
http://www.salon.com/2014/08/03/new_york_citys_appalling_poor_door_fiasco/
= new reply since forum marked as read
