New York City has given one developer the green light to create a controversial separate entrance for lower-income residents at luxury Upper West Side condo.
The New York Post reported on Sunday that New York City has approved developer Extell’s proposed design for what has been deemed as the “poor door.”
The design would mean affordable-housing tenants would have a completely separate entrance to the new condos than the tenants who are paying market rate.
The luxury condos will be built on 40 Riverside Drive and have 55 units available for low-income tenants.
According to the New York Post, these units will be located on the first six floors and will be priced under $1,100 a month for a studio, one- bedroom or two-bedroom floor plan.
The other 219 units will be priced at more than $1,000 per square foot of the unit, and will provide tenants with views of the Hudson River.
New Yorkers have already slammed the separated units and the separate entrance as distasteful and classist.
Other “poor doors” have been popping up around the city as well.
Other buildings offer lavish amenities for higher-income tenants, while middle- or low-income residents are not offered the same luxuries.
Unfortunately, issues with affordable housing in New York go beyond a few “poor doors” and selecting which tenants get to enjoy what amenities.
Just like many other buildings in New York, Extell’s new condominiums will be a part of the city’s “inclusionary zoning” strategy.
This strategy may have good intentions, but political experts believe the approach is all wrong.
The strategy was intended to provide more affordable housing options for low-income families, but it does so by giving developers more floor area and large tax breaks in exchange for building on- or off-site affordable housing.
According to Josh Barro, Business Insider’s former politics editor, this has led to major revenue losses for the city and missed opportunities to really solve the issue of affordable housing.
The city has reportedly lost roughly $2.9 billion in revenue by adopting the “inclusionary zoning” strategy, and Barro believes that money could have been spent to simply build more affordable housing options.