It would be difficult to come with a more on-the-nose metaphor for New York City's income inequality problem than the new high-rise apartment building coming to 40 Riverside Boulevard, which will feature separate doors for regular, wealthy humans and whatever you call the scum that rents affordable housing.
Extell Development Company, the firm behind the new building, announced its intentions to segregate the rich and poor to much outrage last year. Fifty-five of the luxury complex's 219 units would be marked for low-income renters—netting some valuable tax breaks for Extell—with the caveat that the less fortunate tenants would stick to their own entrance.
The city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development approved Extell's Inclusionary Housing Program application for the 33-story tower this week, the New York Post reports. The status grants Extell the aforementioned tax breaks and the right to construct a larger building than would ordinarily be allowed. According to the Daily Mail, affordable housing tenants will enter through a door situated on a "back alley."
Any of the unwashed folk who complain about such a convenient arrangement, of course, are just being ungrateful. As the Mail points out, fellow poor-door developer David Von Spreckelsen explained as much last year:
"No one ever said that the goal was full integration of these populations," said David Von Spreckelsen, senior vice president at Toll Brothers. "So now you have politicians talking about that, saying how horrible those back doors are. I think it's unfair to expect very high-income homeowners who paid a fortune to live in their building to have to be in the same boat as low-income renters, who are very fortunate to live in a new building in a great neighborhood."
In these economically fraught times, it's easy to forget that the super rich earned their right to never see you, hear you, smell you, or consider your pitiful existence. Expecting them to share an entrance would be unfair.
24-Hour Doorman and Concierge Residents' Lounge Screening Room Entertainment Room with Catering Kitchen Billiards and Game Room Indoor Playground by Kidville Landscaped Garden Courtyard Riverside South Shuttle Service On-Site Parking Garage 75' Swimming Pool and Hot Tub Rock Climbing Wall Basketball Court Squash Court Yoga, Pilates, Personal Training and Kinesis Rooms Bowling Alley, Game Room and Club Lounge Golf Simulator Treatment Rooms Men's & Women's Locker Rooms, Sauna and Steam Rooms
24-Hour Doorman and Concierge Residents' Lounge Screening Room Entertainment Room with Catering Kitchen Billiards and Game Room Indoor Playground by Kidville Landscaped Garden Courtyard Riverside South Shuttle Service On-Site Parking Garage 75' Swimming Pool and Hot Tub Rock Climbing Wall Basketball Court Squash Court Yoga, Pilates, Personal Training and Kinesis Rooms Bowling Alley, Game Room and Club Lounge Golf Simulator Treatment Rooms Men's & Women's Locker Rooms, Sauna and Steam Rooms
Do they have to share their amenities too?? The horror!
I don't know how this works, but are the people in the low income rentals not paying the monthly fee for the amenities, like a doorman, etc? ETA-don't most NY places have monthly association type fees?
24-Hour Doorman and Concierge Residents' Lounge Screening Room Entertainment Room with Catering Kitchen Billiards and Game Room Indoor Playground by Kidville Landscaped Garden Courtyard Riverside South Shuttle Service On-Site Parking Garage 75' Swimming Pool and Hot Tub Rock Climbing Wall Basketball Court Squash Court Yoga, Pilates, Personal Training and Kinesis Rooms Bowling Alley, Game Room and Club Lounge Golf Simulator Treatment Rooms Men's & Women's Locker Rooms, Sauna and Steam Rooms
Do they have to share their amenities too?? The horror!
I would imagine that the amenities are in the rich door part of the building, and the poor door people are separated from them.
I don't know how this works, but are the people in the low income rentals not paying the monthly fee for the amenities, like a doorman, etc? ETA-don't most NY places have monthly association type fees?
Condos/coops have monthly maintenance fees that cover maintenance and amenities, but rentals typically do not -- amenities are typically rolled into the rent. (Although we did look at some places where there was a monthly recreation fee to cover the in-building gym that was separate but required). The rich door people own, and are paying monthly common charges of $1400 - $7600, depending on unit. No idea what portion of poor door rent goes to the amenities.
Post by thatgirl2478 on Jul 22, 2014 9:38:00 GMT -5
... I wonder if they designed the building to have the access points to the 'poor' floors in the back (ie in many high rises they have elevators that only go to certain floors) and the 'rich' floors in the front...
shady, IMO, but if you have door men at one and not at the other it might be normal... I don't know - it doesn't leave me with a good feeling though...
Oh and I REALLY don't like that the 'poor' entrance is in the back alley ... that's not safe IMO and it puts them on par with cargo - not cool
I guess I'm failing to see the outrage. If I'm not paying at the same level as someone else is, I wouldn't expect to have all the amenities that they do, including a doorman. Has it really been determined that the "poor" door was going to be in the back/in an alley/undesirable spot? I'd be happy the low income units existed for me if I wanted to be in that location and normally would have been priced out. I wouldn't go into Masa in NY and say I'm only going to pay you $20, but I expect to be served the $400 meal. So I don't know why the finishes not being "equal" to the more expensive units matters.
24-Hour Doorman and Concierge Residents' Lounge Screening Room Entertainment Room with Catering Kitchen Billiards and Game Room Indoor Playground by Kidville Landscaped Garden Courtyard Riverside South Shuttle Service On-Site Parking Garage 75' Swimming Pool and Hot Tub Rock Climbing Wall Basketball Court Squash Court Yoga, Pilates, Personal Training and Kinesis Rooms Bowling Alley, Game Room and Club Lounge Golf Simulator Treatment Rooms Men's & Women's Locker Rooms, Sauna and Steam Rooms
Do they have to share their amenities too?? The horror!
The reason for the separate entrances is that they will lead to separate lobbies. The "rich" lobby will have access to the amenities, the "poor" lobby will not.
I guess I'm failing to see the outrage. If I'm not paying at the same level as someone else is, I wouldn't expect to have all the amenities that they do, including a doorman. Has it really been determined that the "poor" door was going to be in the back/in an alley/undesirable spot? I'd be happy the low income units existed for me if I wanted to be in that location and normally would have been priced out. I wouldn't go into Masa in NY and say I'm only going to pay you $20, but I expect to be served the $400 meal. So I don't know why the finishes not being "equal" to the more expensive units matters.
but hotels do this - they have special elevators, key access to special floors, and certain amenities, but they manage to do it without making the people who didn't spring for the suites feel like shit because they can only use one door. It's one thing to give people special treatment for paying more, and another to "hide" or segregate the people who didn't cough up the cash.
If Masa offered a $20 meal, I'd go. And expect to be seated by the bathroom. But not expect to be walked in through the back door.
... I wonder if they designed the building to have the access points to the 'poor' floors in the back (ie in many high rises they have elevators that only go to certain floors) and the 'rich' floors in the front...
shady, IMO, but if you have door men at one and not at the other it might be normal... I don't know - it doesn't leave me with a good feeling though...
Oh and I REALLY don't like that the 'poor' entrance is in the back alley ... that's not safe IMO and it puts them on par with cargo - not cool
I suspect that "alley" is overstated here (particularly likely because the always exaggerating Daily Mail is the source). The building appears to take up an entire block, so I'd imagine that the poor door is simply on one of the other sides (which, with where this building is, is likely to be more convenient anyway than where the main entrance is).
Oh, and in case anyone feels sorry for me, my building just started poor dooring us They set off 3/4 of the penthouse terrace area (including the best area) for penthouse tenants only. You need a key to get into those areas, and only penthouse residents have them. And we pay as much in rent as some of the penthouse residents do!
Re: doorman. Isn't part of the appeal of a doorman a safety thing? Or is it just convenience?
Because I would think that having some people coming and going from a side entrance without a doorman would be bad for the whole building.
It seems like a key fob to access the other amenities makes sense without having two separate entrances.
Safety and convenience. They make sure randoms don't come in but they also do things like sign for and gather packages/dry cleaning etc., hold your spare keys (and let housekeepers and such in with the spare keys), and field calls for things like maintenance.
I'd imagine that the poor door side is segregated from the rest of the building (meaning, you can't access side A from side B) and either (a) has a doorman, or (b) has a buzz-in system. I've never seen a residential building in Manhattan that you can walk right into. In multi-unit residences there's always an intercom/buzzer system at the very least.
my development backs up to one which is considered more prominent/much more expensive houses. The expensive development is a cul-de-sac off the main road. Its got a pretty manicured (thru their association fees) entrance. I have to drive an extra 1/2 mile around this area to get to my house, but its in a good school district/location so thats why I selected it. By your argument, those a-holes in the expensive development should have made their road a thru street so I didn't have to go around right? And I should feel like sh^t because the entrance to my development isn't manicured, there are no flowers even though I didn't pay for any? (Again, I don't see anywhere which shows that the "poor" enterance is in a disgusting/shady/back alley)
ETA--there are tradeoffs for everyone, whether it be location, schools, move in condition vs fixer, square feet, community amenities. I don't see this as any different.
To me this is much like gated-communities in less dense areas. I'm not a fan of those myself but this is no more outrage worthy to me than that housing practice.
Edit: the tax credit thing is to provide affordable housing which it does. i would not expect "affordable" to have anything in common with "wealthy" on private property...because people often are snobs & have a NIMBY attitude.
Also...this makes me think of Vegas. Like Four Seasons inside the same tower/building as Mandalay Bay but separate entrances. Basically so one set of customers (namely 4 Seasons) doesn't have to encounter/mix with the stuff with the other set (casino, younger, louder, etc).
I guess I'm failing to see the outrage. If I'm not paying at the same level as someone else is, I wouldn't expect to have all the amenities that they do, including a doorman. Has it really been determined that the "poor" door was going to be in the back/in an alley/undesirable spot? I'd be happy the low income units existed for me if I wanted to be in that location and normally would have been priced out. I wouldn't go into Masa in NY and say I'm only going to pay you $20, but I expect to be served the $400 meal. So I don't know why the finishes not being "equal" to the more expensive units matters.
If I really thought this was all about giving people who pay more extra amenities, then I could see being more okay with it--it would be like first class air travel, concierge floors in hotels, VIP tickets, etc. But I get the impression that this is not just about giving wealthy residents more amenities, but ensuring that they don't have to encounter poor people. It is not just that the rich don't want to share the doorman they spent $$$ on; it's that they don't want to be around the poors. Substitute race for SES, and it starts to feel an awful lot like the "white" and "colored" entrances of another era.
hens -what gives you the impression that its about keeping the "poors" away from the rich? This sort of reminds me of the story about the woman with the Mercedes who had to go to the slummy church to pick up her food stamps. I'M TO GOOD TO BE HERE WITH THEM!!! I guess I'm naive.
hens -what gives you the impression that its about keeping the "poors" away from the rich? This sort of reminds me of the story about the woman with the Mercedes who had to go to the slummy church to pick up her food stamps. I'M TO GOOD TO BE HERE WITH THEM!!! I guess I'm naive.
Oh, but it totally is about that, at least in part.
At least some of the people in the $20 million apartments will not want their guests to be subjected to elevator conversations with the low-income folks. You want your $20 million apartment to have some air of exclusivity.
Re: doorman. Isn't part of the appeal of a doorman a safety thing? Or is it just convenience?
Because I would think that having some people coming and going from a side entrance without a doorman would be bad for the whole building.
It seems like a key fob to access the other amenities makes sense without having two separate entrances.
Safety and convenience. They make sure randoms don't come in but they also do things like sign for and gather packages/dry cleaning etc., hold your spare keys (and let housekeepers and such in with the spare keys), and field calls for things like maintenance.
I'd imagine that the poor door side is segregated from the rest of the building (meaning, you can't access side A from side B) and either (a) has a doorman, or (b) has a buzz-in system. I've never seen a residential building in Manhattan that you can walk right into. In multi-unit residences there's always an intercom/buzzer system at the very least.
Oh, I know they have buzzer systems but I thought the idea was that a doorman is still safer because it makes it harder for randoms to sneak in behind someone, that type of thing. Granted, this is just what I know from my own city living and my TV watching.
But I would think that if the separate entrance doesn't have a doorman, then you are at least partly nullifying the point of having a doorman.
I guess I get not wanting to share your pricy, fancy amenities. But I'm thinking that if I were a richie living in the building, for my own security, I'd rather have everyone coming in through the main door with the doorman.
hens -what gives you the impression that its about keeping the "poors" away from the rich? This sort of reminds me of the story about the woman with the Mercedes who had to go to the slummy church to pick up her food stamps. I'M TO GOOD TO BE HERE WITH THEM!!! I guess I'm naive.
Oh, but it totally is about that, at least in part.
At least some of the people in the $20 million apartments will not want their guests to be subjected to elevator conversations with the low-income folks. You want your $20 million apartment to have some air of exclusivity.
yes, the builder is doing this due to NIMBY attitude, they aren't creating the problem. They want to max profits (unit costs) so they do what it takes to ensure the most desirable environment to the widest pool of wealthy people. The affordable units will rent regardless if they have a fancy entrance or an alley one.