This week’s readings once again show us the inherent inequalities present in every affordable housing plan presented by the city in the past decades. It seems that for every attempt to equalize the housing market, further divisions and more problems are created. In his article detailing the effects of DeBlasio’s latest affordable housing plan, Stein makes it clear that the plan will not have the game changing effect it is marketed to achieve. He goes into many aspects of DeBlasio’s plan that are often overlooked by media outlets who promote it as a radical new affordable housing solution for New Yorkers.

The impact of inclusionary zoning is interesting because at first glance, it appears to be a way for builders to create more affordable units than were previously allowed by the existing laws. However, as Stein points out, it brings twice as many middle class and market rate renters along with the supposed ‘affordable’ housing which completely changes the face of the neighborhoods the projects are built in- a so called ‘trojan horse for gentrification’.

As Lason explains in Chapter 6, zoning was originally intended to mold the city into a “large and smoothly operating machine” in the tradition of Taylor. This concept evolved into Moses’s vision of superblocks under zoning regulation for specific purposes. In the 1960s, these functionalist views were being combatted by planners and incentive zoning was introduced, where builders were granted permission to build in certain areas in exchange for providing public access spaces. Now this incentive zoning is being used in a very similar way to promote affordable housing as discussed by Stein in the DeBlasio plan.

When these new developments go into effect they will ultimately increase the divide between low and high income residents, while only serving about 3% of the city’s need for low income housing. Despite DeBlasio’s optimism about the impact of the new housing plan it is hard to ignore the principles of planning described by Larson or the obvious flaws highlighted by Stein to the principles on which the plan is based.

Discussion Question:

Is the city’s main incentive really to support low income residents, or to increase real estate market values through increased development in low income neighborhoods, spearheaded with the ‘affordable housing’ label?