Both Bartha Lewis and Kent Barwick, in their respective pieces for City Limits, agree that New York City and the borough of Brooklyn in particular, are in dire need of affordable housing. Median incomes have fallend while rent prices have risen over the last few years as Brooklyn is experiencing a population boom. Affordable housing is at the forefront of discussion over new housing developments. However, they disagree on whether the currently proposed Atlantic Yards project effectively addresses this important need.
Kent Barwick believes that the city’s current policies for affordable housing are not taking the right approach . Atlantic Yards was designed with the idea that developers should be incentivized with permission to build larger high-density buildings. According to Mr. Barwick, New York City should follow the example of Bostona and San Diego and institute a city-wide rule for all new developers to incorporate affordable units as part of their construction, as opposed to individually negotiating over each new project. He also suggests that the city could consider adding new streets or finding new ways to connect different parts of the city in order to create public spaces, instead of having projects like the Atlantic Yards. However, it appears as though Mr. Barwick is criticizing Atlantic Yards not because it’s bad but because it’s not good enough. Although the ideas he talks about are creative and approach the affordable housing problem on a grander scale than what is being done at Atlantic Yards, it doesn’t seem feasible to put new housing projects on hold while these bigger ideas are being developed.
Secondly, Kent Barwick states that the Atlantic Yards project was not developed with a truly democratic process. He believes that the community did not have enough input in the planning. This is quite contrary to what Bartha Lewis writes in her article where she passionately argues that the private developers of Atlantic Yards worked closely with a neighborhood organization, ACORN to come up with their final plan for how to provide affordable housing. Ms. Lewis is of the opinion that Forest City Ratner was open to suggestions and responsive to needs. To prove this, she gives examples of how Atlantic Yards will make mixed income living a reality in Brooklyn. From the two articles, Ms. Lewis certainly has the better argued position.
However, Ms. Lewis’ argument about the “real world” and pragmatism is a little hard to accept. Atlantic Yards seems to be a reasonably well thought out project, and it has the potential to ease the burden on the housing market in Brooklyn. These are good arguments for why the project should receive the support of the residents. But to argue that Atlantic Yards is a good idea because it is the best that Brooklyn can hope for and that the residents should be realistic about how much progress they can make on this issue, seems counter-intuitive to Ms. Lewis’ point. Affordable housing should be the priority in new developments not secondary to firms’ desire to make profits. Residents should be able to ask for and get well planned projects in their communities, not be forced to accept compromises.
That being said, in my opinion, the Atlantic Yards project has many advantages. It is exactly the kind of project that is going to add fuel to the boom in Brooklyn. Additionally, the specific details mentioned by Ms. Lewis show that the affordable housing issue was a major consideration during the planning process and some good solutions have come out of the negotiations. Residents of all income ranges will be distributed throughout the buildings and there will be no indication made to show that adjoining units are differently priced. Affordably priced units will also be offered for all sizes. I’m not sure if it is indeed feasible to make income a non-issue among neighbors in an apartment complex, but this is a step in the right direction.
