ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Rise of Poor Doors: Separate Entrances for Lower Income Residents in NYC

Updated on October 18, 2014

Separate, and not at all equal

In New York City, but also in other major cities, developers are seeking tax credits through providing lower income residences within luxury high rise apartment buildings. Of course, this is common place even in more suburban areas, and often enough, the town or municipality will not approve a development unless some lower income housing is also provided. In these instances we refer to the housing as "affordable" housing. But what I came across in a Fiscal Timers article, "Front Doors Are For The Rich In These Buildings" (see article here) is in fact rather disturbing, and to me, seems to defeat the purpose of such a tax credit.

I assume most of us recall that prior to the civil rights actions of the 1950s and 1960s, it was considered perfectly fine to have African Americans and others of color use separate facilities, whether they be bathrooms, hotels, or even riding in the back of the bus. But we were able to get passed that, right? No, not right, it seems... although I do see that instead of basing the discrimination on race, we are now basing it on income, and somehow, we feel this is okay...

You see, these luxury buildings are getting substantial tax credits to allow for a number of lower priced apartments in the building. Sounds like a good idea, right? Right... Except that now, these developers are seeking permission to build separate entrances to the building for those of lower priced apartments. And moreover, they are seeking permission fro the cities to disallow access by the lower priced residents to amenities in the building such as gyms, saunas, garden decks, and of course, front doors.

Servants Entrances at the Mansion

Marble House, Newport RI
Marble House, Newport RI | Source

Why Are There Tax Credits For This?

As is the case in most things, especially government, it is difficult to know the intention of those who wrote the law. But from my own research, it would seem the intent was to provide affordable housing within the city limits in such a way as to allow those with more meager means to mix and benefit from the social and cultural environment that comes with living in the city and among those of higher economic means. Clearly, it was not to create a mechanism for reestablishing the policy of separate but equal, long ago deemed inequitable.

Developers claim that since the people paying more paid more, they should get more, and so it is fair to limit access to the lower income housing residents. (Note that what constitutes lower income in such a city as New York is an income of about $52,000 a year or less... an income that would be considered reasonably high in many more rural areas.) These developers claim that since the people paying full price (the lower income apartments are not subsidized by the government, by the way) paid more, they should have access to more. Also, note that the tax credits go to the developer, not the residents. They claim it is unfair to the residents who afforded more.

Separate And Not So Equal

Do you think lower income housing in high end urban environments should restrict access to amenities and even the front door of these buildings?

See results

Justice Based On Price

John Rawls wrote that Justice should be based on fairness. He postulates a group of people, peers, all fully informed, deciding justice based on whether they themselves would think the treatment fair. So, is this treatment of lower income residents "fair"?

A question for you: Do you think people earning around $50,000 a year somehow look different, or are an affront in some way to those who earn more? Do you think that it is reasonable to expect that if you live with others earning less than you do, that you should not have to mix with them in the lobby of the building, or in the elevator ride, or even out in front of the building? Yes people, these Poor doors are being placed in the rear of the building, much as a servants entrance was placed in the mansions of the Gilded Age.

My take on this is that if one receives a tax credit for providing housing within a luxury building to those less well off, but by no means poor, those less well off people should also get to share in the amenities of the building, like the gym, but even more importantly, should also be allowed to use the front door to enter their building. Of course, the developers claim that in fact these residences could and should be considered as being part of another building. Huh?

Mansion By the Sea: Servants Entrance in the Rear

Should low income housing allow for distinct entrances in buildings that have both high income and lower income residences?
Should low income housing allow for distinct entrances in buildings that have both high income and lower income residences? | Source

Intent of Tax Credit

So what was the intent of these tax credits? How should these credits be interpreted? Are we now heading back to the golden age of blatant discrimination and a policy of separate but "equal"? I don't know the answers, but I do see a great many issues with such a policy. First, we open the door to further discrimination in other areas of social life. Second, which is really first, is that it is not a stated objective of the government tax policy to foster discrimination, but rather the entirely opposite: to foster integration on the social level, the residential level, the educational level, etc.

For me this policy of allowing these things to occur is disturbing at a visceral level. And I grant you that I myself have lived in such buildings, paying the higher price, and have never been disturbed by or even recognized anyone that was of lower income, or higher income for that matter. Nor have I ever noticed anyone else noticing any issues in this respect.

I am researching this issue further, and will post more on this. Let me know your thoughts.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Paul Silverzweig profile imageAUTHOR

      Paul Silverzweig 

      4 years ago from Portsmouth RI USA

      Thanks for the correction on the Link Au Fait... I twas working, but I posted it to another site...

    • Au fait profile image

      C E Clark 

      4 years ago from North Texas

      This doesn't surprise me. A surprising number of people in this world imagine themselves to be better than other people, and for some pretty superficial reasons, as in this case. Many of our members of congress (70% are millionaires) have this attitude even though they got their money AFTER being elected to congress numerous times. They want poor people (truly poor, not just those making 20-50 thousand a year) to vote for them, but they want nothing to do with poor people, do nothing to improve conditions for poor people -- often make things worse for poor people, and imagine they are somehow superior. We need another Bastille Day.

      Voting this up, posted to FB, pinned to Awesome Hubpages, and will share with followers.

      Just to let you know that the link in your first paragraph to the original story you base this on does not work.

    • AudreyHowitt profile image

      Audrey Howitt 

      4 years ago from California

      Sometimes the intent of a statute and its effect are quite different. I wonder if that is the case here

    • JayeWisdom profile image

      Jaye Denman 

      4 years ago from Deep South, USA

      This is truly a reprehensible state of affairs and should not be allowed to continue. Discrimination wears many faces and must be prevented by law, or it will rear its ugly head in various ways. I hope Mayor De Blasio is successful in ending this practice, as commenter 'gmwilliams' relates.

      The affluent 'elite' in luxury NYC buildings apparently believe their wealth entitles them--not only to more amenities, but to avoidance of the neighboring hoi polloi, but this is a dangerous precedent to establish. This country already has enough problems without allowing a small segment of society to dictate what others may or may not do or have.

      The U.S. has become a very class-conscious society with a strong division between the wealthy and everyone else. Many ultra-wealthy Americans seem to believe they are superior to the non-affluent. Since quite a few rich citizens inherited their money and property rather than earning it themselves, that doesn't argue for superiority, merely the 'luck of the draw.'

      The haughty residents demanding preferential treatment in luxury buildings would do well to remember that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution contains a clause stating that " state shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." That protection should extend to being allowed to enter one's residential building by the front door!

      Voted Up++ and shared


    • gmwilliams profile image

      Grace Marguerite Williams 

      4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      READ the hub. However, Mayor De Blasio is looking into this and wants to end this. This is very eye-opening to say the least. Voted up. There is a new forum thread pertaining to this very topic:

      if you are interested and want to participate.


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)