The Metaphysical Contradictions of The Housing Crisis: The Implicit Dissonance Between Western Idealism and the Reality of the Housing Crisis

Graphic from The Housing Theory of Everything by John Meyers, Sam Bowman, and Ben Southwood (Image Courtesy of https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-housing-theory-of-everything/)

It would not take long for any stranger of the United States to come across our eager claim of egalitarianism. It’s everywhere, from incessant political campaigning to every patriotic proclamation of ‘American Freedom.’ As inhabitants of modern Western society, we are frequently heard screaming our greatness from the rooftops. 

It is, however; a worthwhile endeavor to investigate the basis and validity of such a deeply rooted intuition. The term ‘egalitarianism,’ derived from the Latin root aequalis (“equals”) means to impartially treat all individuals, free of discrimination or disenfranchisement. Subsequently, it can be inferred that the West’s Egalitarian Ideal, or the standard we claim to achieve, can be centrally characterized by equality. Yet, to substantiate such a claim, we should look at espoused values. In 2023, psychology professors from Chicago University and Yale observed ‘Group-transcendent Fairness’: “the moral endorsement of allocating resources equally to ingroup members and outgroup members.” The study, led by Prof. Fan Yang, found children in Western cultures show steady growth and development of interpersonal egalitarian behavior. However, when compared to children from Eastern Cultures, there is little to no difference. So, if the Western Egalitarian Ideal does not prove exemplary on an individual level, does the idealistic claim come from the systems we have set up as a society?

One system that ought to exemplify our egalitarian values is housing. Given the notion that the three fundamental needs for our survival are food, water, and shelter, it would logically follow that in a society where all are treated equally if one member has access to housing, so too should all members of that society. However, after a chronicled history of attempt after attempt to provide housing for the unhoused, the US continues to see a rise in homeless populations. In fact “On a single night in 2023, roughly 653,100 people – or about 20 of every 10,000 people in the United States – were experiencing homelessness.” The need for sustainable and equitable housing interventions is evident now more than ever. 

A term used to describe such unrealized interventions that became common in the mid-20th Century, amidst continued advocacy around housing just shy of a century ago, was ‘Modern Housing.’ In the opening page of her book by the same name, Catherine Bauer defines the term to “provide certain minimum amenities for every dwelling: cross-ventilation... sunlight, quiet, a pleasant outlook… finally it will be available at a price which citizens of average income or less can afford.” Despite this definition being set in 1934, the relevancy of the standard it sets cannot be overstated. 78 years later, the profession finally started coming around to this way of thinking about housing developments at large. One such project is Via Verde completed by Dattner Architects in the Bronx in 2012. Dattner, in collaboration with forward-thinking developers, asked the question, “What is the most we can provide for tenants while maintaining affordability?” a departure from typical profit incentives which encourage crunching costs at the expense of the tenant instead of the developer or building owner. The result is a massive development that encapsulates a variety of residential densities and amenities, facilitating social gatherings and equitable living between tenants. With such a delay in establishing a standard for success and progressing towards it, skepticism begins to form regarding the earlier claim of a stand-out egalitarian culture.

To understand why it has taken so long to make progress, it must be recognized that since the beginning of large-scale housing interventions in the U.S. socio-political malintent has been omnipresent. The most infamous example is Pruitt-Igoe, constructed in St. Louis MO, and operating from 1951 to 1972. The 33 13-story building super-block was ill-fated. Continuously over its 21-year life, the project faced racist fine print, scarce budget allocation - and authoritative, discriminatory behavior (Via the Saint Louis Housing Authority-SLHA) resulting in the property being condemned and demolished in 1972. At its inception, the SLHA was not chiefly concerned with the public’s welfare but instead, focused on solving the ‘aesthetic’ problem of the slums that have driven density away from the urban core. This misguided motivation is all too indicative of the remaining barriers to progress toward more housing in the modern era. When evaluating exactly how socio-political barriers have continued to be the primary obstacle to equitable progress, a seemingly intentional discriminatory system begins to be uncovered. Residential, local, and federal zoning practices help to illuminate the issue. . .

Restrictive covenants, as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, are constraints “on the use of land; an obligation created by deed not to use land in a certain way.” Such covenants, established as early as 1926, barred African Americans from acquiring covenant-impacted land leading to the widespread creation of minority enclaves. Such groupings were then to experience excessive divestment, later coined ‘redlining’. Intentional discriminatory practice in this manner, and at this scale, makes the egalitarian standard previously discussed seem questionable. 

In addition to restrictive covenants and redlining the regulatory standards for what developers and corporate land-owners are to maintain when creating and sustaining ‘affordable’ residential developments have not kept up with what can logically be considered livable. According to the HUD Affordable Housing Standards (last updated in 1991), Affordable Housing costs are to remain within 30% of a tenant’s income to allow for discretionary and emergency expenses. This way of defining affordable housing fails to account for amenity adjacency. For example, if amenities such as employment or educational institutions are far from the development, it can disproportionately increase transportation costs for tenants. Additionally, this percentage-income standard becomes immensely difficult to uphold for potential tenants whose income is less than 50% of the area median income.

Now that both the severity and systemic nuance of this crisis are at least partially understood, the previously established egalitarian standard can be revisited. For as long as the housing shortage is perpetuated throughout our history, it cannot be claimed that Western modernity shows itself to be truly egalitarian. If the West is to establish itself as an egalitarian culture, it must challenge existing barriers to equitable progress and establish a new, equitable system of affordable housing. For those in and preparing to go into the architectural profession, our role becomes clear. An active role must be taken. Advocating and proposing the design of sustainable and equitable spaces, educating neighboring professions of ways affordability can be achieved, and refocusing on the experience and livelihoods of the end user are all first steps in remedying the crisis.

These initial steps are foundational in allowing architects to contribute to the solution, not maintaining complicity within the crisis that continues to perpetuate further into our collective future. The key here lies in advocacy instead of passive service. Too often, the business-oriented reality of firm cultures incentivizes architects to function as servants to clients or developers whose goals exist in opposition to the solution of this crisis. If the profession plays an active role in creating easier pathways for the development and inception of affordable housing projects, more time can be spent developing projects to levels of quality on par with other housing options currently inaccessible to impoverished future tenants.

In the aftermath of systemic discrimination generating tangible human suffering, the responsibility lies on the shoulders of the architect. By collaborating with developers, clients, policymakers, and financial investors to create a more egalitarian future, we can finally begin to truly claim our ideals.

Bibliography:

1. Beyond our tribe: Developing a normative sense of group-transcendent fairness Yang, Fan; Yang, Xin; Dunham, Yarrow.  Developmental Psychology Vol. 59, Iss. 7,  (Jul 2023): 1203-1217.

2. The Pruitt Igoe Myth by Chad Friedrichs, About the Film. (2015, May 23). The Pruitt Igoe Myth. Retrieved May 3, 2023, from http://www.pruitt-igoe.com/about.html

3. Modern Housing by Catherine Bauer, Bauer, C. (n.d.). Modern housing.

4. Toward an Architecture by Le Corbusier. Le Corbusier. (1927). Toward an Architecture.

5. Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Database https://lihtc.huduser.gov/

6. Via Verde by Dattner Architects  https://www.dattner.com/projects/view/via-verde-the-green-way/

7. The Housing Theory of Everything by John Meyers, Sam Bowman, and Ben Southwood https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-housing-theory-of-everything/

This work has been published in the 92nd Issue of CRIT Journal which can be found here