Case Study - Prospect Plaza

Prospect Plaza Towards a new future, since 1997

Case study by Koen Moesen

2

Introduction

The site of former New York City Housing Authority’s public housing complex, the Prospect Plaza

towers, is being revitalized. Although the first renovation plans date from 1997, today three of the

Prospect Plaza towers are standing like a ghost town. The windows are scattered and the wind and

rain whistle through the buildings. They have been vacant since 2003 and no renovation plans have

been started in all those years. The fourth tower is been demolished in 2005, leaving a huge vacant

lot. Today this lot is still as vacant as in 2005. The revitalizing of the Prospect Plaza complex seems to

be an everlasting story.

Figure I – Pictures of the Prospect Plaza site, taken on Oct 9th 2011

History

The Prospect Plaza towers1 have been built in 1974 by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA).

The complex originally consisted of four high-rise buildings with 12 to 15 stories. A total of 1.171

residents once filled the 368 apartment units. Three of these towers are still standing at this

moment. The complex is bordered by Saratoga and Howard Avenues, St. Marks and Sterling Place

and is situated in Ocean Hill-Brownsville, Brooklyn.

Today 20.814 people or almost 20 % of the inhabitants of Ocean-Hill Brownsville are being housed by

the NYCHA2. Therefore this community district has the highest concentration of public housing in

New York City. Unfortunately all these public housing projects, and especially the ‘tower in the park’-

complexes, became associated with a higher crime rate, a racial segregation and a concentration of

poverty3.

Prospect Plaza was an extremely low-income development, since the average family earned

approximately $ 11.700 a year4. This meant that their house-hold income was less than one-third of

the average income of a New York City household. In fact, the situation is even worse, given that the

Prospect Plaza residents have large families. These undesirable conditions made Prospect Plaza a

very interesting choice for the NYCHA to renovate, although the towers are fairly new, compared to

1 New York City Housing Authority, ‘NYCHA Housing Developments - Prospect Plaza’, on: www.nyc.gov/html/nycha, (http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/html/developments/bklynprospect.shtml, Oct 8th 2011).

2 New York City Housing Authority, ‘Re-vision Prospect Plaza – A community planning workshop’, on: www.revisionprospectplaza.com, June 2010, (http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_ppwguide.pdf, Oct 8th 2011).

3 WILLIAMS, Sabrina L., ‘From HOPE VI to HOPE SICK’, on: www.dollarsandsense.org, July/Aug 2003, (http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/0703williams.html, Oct 8th 2011).

4 NEUWIRTH, Robert, ‘Tower wreckers’, in: City Limits, 2001 (25) nr 7, pp. 14-18.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/html/developments/bklynprospect.shtml

http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/

http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_ppwguide.pdf


http://www.dollarsandsense.org/

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/0703williams.html

3

the rest of New York City’s public housing inventory. Like any other Housing Authority in the United

States, the NYCHA could get money for renovations through the federal HOPE VI program.

HOPE VI

HOPE VI5 is a federal funding program under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Design

(HUD). It stands for ‘Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere’. In 1992 the National Commission

on Severely Distressed Public Housing (NCSDPH) surveyed 1.2 million units of public housing in the

United States. The survey concluded that 86.000 units or about 6 % of the public housing inventory

were in a severely distressed condition. The NCSDPH called for a revitalization of these distressed

units by providing money to the Public Housing Authorities, so they can address the housing and

social service needs. It recommended that demolishing should be on a one-for-one basis. Based on

these recommendations, the Congress appropriated the first HOPE VI funds that same year, but it

lasted until 1999 before the federal HOPE VI program was authorized. Unfortunately the

requirement of a replacement on a one-for-one basis was excused. This would have an enormous

impact on HOPE VI projects all over the country.

HOPE VI aims at new mixed-income developments, where home-owners and renters would live side

by side. This was in fact also the initial goal of public housing, although this goal was never reached. A

mixed-income approach would hinder any concentration of poverty. To get this economical diversity,

the HUD requires for a HOPE VI project also to be ‘mixed financed’. The federal funding needs to

leverage dollars from the private sector. Off course private developers are euphoric to build these

projects, since a mixed-income program would mean higher profits for them. The HOPE VI program

seems to shift the former public housing funding to the construction of new units, which will be

rented or sold at market rate.

At this moment the HOPE VI program has more than 100.000 severely distressed public housing units

across the United States6. This number clearly exceeds the 86.000 units, which the NCSDPH surveyed

as dangerous or unhealthy. Also the number of replaced units is far below the number of demolished

units. In the magazine ‘Dollars and Sense’7, one speaks of a ‘replacement of only about one

affordable unit for every five destroyed’. Since the new constructions are mixed-income

developments, the actual available new housing units for low-income are even less. This results in

the fact that most of the former residents, once a project is being revitalized through HOPE VI, are

unlikely to ever return home.

In fact, this is exactly the goal of HOPE VI. The program is born because the nation’s grand

experiment with public housing had failed8. In the beginning public housing intended social welfare,

but these projects resemble now eternal ghettos. HOPE VI does not try to create more public housing

units. Instead it attempts to shrink the number of units and it prefers to tear down high-rise


6 New York City Housing Authority, ‘Re-vision Prospect Plaza – A community planning workshop’, on:

www.revisionprospectplaza.com, June 2010, (http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_ppwguide.pdf, Oct 8th 2011).










4

buildings, which are associated with an increased crime. Although it might seem an improvement to

replace high-rise buildings with townhouses, the math is inescapable: HOPE VI reduces the supply of

affordable housing units.

This huge gap between the amount of low-income units, which have been destroyed, and the

amount of new low-income units, is solved by a voucher program. Former residents who didn’t get a

place in the new project are being offered places in other public housing projects or Section 8

vouchers. These Section 8 vouchers make it possible for a family to rent a unit at market rate, up to a

certain limit that differs per location. The family will then only pay 30 % of its income for the rent.

The remaining difference between the rent the family paid and the actual market rate rent, is then

covered by the Housing Authority. An interesting aspect is that these Section 8 vouchers don’t

restrict a family to a certain city, but they are allowed to rent anywhere in the United States. But it

can be questioned if these vouchers aren’t concentrating the poverty even more, by pushing the

poor to other low-income neighborhoods?

Getting funding from HOPE VI

In 1997, the NYCHA tried to get funding through the federal HOPE VI program to renovate the

Prospect Plaza Towers. Its proposal was renovating all four Prospect Plaza high-rise buildings and

adding new townhouses at the nearby vacant lots. Since the tenants couldn’t see a downside, they all

approved. Unfortunately the HUD rejected the plan, because it would not decrease the density of the

complex.

One year later the NYCHA came up with a new proposition: the tower at 430 Saratoga Avenue would

be demolished, since it suddenly appeared to have a wide range of structural problems9. But it’s

unclear if the HUD ever received any documentation of these problems10. This tower would become

the first public housing project ever to be demolished in New York City, since the NYCHA had always

preferred preservation and renovation, rather than demolishing11. The three other Prospect Plaza

towers would still be renovated, and the townhouses would still be added. Since this proposal did

decrease the density, the HUD accepted the plans and made $ 22 million available in 1999 for the

renovation, the demolition and the new construction.

Between 2001 and 2003 the 365 families occupying Prospect Plaza were being relocated to various

other public housing projects or they were handed Section 8 vouchers12.

9 LIFF, Bob, ‘City to raze project 15-sory building set for demolition in Prospect Plaza’, in: Daily News (New York), 1999, Sept 19th, Suburban: p. 2.


11 FERNANDEZ, Manny, ‘Public housing project to come tumbling down‘, in: The New York Times, 2010, Feb 6th, p. A13.

12 New York City Housing Authority, ‘Re-vision Prospect Plaza – A community planning workshop’, on: www.revisionprospectplaza.com, June 2010, (http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_ppwguide.pdf, Oct 8th 2011).




5

Home-ownership units and rental units

In 2003 the NYCHA started to build 37 two-

family houses13 nearby the Prospect Plaza site,

at Dean St. and Sterling Place. They consist

each of an affordable rental unit on the

ground floor and an owner-occupied duplex

on top. This would enforce an income mix in

these townhouses. This construction was the

first phase of the three-phase revitalization of

Prospect Plaza. The construction was

completed in 2005. In the same year the tower

at 430 Saratoga Avenue was being

demolished, making place for a community

center facility and rental units. Thirty-two of

these newly built units were purchased by

former public housing residents, although only

one was a former Prospect Plaza resident.

The second phase started in 2007 with the

construction of the 150 rental units nearby

two empty Prospect Plaza towers by a private

developer. They would become four-story high

townhouses. The construction was completed

in 2009. Forty-five of these rental units are set

aside for former residents or other public

housing residents, in possession of Section 8

vouchers14.

Figure III – The 150 rental townhouses of a private developer

13 GRACE, Melissa, ‘Townhouses lift Brownsville hope’, in: Daily News (New York), 2003, Aug 1st, Suburban: p. 1.

14 MARKEY, Eileen, ‘When Brooklyn Projects go down, what will go up?’, on: www.citylimits.org, Aug 19th 2010, (http://www.citylimits.org/news/articles/4152/when-brooklyn-projects-go-down-what-will-go-up, Oct 8th 2011).

Figure II - Plan of the different redevelopment phases

http://www.citylimits.org/

http://www.citylimits.org/news/articles/4152/when-brooklyn-projects-go-down-what-will-go-up

6

Revitalizing the towers

The final phase would have been the rehabilitation of the three remaining Prospect Plaza towers. In

2003 Michaels Development Company15 (MDC), a real estate company based in New Jersey, was

hired to renovate them. But in 2007 this contract was terminated by the NYCHA because the

company couldn’t get a financially interesting plan. In April 2008 MDC sued the NYCHA for breaking

the contract. This lawsuit stalled the project.

In 2010 the NYCHA decided to tear down also the three remaining towers of Prospect Plaza, since

that would make financially more sense. The Housing Authority envisions a series of privately owned

smaller apartment buildings, but only 80 of them will be actual public housing16. The demolition has

been planned for fall 2011, but the exact further development of the resulting new vacant space at

Prospect Plaza has yet to be determined.

Figure IV - The Prospect Plaza site, with its three vacant towers and 150 new rental townhouses

15 FERNANDEZ, Manny, ‘Public housing project to come tumbling down‘, in: The New York Times, 2010, Feb 6th, p. A13.




7

Re-Vision Prospect Plaza, a blueprint for the future

In June 2010, a blueprint for the future has been formed, based on a three-day lasting community

workshop: ‘Re-Vision Prospect Plaza’17. A participatory process will now the base for the new

development plans of Prospect Plaza.

The first day of the workshop18, a tour on site was planned. Every participant made observations of

the positive and negative qualities of the site. Later, after being divided in groups, they came up with

a list, to ensure the qualities of neighborhood and improve its shortcomings. Sherida Paulsen of PKSB

Architects was the lead architect of the workshop. After her presentation about the site, a ‘design-

with-icons’-session was held. The icons corresponded to scaled versions of the desirable functions.

The groups explored a total of six concepts.

Figure V – A total of six concepts as output of the ‘design-with-icons’-session

17

New York City Housing Authority, ‘Re-vision Prospect Plaza – A community planning workshop – Volume 2’, on: www.revisionprospectplaza.com, June 2010, (http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_pwguide.pdf.zip, Oct 8th 2011).

18 New York City Housing Authority, ‘Re-vision Prospect Plaza – A community planning workshop – Volume 2’, on: www.revisionprospectplaza.com, June 2010, (http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_pwguide.pdf.zip, Oct 8th 2011).


http://www.revisionprospectplaza.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/RPP_pwguide.pdf.zip





8

What all these concepts had in common was that all the high-rise buildings were being removed.

Although this argument points toward the demolishing of the Prospect Plaza complex, it should be

said that only 50 people were present at the workshop, and not all of them were former residents of

the projects19. All participants agreed to rename the Prospect Plaza site to Prospect Place North,

Prospect Place South and Saratoga Park.

The design session continued the second day. At the end of the day, the design team reduced the

concepts of the six groups to two different design options.

Figure VI - Six concepts translated into two design plans

On the final day the workshop was concluded with a final presentation of the workshop results.

These results will now become recommendations for the further development plans of Prospect

Plaza.

Design Principles of the Community Plan20

- Demolish existing three vacant towers: build at least 368 new housing units

- Maintain the neighborhood scale: up to six-story buildings

- Allow for housing type diversity: seniors, families

- Create safe streets: provide more entrances at grade

- Integrate green spaces into each site: pocket parks and green backyards

- Allow for quality retail spaces: Fresh Foods supermarket and small neighborhood stores

- Incorporate sustainable design: materials, systems, building layouts








9

Components of the Community Plan21

- 360 housing units, including two walk-up buildings on Prospect Place North and five elevator buildings distributed between Prospect Place South and the Saratoga Park site

- 16,600 square feet of open space, including two 5,000 square foot pocket parks on Prospect Place North and Prospect Place South and a 6,600 square foot terrace as part of the building on the Saratoga Park site

- 12,000 square feet of community facility space, including a 2,000 square foot community room on Prospect Place South and a 10,000 square foot community center on the Saratoga Park site

- 32,860 square feet of retail space, including a 20,000 square foot Fresh Foods supermarket and a 3,000 square foot neighborhood store on the Saratoga Park site, and four neighborhood stores on Prospect Place South, along Saratoga Avenue

- 30,000 square foot community park on the City-owned site adjacent to the Saratoga Park site

- 120 parking spaces across all three NYCHA sites

Figure VII - Prospect Plaza today and the Community Plan

Conclusion

At this point Prospect Plaza is still a story with an open ending, although it seems that, with ‘Re-

Vision Prospect Plaza’, the future of the everlasting Prospect Plaza story has again become visible.

Although it is probably an improvement for the neighborhood, some questions need to be raised.

Where are all the former residents of Prospect Plaza situated in this story? They were once promised

that their homes in the towers would be renovated, but now all of the towers will be demolished.

Therefore probably much less than half of the former residents of Prospect Plaza will ever be able to

return to this site. Is it reasonable that the poorest ones are forced to leave their home and their

neighborhood?

Since this project is the first public housing complex that will ever go down in New York City, will

Prospect Plaza become an example for the rest of New York City’s public housing inventory? Is totally

demolishing a failed chapter of public housing, and especially high-rise buildings, the only answer for

the future of public housing?





Documents

Case Study - Prospect Plaza