Government Housing in the United States

[timbaly]

It's come to my attention over the last few years that much if not all of the new government housing projects are low rise and low density. I'm specifically more familiar with the cases in Philadelphia and Washington DC. When I left New York for college in Philly this really came to my attention. In New York I have not heard about any proposals to destroy pre-existing housing projects and create lower density housing complete with front yards, and possibly driveways or garages. In Philly and DC many of the large Housing Authority buildings have been demolished. Some of the reasons are to give the police an easier time when operating in these areas. If the buildings are low rise or private residences than the officers do not have to contend with other apartment residents hiding the people theyre going after, and there are less likely to be confrontations with other residents.

A lot of the residents who lived in the high rise projects in Philadelphia and DC have been displaced and given private residences. Many of the homes in North Philadelphia are free standing with front and side yards. Many have backyards and driveways as well. The main idea for creating public housing like this seems to be to create a new mindset for the residents. Giving them stand alone houses is thought to give them more of a sense of ownership and property towards their physical living space. They're more likely to invest in their property, such as taking care of the lawn of planting flowers. It's supposed to make them care more about grafitti since they likely will not want it on their outside walls.

The main thing I'm curious to know is who decides on the design for these projects? Who in the local governments?

I'm wondering if anyone has any other information about this trend and when it began. Is this national? Can you find examples of this in places that you live or have lived or visited? Do you think the lower density and low rise buildings have changed the mindsets of the residents? Has there been a measurable impact on crime in these areas? If so what would you attribute it to? If you can shed some light on the physical aspects of governemnt housing outside of the United States that would be much appreciated as well.

[Sendo]

"Govt housing in the US"

Really? Where'd you find it?

If you read Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine and check out news archives you'll see how the post-Katrina chaos was used to ram through anti-poor laws and disfranchisement to keep the laws anti-poor.

NYC for one has been going through gentrification (Esp. Manhattan) since the 1970s.

It's not just tearing down govt housing, it's the lack of upkeep, and the lack of expansion.

I'm not an expert on this though.

[timbaly]

I'm not sure what you mean by "Where did you find it?" Sendo. However if you mean the new style of housing projects I've seen them all over North Phialdelphia and in some parts of South Philadelphia too and a lot in Southeast DC. I can give you specific locations if you want details but I'd have to do some minor research for that.

I haven't read about New Orleans so I'll try to keep that in mind for the future. As for New York it's true that gentrification has been going on for a long time and has displaced poor and even more "middle class" residents but I have never heard of a housing project being demolihed there. Ive lived there my whole life and I can't recall anyone ever mentioning that such a thing happened since the late 1970s. I'm not saying it hasn't, if someone knows otherwise please bring that up. As for the lack of expansion I have heard that as a criticism of destrouing the large apartment buildings, I'm not sure what happens to all the residnets because it does not seem like enough low rises are made in and around the areas where the buildings have been destroyed. In DC I have heard that many people have been displaced into Prince Georges County in Maryland after the destruction of certain housing projects.

[which doctor]

In Chicago they've begun to incorporate public housing into private developments and calling it "mixed-income housing." I imagine that this is all planned by the city public housing authority in collaboration with private housing developers who get tax breaks. We still have the old type concrete block apartments here and they look pretty bad. I walked past one at night and the place was crawling with cops, probably because the surrounding neighborhood is pretty high class.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The sort of housing that timbaly describes is wasteful of land, more expensive to heat, often shoddily built, and, whether on purpose or not, creates a sense of "mine and thine". In addition it encourages the use of private motor vehicles through the addition of driveways and due to the fact that the residents are a lot more spread out.

My hope is that such shitty "housing" is knocked down come the revolution along with the McMansions.

[timbaly]

In Chicago they've begun to incorporate public housing into private developments and calling it "mixed-income housing." I imagine that this is all planned by the city public housing authority in collaboration with private housing developers who get tax breaks.

That sort of mixed income development is not new in New York. How recent has this been going on for in Chicago? There are a lot of buildings in New York where low income people live and land lords get tax breaks. These buildings are independent of the NYCHA (New York City Housing Authority). Some of the better known ones are Park Hill and LeFrak City.

[timbaly]

The sort of housing that timbaly describes is wasteful of land, more expensive to heat, often shoddily built, and, whether on purpose or not, creates a sense of "mine and thine". In addition it encourages the use of private motor vehicles through the addition of driveways and due to the fact that the residents are a lot more spread out.

The new properties are certainly more expensive to heat and they architecturally look out of place. They have a very suburban style to them. In North Philadelphia most of the older homes are row homes. I've heard that there is a big sewer problem in a lot of Philly and the sewers have not been updated in over a century plus in many areas. These new homes have lawns and space where water can go without being a burden to the drainage system. In this sense they're being touted as environmentally friendly. Perhaps they are in this sense, but in terms of heating as you brought up and in terms of electricity use because of the new larger size of homes. The encouraging of car usage is not present in all the new developments. Most of the newer homes I have seen do not have driveways and garages, but a substantial portion do in Philly.

[timbaly]

I couldn't find a good picture of the homes I'm reffering to in Philadelphia, but I do have a decent one.

http://www.cmsbuildersinc.com/webgraphics/tasker.jpg

The stand alone homes in the middle of the picture are what I'm refering too.

I also found this article from the Los Angeles Times about the new developments popping up out there.
http://articles.latimes.com/1999/sep/20/news/mn-12278

[Sendo]

I'm not sure what you mean by "Where did you find it?" Sendo.


I was being sarcastic. While still prevalnet in much of NYC and cities like Chicago, public housing is falling apart or being destroyed. There isn't nearly as much as there was in the post-ww2 era in respect to the need for public housing. Homelessness was once intolerable. Now it's just accepted as pandemic to human civilization.

[timbaly]

Sorry, I did not catch that sarcasm.

Public Housing certainly has changed a lot in Philadelphia. I was curious to look at some of the pictures of the government housing in Baltimore and Boston, I was surprised to see that a lot of the housing in both are still high-rise buildings. In DC the public housing website shows a lot more low density and low rise developments, though I did not see any attached units like those in North Philadelphia. I am fairly certain I saw some in the Southeast quadrant of DC when I was there in the summer.

Philadelphia does have a large homeless problem. Many homeless people can be found at City Hall. It's kind of ironic to me that there is such a large concentration of them there. The area is also home to the cities largest subway station and near tourist areas. I'm surprised the city does not drive these homeless people away and to make themselves look better for the tourists. Most of the other cities I've been to like DC seem to hide their poor residents from tourists really well.