Jump to content

Public Housing in Alabama


Southron

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Here's a shot of just a very small portion of the Hope VI Park Place development (in the foreground) that's located on the western side of downtown Birmingham. They're actually very, very nice.

quickchange-1141334122198.jpg

If you're in Birmingham anytime, you can get a good view of the scope of the project if you're on I-20/59 and get off on the Red Mtn. Expressway heading south. You'll see it on your right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Probably not a good idea to tear down all the public housing and replace it with Hope VI, as someone suggested, unless you make sure all (or nearly all) of the public housing units are replaced in the new developments. Sure it may help spruce up a community, but you don't want to end up throwing families and old people out into boarding houses or interstate overpasses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably not a good idea to tear down all the public housing and replace it with Hope VI, as someone suggested, unless you make sure all (or nearly all) of the public housing units are replaced in the new developments. Sure it may help spruce up a community, but you don't want to end up throwing families and old people out into boarding houses or interstate overpasses.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very much in agreement with the last two posts. At the federal level, I think we need a policy of 100% demolishment for these old housing projects, with displaced tenants moved into HOPE VI (mixed-income neighborhoods) or reintegrated into the larger housing market ("mainstreamed," to borrow a word from our education system). We made a huge mistake in this country in the 1900s when so-called "slum" neighborhoods were demolished and poor residents forced into these lousy housing projects. We physically created the crime problem that we've had for the last few decades in this country. We would have been a hell of a lot better off, financially and socially, if we had created renovation programs to save those old run-down neighborhoods instead of bulldozing them and creating an even bigger and more expensive problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We would have been a hell of a lot better off, financially and socially, if we had created renovation programs to save those old run-down neighborhoods instead of bulldozing them and creating an even bigger and more expensive problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what's funny is that the system we've had is not only bad for subsidized housing recipients and bad for the cities; it has also served to promote corruption among the housing authorities that administer section 8 funds. in many cases (at least in smaller cities), no one wants to have anything to do with the local housing authority, so they don't inquire too pointedly about what the housing board does. that is further compounded by the fact that there's no financial incentive for local oversight under section 8, since the subsidies are federally-funded. so you have a director and a board who often collude to intentionally misspend the money. it can go on for years, because, left to their own devices, housing boards can tweak their way through routine audits. the overall lack of community involvement in block housing projects has segregated cities physically, and isolated (and protected) the people who hold the purse strings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.