If you live in a really nice older community

[lynn]

with good schools, very low crime, everyone knows one another, how would you react to the local Housing Authority purchasing an aparment building in your area for public housing without notifying the community on what was going on? Our city wants to do away with an area of public housing complexes and "deconcentrate"(I think that is word they are using) and spread ph throughout the community. The housing authority is saying crime is no higher in ph areas than any other community, it will not affect the schools ratings or property value.

[Danestress]

I know here, we have had vocal protests to rezoning property so that multi-family housing can be built, and just up the road that a happened - a developer wanted to purchase land and then rezone it so that they could build condos. The neighbors prevented them from doing it. That was right before we moved in.

 

But since in your situation, the apartment building is already there and already meant for a certain population density, I am not sure that they have to notify anyone.

 

I can certainly understand the housing authorities reasoning. No one really wants public housing in their neighborhood. Poor people don't want public housing, middle class people don't want it, and people in nice older homes with good schools don't want it. I'm sure that they never put in a new public housing area that the neighbors are particularly welcoming, but I can understand that they are looking at it from their clients perspective and thinking, "Hey, we could offer these people public housing in a low crime area with great schools." But I am surprised if it's true that crime is no higher in public housing areas than in the current neighborhood.

[fivetails]

If by "public housing", you mean housing that is rented to low-income families at a subsidized rate, or such (yes?) then - I would not object. How could I, as a family who has been that low-income 'public housing' family in the not so recent past? As the friend & family member of people currently living in that kind of 'public housing'? As the wife of a man who grew up in 'public housing'?

 

As a matter of fact, I think the idea that your city has - spreading the low income housing units out around the city, as opposed to shoving them all together in one area, is a fantastic one. That crime rate that you're concerned about - often times, that is increased in "low income areas" *because* you've got all these families ~~ families for whom life is often difficult, challenging, frustrating, depressing, etc ~~ shoved together (I'm not talking about one apartment building - I'm talking about whole sections of towns/cities..)...I've watched this happen, families 'feeding off' the troubles of others around them. Know what I mean? From my own experience, it was often difficult to keep a positive outlook when I was surrounded by people who were sometimes on the verge of just giving up.... the "low income areas" ~~ or "ghettos" if you want to call them that ~~ also tend to be in the "yucky" parts of town... when dh was a little boy, he and his friends played cars in the cement parking lot across from a strip bar. Physical surroundings have a lot of impact on the way that a person feels about themselves, their life, etc.

 

Anyway.. that's just my short thoughts on it, haven't had all my coffee yet so if I'm not as articulate as I want to be, well, yeah :lol:

 

.. I wouldn't be upset about the fact that it's 'public housing' - lower income families need homes too. ;)

 

(Now, if the issue is strictly 'zoning' -- ie, a business where a business is not supposed to be, an apartment where only single family houses are supposed to be, etc etc ... that's a different issue.)

[JFSinIL]

I'm with fivetails on this one. And I have high rise public housing a couple blocks away, plus tons of lower income folks all around the neighborhood. Crime/conditions are worse in the high rise - it is far better to de-concentrate the public housing into smaller units spread out.

 

Chicago has had clumps of high rise public housing that ended up being torn down as the high rises just became crime pits (and pity the simply poor folks who had to try and live surrounded by crime/gangs! Harder to keep your growing kids out of trouble when they are surrounded by it - crime "pits" jsut breed more criminals).

[lynn]

If by "public housing", you mean housing that is rented to low-income families at a subsidized rate, or such (yes?) then - I would not object. How could I, as a family who has been that low-income 'public housing' family in the not so recent past? As the friend & family member of people currently living in that kind of 'public housing'? As the wife of a man who grew up in 'public housing'?

 

As a matter of fact, I think the idea that your city has - spreading the low income housing units out around the city, as opposed to shoving them all together in one area, is a fantastic one. That crime rate that you're concerned about - often times, that is increased in "low income areas" *because* you've got all these families ~~ families for whom life is often difficult, challenging, frustrating, depressing, etc ~~ shoved together (I'm not talking about one apartment building - I'm talking about whole sections of towns/cities..)...I've watched this happen, families 'feeding off' the troubles of others around them. Know what I mean? From my own experience, it was often difficult to keep a positive outlook when I was surrounded by people who were sometimes on the verge of just giving up.... the "low income areas" ~~ or "ghettos" if you want to call them that ~~ also tend to be in the "yucky" parts of town... when dh was a little boy, he and his friends played cars in the cement parking lot across from a strip bar. Physical surroundings have a lot of impact on the way that a person feels about themselves, their life, etc.

 

Anyway.. that's just my short thoughts on it, haven't had all my coffee yet so if I'm not as articulate as I want to be, well, yeah :lol:

 

.. I wouldn't be upset about the fact that it's 'public housing' - lower income families need homes too. ;)

 

(Now, if the issue is strictly 'zoning' -- ie, a business where a business is not supposed to be, an apartment where only single family houses are supposed to be, etc etc ... that's a different issue.)

 

This is what I think also. The townhall meeting got out of hand with calling for the resignation of the housing authority board etc. The residents presently in the apartment buildings can stay if they qualify which I think is making under $50,000 a year. The city is paying moving expenses for those who do not qualify plus different in rent when they find a new place for I think I read 48months. I am all for giving people a break in life, give them a nicer place to raise their children. So few residents are embracing the idea and the one lady that did speak up was not very popular.

[Julie in CA]

That crime rate that you're concerned about - often times, that is increased in "low income areas" *because* you've got all these families ~~ families for whom life is often difficult, challenging, frustrating, depressing, etc ~~ shoved together (I'm not talking about one apartment building - I'm talking about whole sections of towns/cities..)...I've watched this happen, families 'feeding off' the troubles of others around them. Know what I mean? From my own experience, it was often difficult to keep a positive outlook when I was surrounded by people who were sometimes on the verge of just giving up.... the "low income areas" ~~ or "ghettos" if you want to call them that ~~ also tend to be in the "yucky" parts of town... when dh was a little boy, he and his friends played cars in the cement parking lot across from a strip bar. Physical surroundings have a lot of impact on the way that a person feels about themselves, their life, etc.

 

I think it's a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" thing. What makes the difference is whether you believe that it's a shame that the lower-income folks have to live in the "yucky" parts of town, and that they'd be fine if they lived somewhere else, or whether you believe that those "yucky" parts of town are created by the people living there, and that the lower-income folks would just re-create their previous lifestyle, making your area of town into the new "yucky" part of town.

 

Honestly, I understand the concerns on both sides of the issue, and I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't be (secretly) concerned about both my family's safety, and my property value. Now, would I say anything about it, ever? Probably not. -But I'd be a bit worried.

 

In my little hick town, there was a nice area of town near a local elementary school, ready for development. A couple of blocks of low-income housing were put in. This is not a slum. The homes are nice, the cost was extremely affordable, good school within 2 blocks, nice landscaping, adequate law enforcement patrols, but still much of the crime in our town happens in that area now. I feel sorry for the folks with existing homes in the area, and I'd be very unhappy had my home been in that area.

 

I guess I don't know how to reconcile my feelings on this. Is the problem that low-income families are stuck in high crime neighborhoods and can't get out, or do they *create* the high crime neighborhood, and would just transfer that to a new location? I don't know.

 

The sleazy porno-liquor store in our town is in the neighborhood it's in *because that's the location of it's clientelle*.

 

Ultimately, I guess what would make a difference to me is the size of the apartment building. Are we talking about 8 units, or 80? 8 units would be, in my opinion, a great chance for people who want out of low income/high crime neighborhoods to make that move. 80 units, and I think the problems would just move in with them.