Why Public housing isn't booming in chicago? (section 8, 2013)

[chubs]

Only Expensive highrise buildings, condos, and studios

[Vlajos]

Because Daley II implemented the "Plan for Transformation", whose untold goal was to demolish and disperse out of the City the vast majority of public housing residents. Not likely to change under Rahm.

[jwaiter]

Originally Posted by chubs

Only Expensive highrise buildings, condos, and studios

Not my area of expertise, but I'm pretty sure public housing is alive and well in Chicago.

home | Chicago Housing Authority

"CHA is the largest owner of rental housing in the city of Chicago, providing homes to more than 50,000 families and individuals, while supporting healthy communities in neighborhoods all across the city. CHA has more than 9,200 apartments in buildings designated for seniors and over 11,400 units in family and other housing types. It also oversees the administration of 37,000 Housing Choice vouchers that allow low-income families to rent in the private market.
CHA is currently undergoing the Plan for Transformation, the largest and most ambitious redevelopment effort of public housing in the history of the United States. As part of the Plan, CHA will redevelop or rehabilitate its entire stock of public housing."

[Manigault]

We have stopped warehousing folks and gone to Section 8. On balance, it is better to have folks with different income levels throughout a community. Section 8 is no panacea, though. I have seen folks evicted for not paying rent of less than $100 per month. On the other hand, people can get thrown out for a child being arrested for selling drugs. Not convicted or charged, just arrested.

[Vlajos]

What do you think, chubs?

[chubs]

The only public housing are for seniors, what about the families

[Vlajos]

read above

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Because Daley II implemented the "Plan for Transformation", whose untold goal was to demolish and disperse out of the City the vast majority of public housing residents. Not likely to change under Rahm.

A lot of what happened was ordered by Federal courts, although, as Vlajos posted, the details of how it happened were set out by Daley in The Plan For Transformation. The CHA was placed in receivership in 1987, and is currently in the process of coming out of it. The process should be complete sometime in 2013. The Gautreaux decision in 1969 also had a huge impact on where and how public housing could be developed, and HUD ordered the demolition of nearly 20,000 public housing units in the 90's.

The complete disaster of public housing highrises also means that any increase in public housing construction is not going to be massive new buildings. If there is funding for more public housing it will go to small developments scattered around the city.

[rparz]

Whatever they end up doing, I'm sure it'll be under the microscope of a myriad of government agencies, so it's not as if they're exactly flexible.

And, it does sound like housing vouchers dispersed in areas is the way they're going rather then the high rise apartment complexes.

[Vlajos]

Remember robert taylor homes? Something like 16 high rises for blocks along the ryan. Every single one is gone, demolished in the 2000s.