Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is no one aware that the residents of the Frederick Douglass Houses on St. Nicholas, when made aware that the NYCHA was taking land (parking lots and a bit of green space) to build a school, filed a major law suit ?
Is no one aware that the residents of the Frederick Douglass Houses on St. Nicholas, when made aware that the NYCHA was taking land (parking lots and a bit of green space) to build a school, filed a major law suit ?
I don't get why NYCHA residents even have parking lots. I mean if you can't afford to pay the normal rent why do you have a car? Many NY-ers who pay normal rent can't afford a car yet people who live in Nycha can Especially at FDH. Train/Bus access is great there.
I don't get why NYCHA residents even have parking lots. I mean if you can't afford to pay the normal rent why do you have a car? Many NY-ers who pay normal rent can't afford a car yet people who live in Nycha can Especially at FDH. Train/Bus access is great there.
Many have asked this.
We cannot afford, responsibly, to keep a car in Manhattan. At the complexes near-ish to us, however, the parking lots are filled with newer SUVs.
Another way to explain: There were numerous meetings about one of the NYCHA complexes - including residents. Residents talked about people openly dealing drugs, exhibiting violent behavior, etc., and some of those attending were outraged that they could not be immediately evicted.
Setting aside the burden of proof, it is the simple fact that there is nowhere to place these people. This is a key reason for the projects being maintained with the population they are. Once you evict these people, where do they go ? Do they simply wander the streets ? Camp in the parks ? What ?
Do YOU want hordes of anti-social, former NYCHA generational welfare people wandering the streets ?
And in our current legal climate, can you imagine the lawsuits ?
This is what I was getting at earlier. There will always be that element. What do we do with them? I don't see any realistic solutions here at all. Adding to the homeless population achieves little and people will complain about that too.
As for razing the projects (a la Chicago, or New Jersey), did that actually impact the poverty at all? Instead of projects you now have subsidized "garden apartments." They look better, but still have the same ills that plagued the projects.
That's why I wonder if there truly is a solution -- there will always be an element that is anti-social, doesn't believe in working, and doesn't care to achieve anything. This is probably a first world problem moreso than a third world, where if you don't work, you absolutely won't eat. Hardworking people who happen to be poor, I have no problems with. Maybe if the projects were comprised of 95% of these people there wouldn't be an issue. The anti-social, generational welfare crowd are a group all to their own but so many people lump them together with working poor and I don't feel that's right.
This is what I was getting at earlier. There will always be that element. What do we do with them? I don't see any realistic solutions here at all. Adding to the homeless population achieves little and people will complain about that too.
As for razing the projects (a la Chicago, or New Jersey), did that actually impact the poverty at all? Instead of projects you now have subsidized "garden apartments." They look better, but still have the same ills that plagued the projects.
That's why I wonder if there truly is a solution -- there will always be an element that is anti-social, doesn't believe in working, and doesn't care to achieve anything. This is probably a first world problem moreso than a third world, where if you don't work, you absolutely won't eat. Hardworking people who happen to be poor, I have no problems with. Maybe if the projects were comprised of 95% of these people there wouldn't be an issue. The anti-social, generational welfare crowd are a group all to their own but so many people lump them together with working poor and I don't feel that's right.
The theory was that the housing projects wearhouse poverty and encourage the development of antisocial elements. So they deliberately scattered the people in those Chicago housing projects over a wide area, some poor suburbs, rural Illinois, rural Indiana.
Also, I'm not saying that there shouldn't be housing aid. But why should taxpayers have to pay for people to be housed in the most expensive real estate in the nation? Middle class people can't even dream of living in Manhattan, so why do those on welfare HAVE to live there? There's 50 states in the country, and New York has how many counties?
Also, do keep in mind that by providing this housing, you actually enable those who are addicts to continue being addicts. They won't change unless they have to.
The theory was that the housing projects wearhouse poverty and encourage the development of antisocial elements. So they deliberately scattered the people in those Chicago housing projects over a wide area, some poor suburbs, rural Illinois, rural Indiana.
Also, I'm not saying that there shouldn't be housing aid. But why should taxpayers have to pay for people to be housed in the most expensive real estate in the nation? Middle class people can't even dream of living in Manhattan, so why do those on welfare HAVE to live there? There's 50 states in the country, and New York has how many counties?
Also, do keep in mind that by providing this housing, you actually enable those who are addicts to continue being addicts. They won't change unless they have to.
That's true. There is no reason for these ppl to stop. But in what kind of housing accomodations does these ppl live in? I would say pretty crap. So there is no reason to be jelaous.
I don't get why NYCHA residents even have parking lots. I mean if you can't afford to pay the normal rent why do you have a car? Many NY-ers who pay normal rent can't afford a car yet people who live in Nycha can Especially at FDH. Train/Bus access is great there.
Historically NYCHA buildings were built during the age of personal automobiles were to be the future of this country, but the recent economic downturn and the rise of the Millennial generation changed that scope. So of course Robert Moses and friends equipped some housing project with parking lots. Not all Housing projects have massive parking lots. Example in Mott Haven their are four housing developments, Millbrook, Paterson, Mott Haven, and Mitchells, Mott Haven Project has one tiny parking lot which is only reserved for employees, Paterson projects has no parking lots for residents and only for employees, as well as Millbrook projects has one tiny parking lot only for employees. Only Mitchells has 5 massive parking lots + 1 for employees, the reason why this development has so many parking lots to the fact that the expressway entrance and exits is directly across the street from the housing project. At the sametime that development has a subway station located directly downstairs. Some one will have to do some investigation and research on to why some NYCHA developments come equipped with parking lots.
I'm sorry Mathjack... I got to single you out to some extent: You are moving to a less "oppressive state" ( in your own words) please explain how you are opressed in the state of NY? I know you like guns ...
some people don't want to be a slave to the system,
since they're already so far behind. they let the rest
of us do that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.