Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-07-2008, 09:38 AM
 
149 posts, read 201,210 times
Reputation: 37

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoFinance View Post
It's interesting that Manhattan, a supposedly wealthy and prestigious place, has so many housing projects. I'm not talking about just the ones in harlem and east harlem but the massive housing projects in prime real estate, like the lower east side next to east river, chelsea, lincoln center, and even upper east side. What's even more shocking is that there's luxury condos right next to these projects!

If NYC wants to get to the next level and truly become a great city, it should imitate Chicago's model of urban development, which is the gold standard for all cities. Chicago has destroyed most of the housing projects near prime real estate, such as the infamous cabrini green, which is near gold coast. As a result, Chicago from the south loop all the way north to rogers park, is impeccably clean, safe, and thoroughly gentrified. There's very few homeless people and violent criminals roaming the streets at night.

NYC still has a long way to go, and I wish it the best of luck. The next mayor and the city council should study Chicago's model. After all, there's a reason why Chicago is the favorite to win the 2016 Olympics.
Chicago is an ugly undesireable dump, why would NYC ever try to imitate Chicago?

There is a reason why Chicago's growth rate is in the NEGATIVE. Nobody cares about Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2008, 09:54 AM
 
34,094 posts, read 47,309,800 times
Reputation: 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoFinance View Post
If NYC wants to get to the next level and truly become a great city, it should imitate Chicago's model of urban development, which is the gold standard for all cities. Chicago has destroyed most of the housing projects near prime real estate, such as the infamous cabrini green, which is near gold coast. As a result, Chicago from the south loop all the way north to rogers park, is impeccably clean, safe, and thoroughly gentrified. There's very few homeless people and violent criminals roaming the streets at night.
HA! Chicago's model of urban development? What, to place a mile of projects along the Dan Ryan? NYC's projects were never on the decrepid level of Chicago's, and never will be. Thats why the CHA tore them all down, because they were in such a state of disrepair. The CHA was so broke in the 70s they did not even install entrance doors on the developments! Chicago has projects right across the street from the United Center on the West Side. You don't see projects on 34th Street in Midtown across from Madison Square Garden. As for the Lower East Side, that place has only become desirable to live in the last 10 years. What are we supposed to do, relocate people everytime some entrepreneur/developer proclaims some former high-crime area the new Bohemia? Thanks for your comments ChicagoFinance, but we're just fine.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: https://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Bay Ridge, NY
1,915 posts, read 7,986,001 times
Reputation: 559
Weren't Chicago housing projects torn down because guys used to sit on the roof and snipe cops who came by?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 09:58 AM
 
274 posts, read 1,109,045 times
Reputation: 119
[quote=Rudbeckia;4766500]Ace you can't have it both ways. You are anti-gentrification and yet you for tearing down the projects.

"Gentrification" applies to neighborhoods, and projects aren't neighborhoods. Projects are institutions where The Man herds people that society doesn't know what to do with... like prison.



So the working, middle to upper middle can push out the lower class, but the upper class pushing out the middle class should not be allowed??

I didn't say anything about lower/mid/upper class.

I said, "working class people." Most project dwellers belong in the NON-working class. They're publicly funded trust fund kids, and just as useless.


It is all about someone moving in that can afford more than someone else, what is the difference? Since you like middle class people more, they should get special treatment?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC & New York
10,914 posts, read 31,407,048 times
Reputation: 7137
The comparison of Cabrini Green to projects in Chelsea, the Lower East Side, and the Upper East Side is hilarious, since they are not vast tracts of despair, and largely coexist with the neighborhood without any problems. That's why someone will pay $2M for a condo in proximity, because there's no threat from them. I have never had any issue walking or driving by any project in the prime parts of Manhattan.

Also, in Chelsea and the LES, you have to be careful not to lump Penn South and Cooperative Village as "projects" as they are cooperatives, developed by unions, and are owned by their cooperators, many of whom lived in these areas before they became prime. So, the brick architecture might not be the most appealing in light of today's view, and the streamlined forms might more closely replicate a "project," but the people who live there OWN the buildings and they cannot be displaced by any whim. Moreover, the cooperators are not likely to stir up any trouble, and in fact do quite the opposite, and have helped to transform Chelsea and the LES. One does have to be careful around the cooperatives, though, since the roving gangs of retirees headed to the museum, the library, to do charity work, or to a Broadway show might be viewed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 10:03 AM
 
149 posts, read 201,210 times
Reputation: 37
I'm still waiting why this allegedly amazing city of Chicago is experiencing NEGATIVE growth?

I've been to Chicago (too many times) and it is always truly boring, ugly, rotten and part of the Midwest. Soon Houston,TX will surpass Chicago and that's such a pity.

People are fleeing because it's a dump and nobody is moving in for a reason.

NYC should follow Chicago's urban planning, how hilarious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Grand Forks
190 posts, read 814,399 times
Reputation: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace Rock View Post

So the working, middle to upper middle can push out the lower class, but the upper class pushing out the middle class should not be allowed??

I didn't say anything about lower/mid/upper class.

I said, "working class people." Most project dwellers belong in the NON-working class. They're publicly funded trust fund kids, and just as useless.
That was the intention of the projects. To house the city workers and other working class people. It's doing the experiment all over again with sexy results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 10:29 AM
 
Location: outer boroughs, NYC
904 posts, read 2,873,857 times
Reputation: 453
I'm from the New York area and currently live in Chicago. I think New York is the greatest city in the country, but I like Chicago quite a lot, too, it's just different. So on behalf of those of us (well, me) who like both places, can the OP please stop trolling around like a fool? Or, can someone else not take the bait? These people should not be encouraged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 01:06 PM
 
90 posts, read 423,294 times
Reputation: 67
I think an argument could be made that projects/public housing just subsidize big business. They can pay working class people pathetic wages because those people can live in public housing. If public housing didn't exist, the businesses would be forced to pay them a livable wage so they could live within commuting distance of work. I don't know how that would work in practice. I'd be interested to hear about a city that did away with public housing altogether (not just move it farther away) and what happened next.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2008, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Bay Ridge, NY
1,915 posts, read 7,986,001 times
Reputation: 559
https://www.city-data.com/forum/chica...8-percent.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top