Pittsburgh Housing Authority begins replacing addison terrace (Stowe, Bedford: section 8, apartments)

[airwave09]

Pittsburgh Housing Authority begins replacing Addison Terrace


By Rich Lord / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


The Pittsburgh Housing Authority has received $12 million in low-income housing tax credits to complete the financing for the first phase of redevelopment of the Addison Terrace community in the Hill District, executive director A. Fulton Meachem Jr. said today.


The tax credits round out a $31 million package that also includes authority funds and money from other agencies that will pay for new infrastructure, demolition of antiquated buildings, and construction of 80 new townhouse apartments.


"That allows us to build a mixed-income property where Addison used to be," said Mr. Meachem. The 80 units in the first phase will include 56 apartments with subsidized rents for low-income households and 24 market-rate apartments.

Pittsburgh Housing Authority begins replacing Addison Terrace - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

[SuburbanPioneer]

There is a really good recent article which came out of Yale law school research project on why building mixed income housing projects is a bad idea in general:

The False Promise of the Mixed-Income Housing Project

Mixed-income affordable housing projects are unquestionably superior to the large ghettoized public housing structures that until recently blighted the most populous American cities. While the process of developing a mixed income project is likely to give rise to more red tape per subsidized unit, a private mixed-income project is likely to endure longer than a public housing project and to be better managed and less socially troubled.
Nonetheless, building mixed-income subsidized projects is a mediocre policy approach. In most contexts, using tax revenues to enhance spending on housing vouchers would be far more efficient and fairer than devoting those same revenues to providing inclusionary units. Moderator cut: quote shortened, copyright protection.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by SuburbanPioneer

There is a really good recent article which came out of Yale law school research project on why building mixed income housing projects is a bad idea in general:

I have no doubt that Section 8 is better for the former project residents than mixed-income communities. But let's be honest - generally cities don't want to disperse all the former project residents around the city, because they already get flak as it is from working-class neighborhoods which see an influx of new low-income tenants.

So there's three different forces working to hold the community together. The developers, who want to rebuild. The residents, who may want to keep a cohesive community. And the rest of the city, which sadly by and large doesn't want them moving anywhere else.

[speagles84]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have no doubt that Section 8 is better for the former project residents than mixed-income communities. But let's be honest - generally cities don't want to disperse all the former project residents around the city, because they already get flak as it is from working-class neighborhoods which see an influx of new low-income tenants.

So there's three different forces working to hold the community together. The developers, who want to rebuild. The residents, who may want to keep a cohesive community. And the rest of the city, which sadly by and large doesn't want them moving anywhere else.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Unfortunetly, most of these residents will be displaced to places that already are in decline and the current residents will blame them for the place going downhill.

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by speagles84

Couldn't have said it better myself. Unfortunetly, most of these residents will be displaced to places that already are in decline and the current residents will blame them for the place going downhill.

Bingo! Section 8 is hated by residents of marginal neighborhoods, who blame it for bringing riff raff into the area.

[Uptown kid]

[quote] The $31 million first phase is part of a $160 million plan to turn 734 low-income apartments into a 400-townhouse community with subsidized and market-rent residents.[quote]

-Ik the city set Addison Terrace, Formosa Way-Collier Street Apartments & East Liberty Gardens to be razed, but does the quote above infer that more housing projects city-wide are set to be razed/reconstructed for more "mixed income" townhouses?

[BrianTH]

I think Section 8 is blamed for much more than it is really responsible for, but it is undoubtedly true that public opposition to voucher programs is part of why developing mixed-income replacements for the projects remains popular.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

Bingo! Section 8 is hated by residents of marginal neighborhoods, who blame it for bringing riff raff into the area.

It's much better to concentrate all the riff-raff on plots of land in prime geographic locations.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

It's much better to concentrate all the riff-raff on plots of land in prime geographic locations.

I actually saw a guy on the main U.S. forum say:

Gentrifying the city is a foolish thing to do. I hate how metro areas are gradually shifting this way. Uniformity is better; poverty and crime should more or less be in one side of town and stay that way. This way you know what to expect, the entitlement complex won't continue to rise, and when there's no government interference with hiring practices and housing, your associates are all natural and wanted.

I've noticed in general the forumites in the other areas of this site seem to be more to the shallow end of the kiddie pool. Dunno why.

Edit: Terrace Village is not a prime area however. They had to do a lot of earth-moving work to create the flat land for the complex. Now it's more-or-less "locked in" to its winding street pattern, and won't ever connect well with Uptown, Oakland, or other parts of the Hill.

[Uptown kid]

Let's be real here the Hill was the city's murder capitol last year, and in recent previous year the stretch of land from Reed Roberts Manor to the end of Addison Terrace's Elmore Square/Bently Drive was statistically the ruffest in the city. Street gangs hade been in taking hold in Addison Terrace even before the nationally known street gangs like Bloods & Crips surfaced in Pittsburgh. That area has a well deserved bad reputation! Nobody is going to want to move in the complex to supersede a name synonymous with homicides like Elmore Square. Similar to Garfield Commons, Meyers Ridge, & Bedford Hills the mixed income complex set to succeed the former are going to turn out to be undesirable. The only reason Oakhill has become desirable is because the few section 8s are basically only limited to Burrows Street. East Liberty's & Stowe's mixed income only work well since their apart of decent neighborhoods. Luckily for Crawford Square's & OakHill's sake(s) they're somewhat issolated for the grimy part of the Hill.