October 16, 2013
Gang Leader for a Day Essay
The city of Chicago used to be one of the largest city containing high-rise public housings in the nation. The Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) owned 43,000 units with a population in the hundreds thousands of residents. The second wave of project housing was an attempt to construct newer and safer Urbanist-style housing projects “because Chicago can also destroy”. Chicago Housing authority reports.Since the mid-1990sthe city of Chicago had torn down about half of its public-housing high-rises citywide because of the increase of the criminality rate in the projects. In 2000, in an effort to build and strengthen communities by integrating public housing tenants into a social and economic mainstream , reduce the criminality rate, and improve the landscape of the city, the CHA planned to transform the city by demolishing, then rebuilding, or renovating25,000 units of public housing. Thirteen years after the start of the Chicago Housing Authority’s Plan for Transformation, more than 16,000 families have been relocated into variety types of habitat, and different neighborhood in the city. The relocation has not been as effective as it sounded in the initial plans of reducing poverty, and crime rates, and integrating formers residents of housing project in the mainstream society. Where were the families relocated? What became the trends of criminality? How is the new Chicago landscape? I will explore the population relocation and their change in income, the landscape, and the rate of criminality in the most popular Chicago once projects, Cabrini Green, Taylor Homes, and Adams, Brooks, Loomis, Abbott (ABLA) projects. Chicago Housing Authorities relocated families are living in projects in different type of housing which are; mixed income, Housing Choice Voucher, Scattered site, Traditional Public Housing. The CHA has constructed thousands of units mixed income developments. The housing types feature townhouses, duplexes, condos, single family homes in good neighborhood throughout the city. However, a very small numbers of housing project residents can leave in the mid-incomes habitat due to the fact that the number of housing available was significantly less than the number of families to relocate. For that, the CHA has to determine who may be qualified and cope with the rules and expectations to fit in those areas based on screening and monitoring by private developers such as being drug free, having a good credit, and having no police records. The families that made it in were required by the CHA to work at least thirty hours a week or enroll in job training or school for a comparable amount of time (the housing authority arranged for city colleges to be free to tenants). New tenants in the mixed income development were safe but felt like they were in a prison. They had to learn to be more reserved, act a certain way in fear to receive any complaints from their prejudicial neighbors. The Housing Choice Voucher was the major program assisting CHA-subsidized housing types. In a research at the University of Chicago, forty percent of the 9980 households remaining in 2008 were awarded vouchers. With voucher programs,” the participant is free to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing projects” U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development. Unfortunately the majority of voucher holders have relocated to traditional black neighborhood in the South and West side of Chicago. Some families that receive vouchers are unable to find a house or apartment where they would like to be even if the price of the house is within the price of their housing voucher. Landlords sometimes are unwillingly to accept vouchers because they don’t want to deal with bureaucratic hassles, or have doubts about the tenants whether the latter can cause trouble, or simply because they know that their units can be...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document