Throughout time, starting around 1970, many policies, programs and movements were created for affordable housing in the San Francisco area and since then it has evolved immensely. In a city where the average income is about $84,000, affordable housing is necessary. The first program that I will talk about was previously mentioned, the Community Housing Movement, which began around 1970. This substantially transformed the city’s economic base by creating more than 200,000 units of price limited housing with at least 26,000 of these units being permanent affordable housing for the very low income individuals, families, seniors and disabled. Later in 1985, the department of City Planning adopted the Office Housing Production Program, which requires …show more content…
The overall success of these housing programs and policies are a result of three key factors: (1) dedicated community advocacy and strong coalitions; (2) development of and access to substantial funding sources; and (3) constantly evolving housing programs and policies that address new challenges and recognize opportunities.
Later in history, San Francisco’s housing programs and policies were getting different issues and concerns thrown at them, which made the city officials and residents progress and change their behaviors. For starters, in 1996, federal policies changed and about 8,000 affordable housing units were to be converted to market-rate housing, so in response the city created a housing preservation program to help protect them. This housing preservation program has three components: (1) education and outreach to tenants, (2) regulatory and legislative advocacy, and (3) facilitation of private property ownership to nonprofits or cooperative (Rosen and Sullivan, 2014). During this federal policy change, as a nation we lost over 100,000 affordable housing units, but San Francisco lost none. Clearly, this was an effective program. Another issue that arose was several events kept bringing in more
…show more content…
He really kept up with former mayor Koch’s ideas for the city’s affordable housing policies. Bloomberg made a plan to create and preserve 165,000 units of affordable housing during his time in office, which lasted from 2002-2013. He created a New Housing Market Program where private developers are offered tax breaks and density bonuses to develop affordable housing on newly zoned land. This was, in a way, the start of inclusionary zoning in New York City. It was introduced to the city in 1987, but only became a central element of the city’s policies when Bloomberg became mayor (Stabrowski, 2015). It was first introduced to promote racial segregation in the suburbs, but it now also services as a goal of the housing market in dense areas. Inclusionary zoning’s goal is to create below market rate housing and then provide those developers with tax breaks, density bonuses and/or access to cheaper financing. It can be voluntary or mandatory, citywide or a specific area, allow onsite development or offsite development, require different percentages of affordable units or differ in affordability levels and lengths. If inclusionary zoning was to ever become mandatory, it would bring more below market rate housing to the city, but it remains unclear if it would be permanent, thus it is still unknown if it would actually work in the long
Chicago’s Cabrini-Green public housing project is notorious in the United States for being the most impoverished and crime-ridden public housing development ever established. Originally established as inexpensive housing in the 1940’s, it soon became a vast complex of unsightly concrete low and high-rise apartment structures. Originally touted as a giant step forward in the development of public housing, it quickly changed from a racially and economically diverse housing complex to a predominantly black, extremely poor ghetto. As it was left to rot, so to speak, Cabrini-Green harbored drug dealers, gangs and prostitution. It continued its downward spiral of despair until the mid 1990’s when the Federal Government assumed control the Chicago Housing Authority, the organization responsible for this abomination. Cabrini-Green has slowly been recovering from its dismal state of affairs recently, with developers building mixed-income and subsidized housing. The Chicago Housing Authority has also been demolishing the monolithic concrete high-rise slums, replacing them with public housing aimed at not repeating the mistakes of the past. Fortunately, a new era of public housing has dawned from the mistakes that were made, and the lessons that were learned from the things that went on for half a century in Cabrini-Green.
Lance Freeman tackles the issue of gentrification from the perspectives of residents in the gentrified neighborhood. He criticizes the literature for overlooking the experiences of the victims of gentrification. The author argues that people’s conceptions on the issue are somewhat misinformed in that most people consider it as completely deplorable, whereas in reality, it benefits the community by promoting businesses, different types of stores, and cleaner streets. These benefits are even acknowledged by many residents in the gentrified neighborhood. However, the author admits that gentrification indeed does harm. Although gentrification does not equate to displacement per se, it serves to benefit primarily homeowners and harm the poor. Additionally,
The last big effect that comes from the urban housing reform is that it makes it difficult for people to get out of those areas. Living in urban projects is not a place where many people wish to be but they have no choice if they can’t afford to get out of the area. Some people re only able to afford living in those areas or cannot get a job that pays high enough to move to someplace else. This has created a vicious circle of the areas becoming more run down and more
look into its planning policies in order to prevent spatial segregation in Toronto. However does not explain what planning instruments are needed to help diversify the socio-economic composition of Toronto’s inner city. The article also suggests that for a more socially progressive city, anti-gentrification policies should be incorporated and adopted into Toronto’s official plan policies but does not explains what can be included as anti-gentrification policy.
Downs has sought to dispel myths surrounding housing policy. The first myth he debunks is the myth that all government-sponsored urban policies have failed. Downs believes that although they had resulted in greater hardships for poorer neighborhoods, the policies have given great benefits to a majority of urban American families. While he does not consider these policies to be a complete success, he refuses to call them failures due to the fact that they did indeed improve the standard of living for most of urban America. Downs also calls to our attention the effect of housing policies on the number of housing units. Starting in 1950, housing policies were aimed at ending the housing shortage until focus was shifted to low income households in the midst of the Vietnam War. To Downs, ending the shortage was important because it was affecting the American way of life. Couples were delaying marriage, extended families were living in one home, and overcrowded housing led to overcrowded local facilities, such as schools. Downs also argues that this overcrowding led to an inescapable cycle of “substandard”
Goetz, Edward G.. New Deal ruins: race, economic justice, and public housing policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013. Print.
As stated by Richard F. Burns and Thomas G. Vaccaro in Unaffordable Housing: A Root Cause of Social Inequality, 80% to 120% of area median income—also struggle to find affordable rental units in all 50 states. This lack of “workforce housing” results in their inability to live in or near the places where they work. Not being able to live near work if results in higher cost of living because you end up having to pay for either a car or, you could rely on public transportation or even have to pay forward gas money to another person. Housing also ties(“is also tied to”) to cost of living which turns out is very expensive. According to DePersio, Greg in "How Much Money Do You Need to Live in Los Angeles?, As of August 2015, the average rent in Los Angeles is $2,296 per month. Even if someone is only looking for a one-bedroom apartment, the average cost sits at approximately$1,950 per month. A two-bedroom apartment averages slightly over $2,500. So as one can see that they have to make at the very least $13 an hour just to pay rent, this does not even include food or utilities let alone if they have kids forget it. Because of unaffordable housing has left millions without homes making them fall under the category of
In contrast to popular assumption, discrimination in public housing is becoming more prevalent than ever before. Testing done by the Fair Housing Center of Greater Boston has found that today people of color are discriminated against in nearly half of their efforts to buy, sell, finance, or rent property (“1968-Present Housing Discrimination). The statistics are even worse when considering colored people who have families as the testing found that they are discriminated against approximately two thirds of the time (“1968-Present Housing Discrimination”) In addition to facing great difficulty in property affairs, people of color are less likely to be offered residence in desirable locations. 86 percent of revitalized
This housing affordability crisis is stripping away it’s diversity at increasing rates and I feel that not enough is being done to restore it. Liz Pfeffer article “Is the Bay Area in a Housing Bubble or a Crisis?” describes the situation as, “San Francisco’s chronic problem is a lack of housing for middle and lower-income people. It’s not that they can’t afford it, it’s that it doesn’t exist”. Officials should collaborate on creating solutions to the root causes and offer alternatives that would release some of the pressure. I would suggest promoting micro-homes or smaller scaled homes, limiting foreign investors’s purchases of single-family homes, or expanding campuses of employers to areas that are not heavily populated. It is not too late to restore the balance but it will take collaboration and team work. I am urging these officials and activists to try and save the beloved culture of this area and help retain it as a place where social justice is recognized and
Gentrification is designed to improve the quality of life for the residents, but the fact is that it pushes out old residents to welcome in young and wealthy citizens. To analyze the demographic even further, gentrified neighborhoods in New York City have seen an increase in white population despite a city wide decrease. As Kate Abbey-Lamertz of the Huffington Post states, “The report notes that change is driven by educated people moving in, rather than by existing residents becoming more educated.” These changes are being driven by a millennial demographic who can afford the changed aesthetic. The influx of millennials are pushing out families whose lifestyle can’t keep up with the changing demographic. Even though these changes have been occurring for almost thirty years, and the city hasn’t made the changes needed for people who need low income housing. New York City’s gentrification must be slowed in order for people in low income housing to catch
Sidney, Mara S. 2003. Unfair Housing: How National Policy Shapes Community Action. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas.
Therefore, the supply of housing that is affordable and accessible to low income people should be increased. Plus assistance that allows people to reach adequate stability should be regarded as a good investment in a productive society, in order to attain our objective. First we could start by introducing more productive assistance programs that actually focus on helping those in need of housing assistance. These programs will analyze how long people are homeless, what are their needs, the causes of homelessness, and in all how many are currently without a home. Subsequently, the City of Austin would begin building affordable housing according to the amount necessary.
The American dream was owning a house with a white picket fence. Now this dream is impossible. Individuals and families find it more difficult to find a decent home to rent in a suitable living area. According to Huffington Post, the hourly wage needed to afford a two bedroom apartment in California is at least $26 an hour. This is more than triple the minimum wage. Eviction, relocation, and inflation are the common keywords that associate with affordable housing. I 'm hoping to persuade you to support affordable housing for all. Today, I will be discussing, one, inflation of the housing market that needs to decrease, two, eviction from homes, three having to move to communities far from their work site.
The Housing Act of 1949 expanded the federal role in mortgage insurance and the construction of public housing. The act gave city officials the money to carry out their ambitions of reviving the American city. Title I, authorized on...
Gentrification is a highly important topic that has not only been occurring all over the United States, but especially closer than we may have thought. San Francisco is home to hundreds of thousands of people who have been a part of how amazing this city has become. San Francisco is one of the most visited places in the world with many of its famous landmarks, endless opportunities not only for daytime fun but also has an amazing nightlife that people cannot get enough of. People come for a great time and could not be done without the help of the people who have grown up to experience and love this city for what it truly is. The cost of living in such an important city has definitely had its affect of lower income San Francisco residents. For decades we have seen changes occurring in parts of San Francisco where minorities live. We have seen this in Chinatown, SOMA, Fillmore district, and especially the Mission district.