The Atlanta public housing project Herndon Homes, located off of Northside Drive, is being torn down. It was one of the few remaining housing projects left in the city following an ambitious initiative to replace the projects with mixed-income communities.
The demolition, which started earlier in the winter, is slated to be finished by May. Once it is torn down and housing market conditions are more favorable the land will be shopped around to developers and non-profits for development, according to Atlanta Housing Authority spokesman Rick White.
White says that close to 250 families used to live in Herndon Homes, and those who qualify have been given certificates that allowed them to relocate to other private-sector homes and apartments and pay the same amount of rent. "I think it's been extremely effective, " White says, "and I think the affected families would tell you so. It has allowed families to move into much safer areas, areas closer to their employment and with better schools."
Deiredre Oakley, assistant professor at Georgia State, has been working with her colleagues on a study that has followed 400 individuals who used to live in Atlanta public housing. In the last year, Bowen Homes, Bankhead Courts, Hollywood courts, Thomasville Heights, Herndon Homes, Hollywood Court, MLK Tower and University Homes have all been razed. Palmer and Roosevelt houses are slated to be imploded later this year. Most of the city's other projects were demolished starting in the '90s.
"I would say there are individual successes if you take the the program as a whole, but I don't think you can say based on our data that the program is a complete success," Oakley says. "The outcomes are very mixed. There are some people who do really well, but there are problems that come up."
Among the problems Oakley cites from her study are the continued segregation of Atlanta's poor, with former housing residents relocating to neighborhoods which are almost as bad as the neighborhoods they left. (Ostensibly, the aim of the demolition was to see that low-income residents be dispersed among middle-income neighborhoods.) "Public housing had a poverty rate, on average, of 44 percent," she says, "and in the neighborhoods they are moving into, it's an average 30 percent."
Another thing she has found is that many former residents have had to move more then once because of negligent landlords and poor upkeep of apartments. If a subsidized apartment fails its federal inspection, the resident is forced to move giving an already marginalized population even less stability, Oakley says. "This has happened to 25 percent of the 200 people with whom we have completed follow-up interviews. Around 20 percent have had to move more then once."
According to Oakley the destruction of public housing could have negative effects over time for the city's poor. "Very very affordable housing is being destroyed, and you are not replacing it at the same rate," she points out. "All the fixed, low-income housing is being destroyed and greater dependence is [placed] on private rental market housing."
Unlike with traditional public housing, "there is no guarantee that the housing will remain low income overtime," Oakley says, "which could result in people with really low incomes not having any place to live."
(Photo by Joeff Davis)
Showing 1-5 of 5
This falls into the realm of mixed blessings for me. Yes, many of the dilapidated and poorly designed public housing complexes need to be razed. And I appreciate that the current residents get vouchers. But the focus needs to be on replacing housing units. Vouchers are a very expensive means of providing assisted housing. And while the current residents have a short-term guarantee of rental assistance, the unit is forever lost to those who might need help in the future. Demolition is a good idea. But replacement is needed. They should be replaced in a more dispersed mixed-income setting, but replacement of public housing units is a vital step that is missing from the conversation..
"White says that close to 250 families used to live in Herndon Homes, and those who qualify have been given certificates that allowed them to relocate to other private-sector homes and apartments and pay the same amount of rent." Would this be the same as section 8 housing? If so, it is still the ghetto regardless if it is city owned or just city subsidized apartments. A high concentration of people that need rental assistance is simply not a good idea. They need to be distributed through out neighborhoods...not simply in one large cesspool.
Very very affordable housing is being destroyed, and you are not replacing it at the same rate Isn't this what we want to have happen? Shrink the supply of where these people can afford to live and maybe they will move out of our city. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.
Apparently you have not noticed the housing glut, including gobs of empty condos and apartments. The last thing we need is more building.
I think anyone who thinks its a good idea for "these people to be forced out of there city and homes" is a good thing, must have never been without. If you think its good for children who have poor parents to have less than other children, I think you should be careful. It only takes one bad situation and you could loose everything. Its only the grace of God that all of us aren't classified as "poor". Everyone is intitled to decent and affordable housing, no matter what their income is!!!!!!!!!!!