Is Public Housing Worth Saving?

18 February 2004 - 3:00pm

As Seattle embarks on four HOPE VI projects, the program's philosophy remains questionable and its future uncertain.

Guest columnist Howard Husock warns Seattle, and all recipients of HOPE VI funds, that the success of the public housing rehabilitation program was constructed on shaky assumptions. The HOPE VI program seeks to rectify the concentration of poverty that often results with public housing projects by attempting to mix the poor with the non-poor. "The stakes are high: It can well be anticipated that, if maintenance declines, middle-income families will desert the development, leaving behind the feared concentration of poverty." Husock also questions the work ethic that subsidized housing inspires, and the sageness of cities dedicating land to low-income housing for perpetuity.

Source: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, February 15, 2004
Bookmark and Share
These practices are also inequitable since they force non-drivers to subsidize parking costs, reduce travel options for non-drivers, and reduce housing affordability.