Julian McRae & Aidan Sander

10:832:101:06

12/13/12

Affordable Housing

Since the early twentieth century, society and the government have recognized the need for affordable

housing to American citizens. From the inception of public housing to current day, the need for housing has not

changed, though the manner in which it dispensed has been altered. From the slum clearing of the 1930’s to the

high-rise building of the 50’s and 60’s, the aim of public housing has been to help shelter those who need

assistance in housing. Public housing has evolved and adapted to ever changing circumstances leading to varied

public policy and outcomes. Despite the noble aims of some, public housing has long had disreputable

practices, aimed at discrimination. Low-income minorities have long suffered unfair discrimination in the area

of public housing. Whether site discrimination or inferior living areas, low-income minorities have been at the

mercy of a biased system in need of reform. Finally, while public housing has been discriminatory, the aim and

the remedy the project provides is an essential one, which allows millions to afford housing they would

otherwise be without.

Public housing first came into focus during the Great Depression, as millions of people struggled to

afford homes during the economic downturn. Without jobs, many were unable to afford rent, leaving a

substantial need for government intervention. This came in the form of the National Housing Act of 1934, a

section of the New Deal, which created the Federal Housing Administration and housing and home mortgages

more affordable. Though this law focused more on preventing banks from foreclosing homes, it provided a

backbone for future legislation. The first major policy to address public housing was the Housing Act of 1937.

This bill provided subsidies to be paid from the U.S. government to local housing agencies to improve living

conditions for low-income families. Previous to the bills passage, the living conditions of urban immigrants and

those less affluent were detestable at best, with upwards of ten people sharing the same living space. In

addition, most tenements were windowless and provided poor to no air circulation, leading to health concerns.

In addition to improving living qualities, the act created the United States Housing Authority. While the act did

improve qualities, the purpose of the bill was not as noble as one might think, “The explicit purpose of the act

was to alleviate present and recurring unemployment and to remedy the unsafe and insanitary conditions and the

acute shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings for families of low income” (Stoloff). Building further on

the 1937 act, the Housing Act of 1949 brought even more sweeping change to affordable housing. Among other

things, the bill: provided federal financing for slum clearance programs associated with urban renewal,

increased authorization for the Federal Housing Administration, extended federal money to build more than

800,000 public housing units, and funded research for public housing research. In addition, the 1949 bill

brought planning into focus and designated planning as essential to modern cities, “Congress recognizes that

housing problems are part of a broader program of urban planning and development, that highways, parks,

schools, and business must be planned together with housing” (Wheaton). Consequently, affordable housing not

only is affected by the policy, but the importance of planning is highlighted. Furthermore, the bill enumerates

the affect urban areas have on the overall welfare of the nation, while also acknowledging the need for

government intervention to properly handle the issue at hand. This law was again expanded upon through the

Housing Act of 1954, which strengthened the need for comprehensive planning.

The next piece of legislation dealing with housing was not passed until the Housing and Urban

Development Act of 1965. This policy further strengthened existing policies while also creating the United

States Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition to creating a new department, the law gave

more money to federal housing programs and provided rent subsidies not only to the poor, but also to the

elderly, disabled, and veterans. To deal with discriminatory practices, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 section 8 or

the Fair Housing Act banned discriminatory practices. In addition, the act sought to encourage involvement of

private developers in the building of public housing through tax incentives and government subsidies. Finally,

in 1981 a bill mandated that rent maybe no more than 25% of someone’s total income if in public housing.

From 1981 no new major policies have been enacted, though in the twenty-first century the majority of federal

funds have been moved to voucher programs. Under such programs, the tenant pays 30% of their total income

to rent, with vouchers covering the difference. This has been both beneficial and detrimental as people now

have more flexibility with where they can live, but can encounter trouble with the vouchers themselves.

From the 1940’s until more modern times many planners and designers favored high-rise

buildings when creating new housing projects. Though high-rise buildings were often not the most cost-

effective option, they were typically preferred because the cost of land and relative lack of land in urban areas.

As a result, many of the housing complexes built during this time were in the mold of high-rise buildings. The

design of high-rise buildings was often plain and unappealing in a deliberate attempt to stigmatize renters. In

addition, planners high-rise buildings were made in a uniform manner to not only deflate buildings costs, but to

make it obvious to everyone that the complex was indeed a public housing facility. As a result of this practice

the average yearly income of tenants plummeted, “From 1950 to 1970, the median income of public residents

fell from 64 percent to 37 percent of the national median. By 1988, the average income of public housing

households was $6,539, one-fifth of the national average ($32,144) (Atlas, Dreier). This drop in income can be

explained by the migration of middle-income families away from public housing, due in large part because of

the preference against high-rise buildings. Another catalyst for declining income of average high-rise tenants

was the poor construction quality of most buildings. While the buildings materials may have been up to code,

many other aspects were deliberately neglected, “Even in contemporary cases where the buildings are well

constructed, basics such as floor space, closet doors, and reliable elevators might be lacking” (Stoloff). In

addition, the operational expenses quickly outpaced income and authorities lacked the means to provide day-to-

day maintenance, further deteriorating the quality of buildings. This confluence of factors helped contribute to

increasing poor tenants, which would have even more detrimental affects.

As those who made near the median average income left, they were replaced by people with incomes

far lower, creating almost exclusively destitute neighborhoods. With the exit of income came an entrance in

crime, and high-rise project buildings became hotspots for illicit activity. With crime on the rise, public housing

encountered new problems, while existing problems were reinforced. High crime rates exasperated the problem

of income as anyone who might have had even some income left for safer and better areas. Gang activity and

the inevitable collateral damage worsened an already dire situation. While high-rise buildings are not entirely

the reason for all the problems they building style does play a role, “One study found that in New York the

difference between high-rise and low-rise projects was much more significant as an explanation of crime rates

than was the ratio of welfare families. The study showed that the number of robberies in a housing project rose

proportionately with its height” (Atlas, Dreier).

Affordable housing is a public health issue that affects the quality of life. Housing choices open to

people with low to moderate incomes are often limited. These families will spend the majority of their income

on housing payments and sacrifice the purchase of other essentials, commute long distances to work, and/or

suffer overcrowded or unsafe conditions

There are four criteria of affordable housing; minimum volume of habitation, provision of basic

amenities, location of the house, and the cost of the house. A minimum volume of habitation is necessary

because space is limited in major cities to meet the demands for public housing. Apartment buildings are

favored since it is a form of vertical expansion. The basic amenities for any house include sanitation and a water

supply. Parks, schools, and healthcare within the neighborhood are favorable because it will decrease

transportation costs. The location of the house is crucial because if members of the household have to commute

long distances to work, they will end up spending more than if they lived close to work in a house that cost over

50% of the household income. It can also decrease the quality of life in the city by increasing the stress on

public transportation. The cost of the house has to be affordable to the household but at the same time enough

to maintain and sustain the house for years to come.

Sustainability is important when building a house. The housing quality & housing affordability must

continue over the housing’s expected life use (30-50 years). A House always looks good at completion but often

looks terrible a few years later. A city does not want their affordable housing to get to the point where it will

cost more to keep the buildings up than to just tear it down and build new ones. This will leave many families

homeless.

Affordable housing is the leading cause of homelessness. Between 1.6 and 3.5 million Americans were

homeless at some time during 2008 with 40% being children (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development). Communities also run the risk of becoming uniform without it. Families will lose the ability to

interact with people who may be in different economic or cultural circumstances than themselves.

Affordable housing is a necessity because of the many children affected. Hundreds of thousands of

American children have suffered disease, serious injury, malnutrition, and education failure due to living in

below standard housing. Poor families move over 50% more frequently than families that are not poor. Among

children who move more frequently, 23% fail at least one grade in school compared to 12% who never or

infrequently move (Legal Services of New Jersey). 18% of children who move frequently exhibit four or more

behavioral problems versus 7% among those who move infrequently or not at all (Legal Services of New

Jersey). High housing costs means that a family will spend less on other necessities such as food, clothing, or

childcare. Children who live in bad housing have lower educational attainment and a greater likelihood of being

impoverished and unemployed as adults. This will increase the amount of families that need affordable housing

in the next generation.

Works Cited:

http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/oor/2012-OOR.pdf http://www.njfuture.org/smart-growth-101/stories/2011-awards/hoboken/ http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/2005/07/sustainable_aff.html http://www.nj.com/hobokennow/index.ssf/2011/10/suit_alleging_hoboken_developm.html http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/affordablehousing http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-09-01/news/33535403_1_term-affordable-squatter-

settlements-and-slums-price-and-affordability http://cswac.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=28 http://www.lsnj.org/PDFs/criticalshortagehousing100703.pdf http://www.habitat.org/how/why/us_stats_research.aspx http://www.hcdnnj.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=592:new-jersey-needs-to-do-

more-to-meet-its-affordable-housing-goals&catid=20:in-the-news&Itemid=225 http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/sub_section_main_1305.aspx http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/77/ pubhsg.html http://reengageinc.org/research/ brief_history_public_housing.pdf http://rhol.org/rental/ housing.htm http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ hcv http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/topics/ housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8