It’s always interesting to read about the “urban housing crisis” or whatever you want to call it.

Basically, the question is, how do you best provide safe, affordable housing to poor people who live in urban areas? Well, how does government provide this, is the real question. If you don’t buy into the idea that government should have a role (and I guess I don’t), that’s a whole other conversation, isn’t it?

Anyway, I’ve found three fascinating articles about the topic. Two are from The Atlantic, one is from the New York Times. I have to admit, I haven’t been able to get through all three. But, I know they’re gonna be good.

(The middle article was written in 1966 … 40 years ago. Let’s see how things have changed since then.)

American Murder Mystery: Why is crime rising in so many American cities? The answer implicates one of the most celebrated antipoverty programs of recent decades. – By Hanna Rosin, The Atlantic

New Yorkers Without a Voice: A Tragedy of Urban Renewal – By Arthur R Simon, The Atlantic

As Program Moves Poor to Suburbs, Tensions Follow – By Solomon Moore, The New York Times

Couple of stories in yesterday’s Globe that you probably saw, but in case you didn’t.

Broker’s clients detail web of dashed dreams – By Kimberly Blanton, The Boston Globe

Over the past couple of years, a lot of people bought homes they can’t afford. You may have heard about that. In some cases, the buyers were poor credit risks and/or borrowed more than they should have. A lot of the time, they couldn’t even afford to make their first payments, which only got worse once their adjustable-rate loans reset.

In some cases, fraud was committed, either by the borrowers or their lenders.

The Globe ran a story about this woman who apparently forged a lot of loan applications and documents. Over and over again.

The borrowers, of course, claim ignorance about the whole thing.

Amazing story. No one comes out looking good, in the end.

(** Point of clarification: the first person profiled is Marcia Neilson, a woman who “bought a Dorchester house” according to the reporter. Makes it out to seem like she was taken advantage of. Well, sort of. The “house” was actually a two-family home, so the woman who bought it wasn’t so much a “homeowner” as an “investor”, which, of course, frames the story a little differently. Also, it’s not as if the homeowner investor was completely ignorant. She put down over $100,000 at closing, according to the public record. Was she taken advantage of?)

As gentrification spreads, rich, poor seek a balance – By David Abel, The Boston Globe

The South End of Boston has more low- and subsidized-housing units than any other neighborhood within the city. It also has a couple of shelters for the homeless or recently homeless.

Some people are proud of this. And/or satisfied with the status quo.

Other people, however, are not totally happy. Or, to be perfectly clear, they’re not so pleased with having to watch homeless drunk guys urinate out their back door or get into fights in front of them and their children.

As gentrification spreads to nearly every corner of Boston, the city’s largest homeless shelters, once outposts in rough-and-tumble neighborhoods, have found themselves surrounded by pricey condos, luxury hotels, and ritzy restaurants.

“The new environment will be a continuing challenge that requires a great deal of faith, a willingness to listen, and avoiding jumping to stereotypes, on all sides,” said Lyndia Downie, president of the Pine Street Inn.

To some others, though, even just bringing up the subject leads to immediate criticism.

I give you the South End Is Over blogger:

An interesting article on the homeless and local gentrification by David Abel appeared in today’s Boston Globe. As usual, some Nouvelle South End residents expressed their displeasure at having to come into contact (well, only visual contact) with, gasp, homeless people!! Can you imagine?!

Of course, the Pine Street Inn (a homeless shelter located off of Harrison Avenue in the South End) is to blame for the hordes of homeless causing mayhem in our visual landscape.

What’s right, what’s wrong?

Toward the end of the year, everyone’s out with data on just about everything.

Today I read about the number of murders going down in many major US cities, this year.

Year-to-date, at least.

Unfortunately, some cities have experienced increases.

Historic low in NYC, Chicago homicides – By Colleen Long, Associated Press

City — 2007 — 2006

Boston — 66 murders — 73 murders;
New York City — 484 murders — 582 murders;
Chicago — 435 murders — not available, but lowest since 1965;
Miami — 79 murders — 86 murders;
Atlanta — 126 murders — 111 murders;
Philadelphia — 390 murders — 401 murders;
Phoenix — 207 murders — 214 murders;
Baltimore — 280 murders — 276 murders (all of 2006);
Newark — 98 murders — 106 murders;
Dallas — 200 murders — 175 murders.

At the beginning of this year, it looked as though all US cities were going to endure more murders (and, presumably, more other violent crimes). Fortunately, it looks as though it never happened.

The big question is, of course, what happens if the economy goes sour? Bad times bring desperate people.

(Oh, in case you forgot or are just joining us, Boston had only 31 homicides in 1999, the lowest number recorded in the city, ever.)

I’ve always wanted to visit Buffalo.

Friends say I shouldn’t bother.

I can see why they say that.

From a story in today’s Times:

Vacant Houses, Scourge of a Beaten-Down Buffalo – By Ken Belson, The New York Times

Gangs, squatters and teenagers [in Buffalo] have been burning down hundreds of houses a year, straining the meager resources of the Police and Fire Departments. Some of the properties have been turned into crack dens and places to stash guns and drugs. A few have been booby-trapped or had their floors ripped out by scavengers looking for pipes they can sell to metal dealers.

So Mayor Byron W. Brown recently unveiled a $100 million five-year plan to rip down 5,000 houses, about half of all the vacant houses in the city, which ranks second only to St. Louis in the percentage of vacant properties per capita nationwide.

Again:

… ranks second only to St. Louis in the percentage of vacant properties per capita nationwide …

That’s terrible.

What’s wrong with Buffalo?

According to census figures released last month, nearly 30 percent of Buffalo’s residents live in poverty, a rate surpassed only by Detroit among the nation’s largest cities. As a result, large numbers of homes continue to be abandoned, and there is not enough money around to build new ones in their place.

That’s really terrible.

Buffalo is not the only city considering such drastic measures.

Philadelphia’s efforts led to a mini-renaissance in recent years; Detroit has had more mixed results. Youngstown, Ohio, is debating whether to bulldoze entire neighborhoods and turn them into parks. (Youngstown being the basis for the Bruce Springsteen song, of course.)

(In a similar way, some people proposed that a “new” New Orleans be rebuilt as a much smaller, safer city, but of course, any calls for reconfiguring that city were shouted down in a chorus of political correctness.)

Of course, tearing buildings down is the “easy” part.

Deciding what to put in their place, is hard.

Getting the new buildings built, is harder still.

Boston has done a pretty good job of tearing down old, abandoned buildings.

It has done a fair job of replacing the empty lots that remain with new housing and community centers.

Yet, too many empty lots remain. You can see what I mean if you ever take a drive through parts of Dorchester and Roxbury.

Still, seeing what Buffalo’s going through, you have to be pretty thankful that we’ve got it this good.

Meanwhile, a local developer has proposed this 23-story residential tower (with a library, community room, wine cellar, multi-media room, and doorman).

Lately, there’s been a lot of talk about old Boston neighborhoods being “reconnected” to the city. The North End was cut off from the rest of Boston by the Central Artery, built in the 1950’s. Now, the depression of the Artery allows for the “stitching” of that neighborhood with downtown Boston.

Likewise, parts of Chinatown were destroyed, buildings torn-down or chopped in half, also for the artery (people love cars, I guess?). As I mentioned in an earlier post this week, plans are underway to reclaim some of that land, to be used by long-time residents for desperately-needed housing.

And, of course, everyone laments the loss of Boston’s West End, where the towers of the Charles River Park loom, today. (People have short memories and like to romanticize the past, I guess?)

There are less well-known neighborhoods that were destroyed in the interest of “urban renewal’ of the 1950’s and 1960’s.

The “New York Streets” neighborhood was located where the Boston Herald’s offices are, today. According to what I’ve read, it was home to many different races, mostly lower-income people.

Here’s a photo of what was left of the neighborhood, after they built the Southeast Expressway.

- click to blow-up image

Um, yeah. It’s gone.

Interesting, I never thought about it very much, but I think what was happening on the left was a result of what was happening on the right, and in the middle.

A neighborhood wiped-off the face of the earth, because the old way of moving goods (and people) changed from railways to highways.

Fascinating.