Urban planners face an affordable housing crisis compounded by federal programs that eliminated subsidized housing. Prior work indicates profit-making motivations and race influenced housing removal but overlooks planning efforts to rebuild affordable housing. This paper explores the neighborhood factors affecting the redevelopment of subsidized housing under the Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE VI) program, using multivariate regression analysis of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Census data. Findings show housing market indicators, racial composition, and poverty rates do not predict the mix of rebuilt units, which suggests opportunities for planning to promote affordable housing goals in public–private development projects.
Abt Associates and Econometrica, with FinkelMerylHansonCharlesHiltonRichardLamHin-KinVandawalkerMelissa. 2006. Multifamily Properties: Opting in, Opting out and Remaining Affordable. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
2.
AchtenbergEmily. 2002. Stemming the Tide: A Handbook on Preserving Multifamily Subsidized Housing. New York: Local Initiatives Support Corporation.
3.
BaronRichard D.2009. “The Evolution of Hope VI as a Development Program.” In From Despair to Hope: HOPE VI and the New Promise of Public Housing in America’s Cities, edited by CisnerosHenryEngdahlLora, 31–47. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
CharetteAllisonHerbertChrisJakabovicsAndrewMaryaEllen TracyMcCueDaniel T.2015. Projecting Trends in Severely Cost-burdened Renters: 2015-2025. Columbia, MD: Enterprise Community Partners.
6.
ChaskinRobert J.JosephMark L.2015. Integrating the Inner City: The Promise and Perils of Mixed-income Public Housing Transformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7.
ChristensenKaren S.2015. “Both Process and Outcome Are Essential to Planning.” Journal of Planning Education and Research35 (2): 188–98. doi:10.1177%2F0739456X14566277.
8.
FainsteinSusan S.2005. “Planning Theory and the City.” Journal of Planning Education and Research25 (2): 121–30. doi:10.1177/0739456X05279275.
9.
FeldmanRoberta M.StallSusan. 2004. The Dignity of Resistance: Women Residents’ Activism in Chicago Public Housing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
MarciaFernald, ed. 2018. The State of the Nation’s Housing 2018. Cambridge: Joint Center for Housing Studies.
11.
FosburgLinda B.PopkinSusan J.LockeGretchen P.1996. An Historical and Baseline Assessment of HOPE VI: Vol. 1. Cross Site Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
12.
FreemanLanceBoteinHilary. 2002. “Subsidized Housing and Neighborhood Impacts: A Theoretical Discussion and Review of the Evidence.” Journal of Planning Literature16 (3): 359–78. doi:10.1177/08854120222093419.
13.
GalsterGeorgeTatianPeter. 2009. “Modeling Housing Appreciation Dynamics in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods.” Journal of Planning Education and Research29 (1): 7–22. doi:10.1177/0739456X09334141.
14.
GoetzEdward. 2010. “Desegregation in 3D: Displacement, Dispersal and Development in American Public Housing.” Housing Studies25 (2): 137–58. doi:10.1080/02673030903561800.
15.
GoetzEdward. 2011. “Gentrification in Black and White: The Racial Impact of Public Housing Demolition in American Cities.” Urban Studies48 (8): 1581–604. doi:10.1177/0042098010375323.
16.
GoetzEdward. 2013. New Deal Ruins: Race, Economic Justice, and Public Housing Policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17.
GreenRichard K.MalpezziStephen. 2003. A Primer on U.S. Housing Markets and Housing Policy. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
18.
GressTarynChoSeungjongJosephMark. 2016. HOPE VI Data Compilation and Analysis. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
19.
HowardAmy L.2014. More than Shelter: Activism and Community in San Francisco Public Housing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
20.
JohnsonJennifer S.TalenEmily. 2008. “Affordable Housing in New Urbanist Communities: A Survey of Developers.” Housing Policy Debate19 (4): 583–613. doi:10.1080/10511482.2008.9521648.
21.
KeatingLarry. 2000. “Redeveloping Public Housing.” Journal of the American Planning Association66 (4): 384–97. doi:10.1080/01944360008976122.
22.
KingsleyG. Thomas. 2017. Trends in Housing Problems and Federal Housing Assistance. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
23.
Manning ThomasJuneHwangHee-Yun. 2003. “Social Equity in Redevelopment and Housing: United States and Korea.” Journal of Planning Education and Research23 (1): 8–23. doi:10.1177/0739456X03257257.
24.
MarcusePeter. 1978. “Housing Policy and the Myth of the Benevolent State.” Social Policy8 (4): 21–26.
25.
MeléndezEdwinSchwartzAlex F.MontrichardAlexandra de. 2008. “Year 15 and Preservation of Tax-credit Housing for Low-income Households: An Assessment of Risk.” Housing Studies23 (1): 67–87. doi:10.1080/02673030701730714.
26.
MiraftabFaranak. 2004. “Public-private Partnerships: The Trojan Horse of Neoliberal Development?” Journal of Planning Education and Research24 (1): 89–101. doi:10.1177/0739456X04267173.
PopkinSusan J.KatzBruceCunninghamMary K.BrownKaren D.GustafsonJeremyTurnerMargery A.2004. A Decade of HOPE VI: Research Findings and Policy Challenges. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
29.
SagalynLynne B.2007. “Public/Private Development: Lessons from History, Research, and Practice.” Journal of the American Planning Association73 (1): 7–22. doi:10.1080/01944360708976133.
30.
ShamsuddinShomon. 2018. “Estimating the Effects of Public Housing on Intergenerational Mobility.” Paper Presented at Annual Conference of Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Buffalo, NY, October 25.
31.
ShamsuddinShomonValeLawrence J.2017a. “Hoping for More: Redeveloping U.S. Public Housing without Marginalizing Low-income Residents?” Housing Studies32 (2): 225–44. doi:10.1080/02673037.2016.1194375.
32.
ShamsuddinShomonValeLawrence J.2017b. “Lease It or Lose It? The Implications of New York’s Land Lease Initiative for Public Housing Preservation.” Urban Studies54 (1): 137–57. doi:10.1177/0042098015614248.
33.
TurbovMindyPiperValerie. 2005. HOPE VI and Mixed-finance Redevelopments: A Catalyst for Neighborhood Renewal. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
ValeLawrence J.2013. Purging the Poorest: Public Housing and the Design Politics of Twice-cleared Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
ValeLawrence J.2018. After the Projects: Public Housing Redevelopment and the Governance of the Poorest Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
ValeLawrence J.ShamsuddinShomon. 2014. “All Mixed Up: Defining Mixed-income in Public Housing Redevelopment.” Paper Presented at Annual Conference of ISA World Congress of Sociology, Yokohama, Japan, July 18.
38.
ValeLawrence J.ShamsuddinShomon. 2017. “All Mixed up: Making Sense of Mixed-income Housing Developments.” Journal of the American Planning Association83 (1): 56–67. doi:10.1080/01944363.2016.1248475.
39.
ValeLawrence J.ShamsuddinShomonKellyNicholas. 2018. “Broken Promises or Selective Memory Planning? A National Picture of HOPE VI Plans and Realities.” Housing Policy Debate28 (5): 746–69. doi:10.1080/10511482.2018.1458245.
40.
WatsonNicole E.SteffenBarry L.MartinMargeVandenbrouckeDavid A.2017. Worst Case Housing Needs: 2017 Report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
41.
WexlerHarry J.2001. “HOPE VI: Market Means/Public Ends.” Journal of Affordable Housing and Community Development Law10 (3): 195–233. doi:10.2139/ssrn/266181.
WilsonJames Q., ed. 1996. Urban Renewal: The Record and the Controversy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
44.
WoodDavidSchmidtPaul. 2003. Public Housing: HOPE VI Resident Issues and Changes in Neighborhoods Surrounding Grant Sites. GAO-04-109. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office.
45.
ZhangYanWeismannGretchen. 2006. “Public Housing’s Cinderella: Policy Dynamics of HOPE VI in the mid-1990s.” In Where Are Poor People to Live? Transforming Public Housing Communities, edited by BennettLarrySmithJanet L.WrightPatricia A., 53–79. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.
