WHITE PLAINS CITIZENETREPORTER SETS RECORD VISITS FOR YEAR 7,017,658 VISITS! 2,098,003 VISITORS MADE 6 VISITS A DAY EVERY DAY. 63,330 UNIQUE VISITORS MADE 133,730 VISITS IN DECEMBER. WPCNR AVERAGED 17,284 VISITORS A WEEK, VISITING 31,270 TIMES.

Hits: 0

WPCNR HALO WATCH. From Cushman & Wakefield. July 6,2009(EDITED): In the White Plains Central Business District (CBD), direct asking rents declined in April, May and June, registering $32.32 psf, a decrease from the $34.53 psf last quarter and $35.55 psf one year ago.  The White Plains Non-CBD direct asking rents averaged $32.28 psf, a slight decrease from $32.34 psf last quarter but an increase from $31.77 psf one year ago.

 

Cushman & Wakefield reported the Westchester County commercial real estate market showed a continued decrease in key indicators across the county.  Class-A leasing activity, however, increased this quarter — totaling approximately 234,019 square feet (sf), up from 100,746 sf last quarter. This increase is due primarily to one tenant lease.

 

 

A total of 408,040 sf of space was added to the market inventory this quarter, a 27% increase over the 319,933 sf added last quarter.  More than half of the space added (206,081 sf) to the vacancy this quarter was sublease space.

 

The overall Class-A space available in the county rose to more than 4.4 million sf (msf) in the second quarter, a slight increase from 4.2 msf last quarter and a jump from the 3.6 msf this time last year.  Of that available space, more than 920,000 sf is sublease space.  Sublease space represents more than 53% of the available space that’s been added to the market since this time last year. 

 

Overall vacancies continued to increase countywide with the vacancy rate for Class-A space registering at 20.6%, an increase from 19.4% last quarter and a substantial rise from the 16.7% vacancy rate of one year ago.  These increases, reflecting the national real estate trend, were primarily due to the increase in sublease space returned to the market from such tenants as Alliance Bernstein for 94,693 sf, Pernod Ricard for 33,263 sf and GFK Custom Research for 24,000 sf.

 

“Commercial real estate traditionally lags behind and reflects the economy, so it’s no surprise that we’re still dealing with a difficult market,” said Jim Fagan, senior managing director and head of Cushman & Wakefield’s Fairfield and Westchester County region.  “While the market is still in the midst of a storm as tenants downsize their space needs and leasing activity slows, there are several large tenants — possibly as many as ten — that are choosing this time and environment to acquire additional space.”

 

Direct asking rents for Class-A space countywide at the close of the second quarter averaged $31.29 per square foot (psf), down from $31.96 psf last quarter and $32.13 psf one year ago.  Although asking rents remain fairly stable, they are not reflective of actual taking rents, which have decreased substantially, especially when combined with the ever-increasing landlord concessions.

Overall absorption for Class-A space in the county in the second quarter totaled negative 231,629 sf, compared with negative 371,343 sf absorbed last quarter and negative 206,213 in second quarter 2008.

 

Major transactions that occurred during the second quarter included the 114,940-sf lease signed by Transamerica Financial at 440 Mamaroneck Avenue in Harrison and Westchester Medical’s lease for 31,631 sf at 2700 Westchester Avenue in Purchase.

 

Mr. Fagan said, “Financially stable landlords own most of the major office buildings in the county.  Because of that, Westchester County should not go through wholesale re-trading the way we did in the early 1990s.  I have confidence in this market — it’s fundamentally sound.” 

 

WESTCHESTER COUNTY ECONOMY

 

Westchester County has experienced slightly less job loss than the nation as a whole; with an unemployment rate in May 2009 at 7.0% (June data is not yet available), well below the national average at 9.4%.  (National unemployment rose slightly to 9.5 %, however, statistics are not yet available for Westchester County.)  The county continues to experience weakness related to the concentration of corporate offices, as many companies have been shedding white collar jobs. While continuing to shed jobs, Westchester appears to be in somewhat better shape than the rest of the country.  Overall, we expect Westchester to track national trends because of its diversified industry and employment base and reach a trough in employment during the second half of 2009 before recovering in 2010. 

 

INVESTMENT SALES

The investment sales market remained stagnant registering only one sale for the quarter; 425 South Broadway in Tarrytown at $2.5 million or $59/sf.

 

Mr. Fagan added, “The investment markets have, and will continue to be, extremely slow predominately due to three factors: (1) credit markets remain very tight as lenders, not sure which direction the commercial real estate market is heading, increase the covenants needed to complete a loan; (2) sellers who do not have to sell will not sell into a devalued market; and (3) sellers who have to sell, often times can’t if they have too much leverage on the properties.  We see this as a cyclical trend that will improve over time.”

 

Hits: 0

 

 

WPCNR NEWS & COMMENT. By John F. Bailey. July 3, 2009: Since no other media electronic, print or internet has considered rebuilding 9 acres in the heart of White Plains and replacing it with seven 15-story towers  2,000 more residents (WPCNR estimate)  and two long blocks of retail on the Winbrook site is important or worthy enough to report on, someone has to do it.

 

 

 In the presentation to a handful of Winbrook residents last Tuesday, attended by this reporter,  Winbrook residents appeared wowed by the simple “gee-whiz”  sketches of partial views of the Winbrook Revitalization presented by architect Gary Warshauer, still asked shrewd, penetrating questions no Common Council person has thought of to ask.

 

One resident asked if public housing tenants would be mixed in with the moderate income and market rate unit renters and the answer from Terry Walton, a consultant with the White Plains Housing Authority was Yes.

 

Another resident asked if present seniors at Winbrook shouldn’t have their housing built first, so they would not have to move twice, suggesting the senior assisted living building be built first. They were told some seniors might have to move twice.

 

However, if I were on the Common Council tonight, I’d ask the following and demand answers before I voted this zoning in.

1. What is the property tax effect on the property if it is still owned by the Winbrook Housing Authority after all 7 buildings are built and managed by a private developer (s), yet the property  produces income for the developer(s)?

 

2. How much in tax credits will be enjoyed by the developer(s) who build the affordable housing portion.

 

3. How much in property taxes will the developer (s) pay on the market rate housing?

 

4. What will the site look like from street level? Viewed from the North, and West? No one has any idea at the present time based on the rudimentary sketches shown so far.

 

TENANT QUALIFICATIONS

 

5.  Will Winbrook residents of today have to be employed? Free of drugs? Earning a certain amount of income? (The requirements of the three HUD projects cited by the White Plains Housing Authority as examples of what they might do last week do.)

 

6. Will present Winbrook residents be subject to requalification based on income, criminal records, credit records?

 

BUILDERS/DEVELOPERS/CONSULTANTS

 

7. Will minority contracting, engineering firms, architectural firms be required to be hired? So far the only engineering and architects on this project are very white – but wait that is a minority in White Plains, isn’t it?

 

8. Will contractors building the site be required to hire minority workers to work on the site? Will they be required to train Winbrook-based youth and workers to join their unions? 

 

WHAT STIMULUS MONEY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?

 

9. Specifically what wave of economic stimulus money is the project going to apply for and has to apply so quickly for  that the Winbrook zoning has to be approved tonight?  (Without more specific information on the project and HUD’s role?)

 

 

 

 

A press release from HUD last week, shows there are a lot of projects ahead of the opportunistic White Plains Housing Authority and the usual suspects of city architects, engineers and consultants who are salivating about the money raining down across America and want a piece of it.

 

According to a press release from the Department of Housing and Urban Development,  announcing $1 Billion to jump start affordable housing programs, released 6 days ago, June 30,at http://portal.hud.gov/portal/page?_pageid=153,8081865&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

and I quote:

 

The current economic and financial crises present significant challenges for the construction industry, particularly residential construction. One of the by-products of this crisis has been the freezing of investments in the low income housing tax credit (LIHTC) market. The tax credits create an incentive for investors to provide capital to developers to build multi-family rental housing for moderate- and low-income families across the nation. Since the contraction of the credit market, and as traditional investors remain on the sidelines, the value of tax credits has plummeted. Consequently, as many as 1,000 projects (containing nearly 150,000 units of housing) are on hold across the country.

 

In response, the Recovery Act provides $2.25 billion for TCAP, a grant program to provide capital investments in these stalled LIHTC developments. HUD is awarding these TCAP grants by formula to 52 state housing credit agencies (all 50 states plus the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) to complete construction of qualified housing projects that will ultimately provide affordable housing to an estimated 35,000 households nationwide. Since a major purpose of this program is job creation, the Recovery Act establishes ambitious deadlines for expenditure of grant funds and requires state housing credit agencies to give priority to projects that can begin immediately and be completed by February 16, 2012.

 

I repeat, for the Common Councilmembers who might miss it, this news release from HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan came out last Tuesday, June 30.

 

So, if I were on that Common Council, I want to know from the White Plains Housing Authority, how come we have to pass this zoning tonight, when there are already 1,000 projects ahead of us? What real shot do we have of bypassing these 1,000  projects and getting our paws on $500 Million or more?

 

I want to know from the White Plains Housing Authority how White Plains can cut the line, (is this the White Plains High School Money Cafeteria) so to speak to get a share of this $2.25 Billion  when any project eligible for that Obama booty  has to be completed by February 2012 as indicated in the news release? Has Nita and Chuck and Hillary greased the skids?

 

The White Plains Housing Authority said this project could take 8 to 10 years, that would appear to mean that this HUD money simply is not accessible for this project. Is it?

 

If so, what money does the White Plains Housing Authority have in mind? Admittedly, a government-connected consultant is working with them (ICG), but hey, does that mean we are guaranteed HUD money?

 

HOW FAST CAN THE WHITE PLAINS HOUSING AUTHORITY GET THE PAPERWORK IN?

10. Considering how long it took White Plains affordable housing projects at Hortons Mill (a 17-unit project) and South Kensico (42-unit project) to get going (a tedious long five years with very slow paperwork filing by the two developers – way slow, plus begging over $1.1 Million in taxpayer dollars from the city, awarded the two projects by the Common Council), how fast is the Housing Authority and their consultant going to get through the paperwork on a 1,100 unit project to HUD’s satisfaction?

In a week after approval, perhaps?  If they don’t get the proposal in by the next Common Council meeting, the zoning should be rescinded. To hear the Housing Authority talk, they have the application ready to go, and it has to be sent in now to get the funding. Is it ready? I’d ask that question: Mr. White Plains Housing Authority

 

DETAILS OF DEVELOPMENT

11. What is going to be built on the west side of South Lexington Avenue: townhouses? (No one has supplied the details other than some retain,  townhouses? What?)

 

12. Will property owners on the West Lex side and both sides of West and East Post Road  be eminent-domained if they do not cooperate?

 

13.How much is the entire project envisioned to cost?

 

14. Are those private owners expected to contribute money to the revitalization of their share of the Lexington Avenue West Side, and both sides of Post Road?

 

15. What if the private owners do not contribute and leave the property just the way it is? What is the plan because there does not appear to be a plan?

 

QUALITY OF LIFE

 

16.    What will happen when new housing is built beside the present Winbrook buildings with the residents still in them? (I have lived with housing renovation two and ½ years and it is no fun? Living with heavy construction night and day for eight years? How many will stay? And will it compromise the objective of the project?

 

17.    Is the real objective to remove as many of the lowest income residents as possible by making their lives more unbearable than they already are? And following the interminable wait that displaced tenants in Detroit and Chicago experienced and are experiencing?

 

WILL THE NEW WINBROOK BE A KINDER, GENTLER,MORE ATTRACTIVE WINBROOK

 

There is a case history involving just this sort of construction proposed by the White Plains Housing Authority – “construction across the street while you wait construction.”

 

 In the Chicago Legends South project, one Robert Taylor projects building (the Henry Horner homes)  had replacement housing built right across the street from it, again turning to the Chicago Reporter:

 

“In the early 90s, the Henry Horner homes residents through public advocates sued the Chicago Housing Authority, saying the state of their buildings amounted to “de facto demolition entitling them to immediate replacement housing.” They won, and the first replacement units were constructed in 1996.”

 

However, the result has not changed life significantly, to wit:

 

According to The Chicago Reporter: “At Horner (replacement homes) there is no work requirement because of the (court ordered) consent decree. There is no minimum income requirement attached to any of the public housing units. The right of return is denied to convicted felons, and anyone who is evicted  or voluntarily.”

 

The advocate lawyers say the result has failed to change the Robert Taylor Projects “astmosphere,” again, we quote from reporter Casey Sanchez’s story:

 

“While building replacement housing next to existing public housing units makes relocation timely and humane for residents, the advovates say it also makes it difficult for residents of the new mixed-income housing to separate themselves from the crime that plagues existing Chicago Housing Authority high-rises. Neighborhood security is one of  West Haven’s most intractable problems. Failure to provide effective policing and to evict tenants who break the law or violate their leases are serious threats to realization of the West Haven mixed-income vision, according to the Web site for Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, the group that brought the Horner Case.”

Read the story at http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=148319656

 

 

 

18.How fast will Winbrook residents move in? 

 

19,How many affordable housing tenants and market rate tenants will move in with the first select Winbrook residents?

 

20. How long will the construction take per building?

 

21. Will some units be condominiums eventually? Does developer have to go back to Common Council to reformulate how units are offered to the markets?

 

SELECTION OF RETAIL/BUSINESSES?

 

19. When will the retail be leased up– simultaneously with tenant move-in or secondary?

 

20. What types of retailers will be considered?

21. How will retail in that part of town draw business from downtown?

 

22. Last week, at the meeting with tenants, The White Plains Housing Authority said that after the zoning approval tonight, they would do an environmental review,involve the tenants and the community and the project would be planned. Isn’t this backwards?

 

POST OFFICE REDEVELOPMENT FIT?

 

23. How will the New Winbrook relate to the U.S. Post Office plan to develop the White Plains Post Office site on Fisher Avenue – another megaproject no one knows anything about? Why don’t we? Shouldn’t we? Before HUD and the Post Office and the Housing Authority show us how it is going to work together and bring money into the city coffers?

 

Of course, there may be other projects that have worked out better for the low income residents of Chicago Legends South, Detroit’s Woodbridge and Atlanta project, and living in a construction site for 8 to 10 years may appeal to the 1,000 residents of Winbrook for a chance at a deluxe apartment in the sky.

 

 

IMPACT ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT

 

24. The White Plains City School District is in financial crisis and at building capacity now.  Within eight years, how many more children will this new low income, affordable housing and market rate project pump into the district? 

 

25. Will the new residents – WPCNR estimates the full population will double to over 2,500 persons—will they pay their way? Or will the individual property owner pay and pay for the cost of educating the children coming in? A little projection please? Remember two thirds will be affordable housing (middle class) and market rate(young couples). That could mean a baby or two. It’s got to mean a baby or two.

 

If I am the Common Council I have to fly out to Chicago, Detroit and Atlanta and see how this has worked and what they have done. I have to read some of the studies on what revitalization has really done across the nation. In my brief search over the last five days, this is what I have turned up. The White Plains Housing Authority consultant should have had that ready and presented to the Common Council before now, shouldn’t they?

 

IMPACT ON CITY INFRASTRUCTURE

 

26. If you have 2,500 more residents in that area of the city, the police and infrastructure needs have to grow. How will they grow? Will HUD money pay for it all? Will Developer Money Pay, as Mr. Cappelli had to do?  Not having an Enironmental Review first — paid for by the developer(s) means that if you approve the zoning, the city does not know what it is getting into! Who will pay?

 

 

IS THIS A DONE DEAL?

 

 

The White Plains Housing Authority has not done its homework. At least Louis Cappelli did that, and he built everything in five years – Not 8.

 

We have not heard from one HUD honcho that they love this project and have set aside $500 Million just for us.

 

27. Could we produce Nita Lowey, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton  or even Bill Ryan to say – I have here from our President Barack Obama, $500 Million! In HUD money.

 

Where is that promise?

 

28. Are we to believe our project is  going to jump ahead of 1,000 stalled housing projects? Is a project that we do not even know what it is going to look like yet, going to be completed in three years, as the HUD Secretary claims the extra $2.25 Billion is going to go to?

 

If such as promise has been made, then let’s see it in writing.

 

Where’s the letter?

 

If there is no letter, what is the rush?

 

IS THIS JOE DELFINO’S LAST BIG DEAL?

 

But, of course, no one on the Common Council is going to want to be accused of losing the city $400 Million to $500 Million to who knows, maybe a Billion in free money.

 

The architects will do great. The engineers will do fine. The contractors and developers will do great feeding on White Plains Housing Authority largesse. As Commissioner of Planning Susan Habel, says key to growth is providing persons to attract retail.

 

Will this work? Where is the evidence that it has worked?

 

Where did all the poor people go in those three developments? Not all to a better life,according to what I read.

 

The council tonight will be sold a bill of goods that this project, to be soon followed by the post office project will save the Adam Bradley administration. But again I go back to my first question – what is the tax impact?

 

I think you have to have that before you approve that zoning tonight.

 

What’s a month or two or three or four?

 

Shouldn’t the Mayor-to-be, Adam Bradley be entitled to examine this decision in depth before he is saddled with the biggest project White Plains as ever seen that he cannot stop and has no control over? The White Plains Housing Authority will become an empire, controlling 9.5 acres, millions of dollars in contracts and consultancy fees, virtually a city within a city, with money.

 

I would want a lot more information before I bobble-headed my “yes” vote tonight.

Hits: 0

WPCNR THE HOUSING NEWS. By John F. Bailey. July 4, 2009: It is unclear how new public housing replacement projectsopened in the last ten years benefitted residents of public housing – at least in Detroit.

 

 Rehousing residents of decaying housing and where they go after they are moved out due to demolition of their projects and where they are today is somewhat hard to tell.

 

 

In Detroit, an article by The Michigan Messenger (A Center for Independent Media  website) in December, 2007, came to the conclusion that Woodbridge Estates (a collection of town houses and a renovated residential tower) at Wayne State University in Detroit the figures are not clear on how many of 600 displaced persons now live in the new Woodbridge townhouses and single family homes. http://michiganmessenger.com/611

 

Woodbridge Estates is one of the developments presented as a model for what White Plains Housing Authority this week for what the WPHA hopes to accomplish with the help of the Department of  Housing and Urban Development.

 

The sales manager of Woodbridge could not the news reporter  tell how many displaced residents from Jeffries –West Homes (the project Woodbridge replaced have moved into it.

 

 

Woodbridge consists of townhouses and single-family homes priced from $179,000 to $339,000 in 2007 before the real estate debacle of 2008.

 

Todd Craft, Michigan Messenger reports, identified by community sales manager for Woodbridge said that of the 600-plus Jeffries Projects residents “relocated” in 1998, “300 were located where opportunities became available again for purchasing units for rentals. Of them, none of them purchased and some went to the rental side.”

 

Messenger reports “Craft could not supply the exact number for how many former residents now live in the rental side (of Woodbridge Estates).”

 

Craft, Messenger reports, did say that 38 of 40 of Woodbridge rental residents come from the city of Detroit.

 

Craft confirmed though that when the Jeffries project was raised to build Woodbridge, residents were not forced to live “on-site” next to the Woodbridge construction. They were moved to “nearby apartments” in Research Park and Freedom Place.

 

How did that work out?

 

Reporter Brandon Q. White quotes Corey Sammons, the site manager at Research Park reported only 10 to 15% of that project residents came from the Jeffries displaced residents. Research Park has 98 low-income units of 245.

 

Significantly, Sammons reported to White, that Research Park now has the same problems of the Jeffries Projects, drugs and crime.

 

Getting back to Woodbridge Estates, Messenger reports that site manager Craft as saying that of the rental units, 60% had some subsidy and 40% were market rate. Through the HUD Hope 6 home ownership program HUD, subsidized purchases of the homes.

 

In Woodbridge Sales side, the project has 60% at market rate, and 40% “receive a subsidy in the form of a grant or a second mortgage and that a second mortgage is forgiven if the resident stays for seven years.”

 

Craft said that when the units became available for purchase, 300 of the 600 persons displaced from Jeffries, were found and offered the Woodbrige homes for purchase.

 

None bought.

 

Though the White Plains Winbrook project up for its critical “clear the track” zoning approval Monday evening, despite County Planning Department objection to the procedure, would construct new units while present residents are living on the site, no project that the White Plains Housing Authority cited as an example have not made residents stay on site while the new projects were built.

 

 

Hits: 0

 

 

WPCNR THE HOUSING NEWS. By John F. Bailey. July 3, 2009: The Westchester County Planning Board in a letter from Deputy Commissioner of Planning Edward Buroughs dated June 19, cautions the City of White Plains strongly not to pass the zoning change clearing the tracks to rebuild Winbrook by adding  Winbrook  into the Central Parking District. Mr. Buroughs says it violates  standard New York State Environmental Quality Review procedures. Nevertheless, council is proceeding on schedule for the approval Monday night.

 

The major zoning change is on track for a continuance of its public hearing Monday night and an expected  “super hot rush approval” by the Common Council  Monday evening because, because the White Plains Housing Authority.

 

 

Commissioner Buroughs advised the city June 19 that due to the “significant impact on community character, makes the concurrent review of detailed site plans and the proposed zoning amendment all the more important.”

 

 

Commissioner Buroughs expresses the county’s reluctance to bless the zoning change, after noting that  “Planning for a mix of fair and affordable housing to a range of incomes, integrated with commercial services, should set the framework for creating a more attractive, functional and vibrant community. We are further encouraged that the proposal calls for on-site relocation of current residents.”

 

However, Buroughs is troubled, nonetheless:

 

In a paragraph in a letter to Anne McPherson, the City Clerk, on “Procedural Considerations,” He writes:

 

“When zoning ordinance amendments are proposed in support of  a specific development concept on a specific site, the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) generally suggests that the evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the zoning action be considered in tandem with the evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed site development. To do otherwise could be considered  to be segmentation of the environmental review. While the most recent submission includes a conceptual site plan, it is impossible to conduct a full environmental review of the proposed site improvements without detailed site plans.”

 

Mr. Buroughs worries:

 

“Furthermore, we note from the site plan that the proposed development would include four 15-story towers, which would have substantial aesthetic impact on the character of the site and the surrounding neighborhood. The potential for such a significant impact

on community character makes the concurrent review of detailed site plans and the proposed zoning amendment all the more important.”

 

Mr. Buroughs closes with no green light:

 

“We respectfully request that the City forward additional materials related to this project, including full site plans, as they become available.”

 

The White Plains Commissioner of Planning, Susan Habel,  in her written discussion of the Zoning amendment to the Mayor and Common Council explains the White Plains Housing Authority has no money to execute a full environmental review at this time:

 

“Based on the amount of development contemplated by the Housing Authority, a full Type I Action environmental review, including an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) should be prepared and reviewed for any future development of the Winbrook property.

 

It is not possible to conduct such a review at this time because with HUD (Housing and Urban Development) funding approval and the development of other public-private partnerships, the Housing Authority does not have the resources to undertake a full review and cannot determine what the full development program would be.”

 

At one of  presentation to Winbrook residents last Monday, attended by this reporter, the residents (17 attended by this reporter’s count),it was said that the zoning change at this time before an environmental review was so that White Plains Housing Authority can apply for Obama Administration “Stimulus Money” for the project, in addition to HUD funding.

 

Usually in SEQR Environmental reviews, the cost of the EIS is borne by the developer.

 

The Housing Authority position is that it needs the zoning to prove to HUD and potential developer partners that White Plains is in favor of the project.

 

Despite Mr. Boroughs’ caveat received June22, the hearing is still on schedule and the council appears to be ploughing full steam ahead to pass the zoning.

 

The “detailed” site plans on the project so far that have been made public:

 

Overhead View

 

Street front and building rising above the setback, Corner of Quarropas and South Lexington Avenue.

Portion of South Lexington Avenue street, front, typical entrance to the new Winbrook, at right.

 

Hits: 0

.

 

WPCNR THE HOUSING NEWS. By John F. Bailey. July 2, 2009: The White Plains Housing Authority unique plan to rebuild Winbrook with Housing and Urban Development money while residents continue to live next to their future new homes for up to a decade,  is  not the way HUD normally combines with a Housing Authority to execute a project.

 

 

In Atlanta,  one of the model city developments touted by White Plains Housing Authority presenters of the project this week, (see slide above) has not in any of their projects built over the last 13 years, required residents of a project being replaced to have to stay on the construction site.

 

John Sugg, a spokesman for the Atlanta Housing Authority  told WPCNR today that residents living in a project slated for revitalization are given Atlanta Housing Authority Vouchers and the Atlanta Housing Authority assists them to find substantially improved residences. When the project is completed, about one-third of the residents return to live in the typical Atlanta rivitalizationproject, and another two-thirds of the units are either rented at market rates or at tax-credit/percentages of median income rates. Tax credits he said are provided the developer to make up for the reduced rates for the income eligible renters. He said there is some condominium purchases available too. 

 

Sugg said the Atlanta Housing Authority in its various housing revitalization projects the last 13 thirteen years (which Sugg reports will be completed this year), established a joint partnership with the developer executing the individual site. One such developer is H.J. Russell & Company, the largest black-owned firm in the country, Sugg said. 

 

Asked if condominium ownership was a typical option offered, Sugg said most of the units in the new developments Atlanta has opened were rentals, at Centennial Place, he said the majority were rentals, but some condominiumships were offered. Sugg had no statistics on the number of rentals in Atlantas new stock of revitalized developments as opposed to condominiums, but indicated condominium offerings in addition to rentals existed.

 

Sugg said experience has shown Atlanta that if the mix of residents is not altered, the same “project” conditions return in time. He said the Atlanta Housing Authority is dedicated to assisting voucher holders who cannot return to a new AHA project when it opens, to train and prepare them to be successful elsewhere. The AHA efforts have enabled landlords elsewhere around Atlanta to be more accepting of voucher holders just because of the AHA commitment to the voucher holder.

 

 He said, for example that if a person has a criminal record, refuses to work, is unemployed or a history of lease violations, all persons are guaranteed housing assistance. Sugg observed that any of those conditions would prohibit individuals from returning to a newly established AHA community such as Community Place.

 

He said the vast majority of the population in projects Atlanta has demolished and replaced are women and children, a portion of  them have relocated to other rental projects and gone into finished projects the AHA has built.

 

Retail and services are a part of Atlanta’s revitalization projects, Sugg said, sayi

 

In July of 2008, according to a news release from the Atlanta Housing Authority, HUD approved demolition of the final four major family housing projects in Atlanta: Hollywood Courts, Thomasville Heights, Herndon Homes and Bankhead Courts and Bowen Homes. There were 1,850 dwelling units in those projects.

 

Last July, more than 1,300 residents of the projects to be demolished, the news release says, “participated in (AHA-sponsored) seminars to guide them on their transition to housing of their choice. In surveys…only 13 – a mere 1.4%– stated they did not want to move.”

 

In fourteen years, Atlanta has relocated 10,000 households from its housing projects. A total of 80% of the families stated within the Atlanta city limits and the other 20% using housing assistance to move to suburbs of Atlanta. This release may be found at

http://www.atlantahousing.org/pressroom/pressreleases_print.cfm?id=23.