-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 June 2002 06:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi list- in the McKenzie report, 52 housing units by the City, however,
> Whittier completed 100plus units with NRP 1, 57% of our dollars. Where
> does this fit in??? I'm confussed, can someone clear this up?? Is the 52
> not part of NRP1??
> WE did alot in Whittier and proud of it. And I think NRP has been a
> great program, it may need tweeking, but much less then the MCDA.
> Clear this up for me please.
52 is the net increase in housing units, not the total number built. Note
that this is in the last five years. According to the report (if I'm
reading it correctly) the last decade saw a decrease of 1,882 units.
So while you should be proud of the work you've done to build housing in
Whittier, it is not keeping up with the number of units destroyed
elsewhere in the city.
If you need a good example of where the missing housing is, I would direct
your attention to the north side (for starters) where almost every block
seems to have a vacant lot or boarded house (and where recently lots of
housing starts have also happened). You might also notice that where once
a huge housing project stood is now a giant construction zone-- work is
actively occurring (but behind schedule?) on replacement housing (that
won't house most of the displaced population, since they won't be able to
afford to live in the mixed income development until after the sheen of
gentrification wears off).
I can also think of a two block area near my house where every single home
was torn down (ok, maybe a couple were moved) to build an elementary
school. This one project easily offsets the 100 units your hard work put
in place in Whittier. Oh, and just kitty-corner from the new school across
Penn & Lowry is another huge empty lot that is supposed to have some
development done, but apparently only the gods know when it will actually
begin. It's been a green field with a sign announcing the development in
it for something like two years now.
It would appear that the previous city administrators were better at
tearing down housing than getting it built. My quick look at the McKinsey
report leads me to believe that this is because the planning and
development process in Minneapolis is so disjointed that even the
flowcharts and diagrams of the process don't make a lot of sense. There is
no central committee, direction, or oversight and this sorely needs to
change. Maybe we need an Office of Homeland Development.
I certainly hope Mayor Rybak is able to keep track of the 50 initiatives he
mentions in his recent post to the list-- they could easily fall prey to
the same problem of decentralized lack of control... I am confident he has
staffers working full-time on making sure this doesn't spiral out of
control (as this is the same problem the previous administrators had).
- -Michael Libby (Cleveland Neighborhood/North Mpls)
- --
______Michael_C_Libby__{_x_(at)_ichimunki_(dot)_com_}______
| my website: http://www.ichimunki.com/ |
|____ public key at http://www.ichimunki.com/public.key ____|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE9GbNv4ClW9KMwqnMRAuX1AKConpyL65jZmGWOeKPCbPTsPxAdRQCfRp3W
Qat4bep4QSRtGv3L3YKqO40=
=hAKa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
