Low Income Housing Development Essay

Many professionals recognize the benefits of assistive animals for people with physical disabilities. This includes seeing-eye dogs that are trained to alert owners to environmental hazards. Some policies may be hard to change, but are required if needed. One well known policy

Literature on the effects of low socioeconomic status (SES) on one’s psychological well-being is well established. Prior studies show that low-SES not only impacts individuals’ mental well-being, but also affects their children’s developmental trajectories. This paper reviews one of these numerous studies and further discusses the influences of parental SES on one’s life outcomes, as well as intergenerational mobility and achievement gap through a developmental perspective.

Green housing projects also provide a healthier living environment than traditional housing projects (Marin). A Cornell study, comparing over 200 low-income and mid-income children in upstate New York focused on the effects of living conditions on health, and found that the poorer children were five times as likely to suffer from environmental stresses which lead directly to health problems (Public Health; Overcrowded and noisy living conditions may contribute to bad health). “Researchers examined crowding, noise and housing quality for the sample of 8- to 10-year-olds and found that the levels of stress hormones measured among the low-income children were consistently higher, indicating those children were under physiological and psychological stress.” Sustainable low-income housing has the effect of reducing these environmental stressors because it inherently incorporates the issues of occupant well-being as much as it incorporates green building materials into design. In 1990 the New York Times ran an article on the skyrocketing rate of epidemics in the inner cities since the 1980’s. Urban poor, the residents of inner cities, are living in what reporter Elizabeth Rosenthal terms

One of the most prevalent forms of discrimination is through housing. While modern discrimination is typically difficult to figure out the exact intentions of the person accused of discrimination, such as a boss not choosing a minority to fill a management role, discrimination in housing has continued to be more obvious. The reason why housing is so important is because where a person lives dictates the school the resident’s children go to, the infrastructure such as hospitals, parks and libraries, and also availability of employment. Many of the housing inequalities have been caused by the Federal government such as the national appraisal system and subsidizing suburban areas, and not enforcing abolishing restricted covenants.

The United States government provides housing assistance for the elderly or disabled with low income statues through various programs in the form of rental assistance or affordable housing. However, most of these governments housing assistance for the disabled or elderly persons are managed through the local public housing authorities (PHAs). Several other agencies providing the same government benefits includes the local Department of Housing and Community Development, the individual State Housing Finance Agencies and the Rural Development offices through the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA). Additionally, some financial aid channeled toward the housing assistance programs are retrieved from the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as the USDA’s Rural Housing Services. Within this paper, several aspects of the housing policy for the disabled and the elderly persons will be delved into in brooder details.

Many advocates and policymakers of housing for the poor believe that to achieve optimal human development of low-income households the location of the housing must be considered as well as the quality of the housing unit (Newman, 2008).

Within the City of Toronto, there is a heavy concentration of social housing, in the form of both houses and buildings, in the space South of St. Clair Avenue, bordered by Jane St. to the West and Woodbine Avenue to the East. Within this space however, rather than being evenly spaced out, social housing developments are clustered within certain neighbourhoods, such as in and around Parkdale and between the neighbourhoods of Moss Park, Regent Park, and the Garden district. Outside of this space, generally speaking, social housing is placed further apart with some exceptional clusters, such as the 18th and (portions of) the 4th community housing units, as well as the Yonge-Eglinton area. In the peripheries of the city, social housing developments are mostly located along major arteries, and there are very few houses, as opposed to buildings.

Those who cannot afford the high prices of housing are often forced out into the streets where they face a very uncertain future due to the number of abuses they encounter daily from all walks of life, with the most damning being the vagrancy laws that come into vogue in areas that are getting gentrified, which many cities have passed to “protect” their newfound assets and tax base from the “lowering” of property values. Furthermore, when cities such as Los Angeles demand that property developers set aside affordable housing for lower income people, they get sued in court, such as in 2009, when real estate developer Geoffrey Palmer successfully sued in order to overturned an ordnance which required that. This was also the same man who also proposed building a footbridge connecting two of his buildings to minimize contact with people he deemed undesirable (Davis).

It is often easy to castigate large cities or third world countries as failures in the field of affordable housing, yet the crisis, like an invisible cancer, manifests itself in many forms, plaguing both urban and suburban areas. Reformers have wrestled passionately with the issue for centuries, revealing the severity of the situation in an attempt for change, while politicians have only responded with band aid solutions. Unfortunately, the housing crisis easily fades from our memory, replaced by visions of homeless vets, or starving children. Metropolis magazine explains that “…though billions of dollars are spent each year on housing and development programs worldwide, ? At least 1 billion people

1. I’ve known several people who have worked as Conference Housing Assistants, and they’ve all said great things about it. Firstly, reading the job description, I see that interpersonal communication and organization are two of the biggest skills needed for this position of which I pride myself over. I want to be able to tie my qualifications and skills to the school that I attend so that I can assist others as well as represent Stony Brook. I know many former Orientation Leaders, Conference Housing Assistants, and Residential Assistants who have said it’s a rewarding position because you get to assist and meet new people.

This verdict was hammered home by the well-publicized demolition in 1972 of the Pruitt– Igoe project in St. Louis” (Massey & Kanaiaupuni, 1993). Although most politicians viewed large housing complexes (projects) as a social destruction it did help to recreate new strategies for improving the housing program. America’s most impoverished populations were still struggling to maintain decent housing at an affordable rate.

Take a moment and think, do you have shelter, running water, and food? Because as many as 1.6 billion people in the whole world do not have adequate housing. Homelessness has been a growing issue and has not been improving. Homelessness is the state of being without a home. According to the article So little to ask for: a home (nicholas), over 64,000 families are living without a home in the U.S right now.

To clarify, the high rents and prices of products around the neighborhood prevent the low-income families to enhance their economy. For example, Knafo writes “Through rezoning, tax abatement for developer, and the privatization of public spaces, local governments and federal agencies often work to change low-income neighborhood at the encouragement of developers, they argue (Knafo 3).”/ “the ultimate hope of building support policies that protect low-income renters, particularly renters of color, from getting priced out of their communities (Knafo 6).” This illustrates that low-income people are being exclude from the developments for the reason that the excessive high prices and rent they need to pay. Although many people as Local governments and federal agencies might object that this developments are an advantages for the county economy, I maintain, this prejudiced the low-income families that cannot afford high rates in prices in their community. Therefore, I conclude that gentrification is a disruption of prosperity for the low-income

Those who rent from private landlords do not only tend to, on average, pay almost double the rent of a person living within social housing but also are twice as likely to live in a residence the Government would class as a “non-decent home”, a residence in disrepair and one that does not meet health and safety standards (Jonathan Owen, 2014). The undisputable growth of private renting sector is not limited to England but is also noticeable in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. In wales the private rental sector represents 14% of total housing, the private rental sector in Scotland has doubled over the last ten years as more than three hundred thousand properties have been sold and in Northern Ireland private landlords own more properties than councils and housing associations combined according to national figures provided in 214 (Jonathan Owen, 2014).

Throughout the entire history of human civilization, the prevalence of homelessness has been a challenge to every nation.  It might be depressing to learn that no countries today have eradicated homelessness, but the human race is never stopped from trying harder than before to tackle this prolonged issue. As the two leading economic powers, America and China have to face the challenge of reducing homelessness. According to a report written by Nation Coalition for the Homeless, “a study done by the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty which states that approximately 3.5 million people, 1.35 million of them children, are likely to experience homelessness in a given year” in America alone (National Coalition for the Homeless, July