|
To: |
Forest Park Southeast Housing Corporation Board; ARCHS Board; RHCDA Board;
and Alderman Joseph D. Roddy |
|
From: |
Forest Park Southeast residents, service providers, and other stakeholders |
|
Date: |
September, 2001 |
Our neighborhood's June 24, 1999 presentation to the ARCHS Board said that our
plan's implementation would simultaneously improve all buildings in each of
four selected blocks (one block in each quadrant). Upon completion of the first
blocks, new blocks would be selected. The July, 1999 draft plan includes the
same approach.
This equalized approach grew, in part, from a perception of longstanding favoritism
for a small area of the neighborhood.While the draft plan mentions the problems
associated with absentee landlords, it does not advocate landlord buyouts or
the displacement of tenants.
In fact, the draft plan's principles include (quoting page 3):
- Reinforce and revitalize Forest Park Southeast as a traditional, mixed-income
St. Louis neighborhood . . . ;
- Provide a variety of housing types and prices ranging from subsidized rental
to home ownership along the continuum from low-income to market-rate; . . .
and
- Ensure that residents have an effective leadership role in guiding both the
development of the design of their neighborhood and the implementation of the
plan.
More than two years later, the plan as presented and the stated principles have
disappeared in the bait and switch of business as usual. Some internal causes
are personal conflicts and inexperience in planning and implementation. Contributing
causes external to the neighborhood have been tolerance and support for contrary
plans and principles by the Housing Corporation, ARCHS, RHCDA, and the city.
A current example is the Park East project undertaken by the Forest Park Southeast
Housing Corporation with the support of RHCDA and lenders committed to the Sustainable
Neighborhoods Initiative. Park East bought out one landlord, acquiring scattered
sites, primarily in the long-favored quadrant of the neighborhood. Worse yet,
it appears that Park East and other redevelopment tends to displace low-income
FPSE residents.
The Park East developers assert that they are "working closely" with Urban
Strategies to provide assistance to tenants in locating housing alternatives.
When FPSE representatives asked Urban Strategies what was being done, the responses
were, "We offered to help" and we have no control over the project. The
Park East promoters also say that relocation benefits are not required because
they are not receiving any type of funding from the city, state, or federal
governments.
We realize that natural economic trends will change the economic mix of the
neighborhood. Redevelopment is a good part of the inevitable change. But redevelopment
should not be an instrument of displacement. Rather it should positively support
present residents or, at worst, be neutral.
We will do what we can to cure our own ills. We ask that the Housing Corporation,
ARCHS, RHCDA, and the city government reexamine their practices and commit to
the stated plan and principles in deed as well as in word.
Copies: Sandra Moore and Esther Shin
| Name and Address |
Comments, pro or con |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
. . . |
. . . |