« Fire | Main | Contractor's Responsibility »
Housing, Housing Everywhere
August 10, 2004
Take a drive around Holland sometime. Drive through the horror that is Holland Township, through the new expanse that is Zeeland Township, through the threatened farming township of Fillmore - look at the new housing that keeps popping up. Then take a deep breath, think hard and ask yourself, “Where do all the people to fill these brand new, rarely inexpensive homes, come from?”
For instance, the new Knollwood development at 104th and Ottagon (32nd). It will contain over 120 single family homes when completed. Granted, this is a new traditional neighborhood design community, but despite its environmental and community benefits, it is still a large swath of new housing.
Or, think about the new Homestead Village (soon to be known as Kensington Place… or something of the sort). This new neighborhood, completely located within the City of Holland, will have apartments, townhouses and single family homes, with room for a possible 5,000 new residents. I do not know what the price ranges will be, but chances are they aren’t necessarily meant for low-income families.
Finally, the new Macatawa Legends, located at the four corners of Holland, Park, Olive and Port Sheldon Townships. This massive project will include a golf course, horse stables, and a large community park and over 700 homes. These will definitely not be low-end homes; my guess is that they will start around $200,000, probably more.
Most of the new housing projects seem to be targeted to the middle class residents of the area and recent implants; local engineers, scientists, and other middle-income professionals. But this leaves out the large numbers of new residents who are lower income; the Mexican migrant workers who move in with their families, the Chinese immigrants, the Vietnamese, Laos and Cambodian families attracted by prospects for a better life, not to mention lower income American families. Don’t they deserve better homes to live in? Should they be forever relegated to run-down housing or apartment lives?
The easiest part about looking at this problem from the outside is my ability to critique and not have to propose a solution. However, that tough part is the part I want to try to change. Multiple solutions abound, but it takes those in power to realize that change is needed, in order to positively affect progress.
Posted by paul at August 10, 2004 07:42 PM
Post a comment
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.meermacatawa.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4
Comments
Aaron Schaap said on August 10, 2004 10:15 PMI just wanted to say that I'm really excited that you have a weblog. The stuff you know is interesting, although you probably don't get to talk about it as much as you'd like in our circle of friends.
Keep the posts coming. You should also think about a Bio page. Something that explains to people who you are, your experience and the validity in which you are able to speek.
Brandon said on August 11, 2004 12:36 AMWhere the hell is that Homestead/Kensington thing going? Is that the "new urbanist" neighborhood for the former-Fillmore annexation?
Anyway, what's happening, probably, is that these wealthier people move to the new fringes, while the poorer and more often minority folks fill the gaps they leave. The growing urban donut (and residential segregation) isn't only in SE Michigan.'
And what awful, empty names... "Macatawa Legends"? Gag me.
Murph said on August 13, 2004 11:31 AMHeh. "Macatawa Legends" sounds like a crappy computer RPG.
Meanwhile, I'm exceptionally curious to hear your ideas on providing high-quality, low-cost housing for lower-income families. I see a problem in that, if the lower-cost housing is of good quality, then the higher-income families will take the lower-cost housing, leaving the lower-income families with nothing. I think it would be hard to break the Jacobsian paradigm of continuously producing (either by building or renovation) highly-desireable (though high-cost, to cover the costs of production) housing, such that the higher-income move into it, leaving behind the less-desireable housing to be available at lower cost.
My own feeling is that finding and promoting ways to provide general quality-of-life more cheaply, such as carsharing, food-buying cooperatives, urban homesteading, and cohousing, will have a higher impact on the quality of life of lower-income families than will trying to provide quality of life purely through structural quality of housing. Not to say that these things will be *easy* to implement, as they tap into a more community-oriented (and therefore less individualistic) way of doing things than Americans are accustomed to. These types of mutual-aid social structures were common during the Great Depression and WWII, but went into steep decline afterwards.