Healing Charlottesville

Housing Authority is controversial because of urban renewal's history

Printed Tuesday August 20, 2002.

As a former resident of public housing (Westhaven, Garrett Square, and South First Street) I would like to give back to the community by explaining why the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority is controversial.

The authority was created narrowly by voter referendum in 1954 - the same year the Supreme Court ruled that "separate but equal" was an oxymoron.   Ironically, the local elite, who opposed the CRHA for fear of federal pressure to integrate, later supported urban renewal.

The CRHA was the instrument of urban renewal.   The two are synonymous.   The CRHA appears on deeds as part of the record of ownership of parcels in Vinegar Hill, the Garrett area, and elsewhere around town.

Urban renewal is the big story today not because it was wrong or unjust, but rather because of the excessive number of historic buildings destroyed and because half the population moved away, taking their oral and documented histories with them.   As a result, Charlottesville has suffered a major break with its recent and distant past.

The next study commissioned by the CRHA should answer these basic questions:   How many parcels of land have been owned by the CRHA?   What percentage of city acreage is that?   Who owned the land before and who owns it now?   How are the assumptions of urban renewal and present-day CRHA different?   Should the government convert poor people's property to affordable housing for poor people to rent?

Until we have these answers, newomers and community leaders will not know the scale, duration, or impact of an ongoing, well-intentioned program.

Blair Hawkins
Posted August 21, 2002.

...Front page story of The Daily Progress August 20 was the promotion of assistant superintendent, Charlottesville native Ron Hutchinson, to head city public schools for the next two years.

Discussion   |   Index   |   Time Machine

HealingCharlottesville@yahoo.com