Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

blooperduper33 t1_itcmcsh wrote

I mean, they are talking about once they are fixed up right? Not like moving people in destroyed houses? Are you suggesting we leave them destroyed and just fully abandon these neighborhoods forever?

15

hijinked t1_itcqz91 wrote

A lot of these are beyond repair.

19

jabbadarth t1_itculj9 wrote

And even the ones that are repairable would cost tens if not hundreds of thousands to fix and take months for each one.

More often than not demolishing and buying new is a cheaper and easier option especially once the roof fails enough to les water in.

8

Douseigh t1_itgvlmz wrote

And each day they age more and more, in a generation these will be like rehabbing that old ass farm house in the woods

2

dopkick t1_itcqwx5 wrote

For now, yes - bulldoze them and turn them into open spaces with local plants for pollinators. There is plenty of housing stock that is not in the absolute worst possible areas that can be rehabbed for a fraction of the cost and with a fraction of the challenges.

This will also, hopefully, alleviate some of the burden on maintaining public services in these areas. We have water/sewer/gas/etc. in place for a population over double Baltimore's actual population and it's all aging. Low pressure gas lines are being replaced with medium pressure lines because the old lines have corroded to where they are full of holes that are plugged by dirt.

Unlike many other cities, Baltimore is NOT in high demand and land does not command a premium value. There is plenty of supply, even if there is a large spike in demand. We don't need ambitious programs to rehab the absolute worst blocks in the city.

13

Xanny t1_itcrpxj wrote

It would make sense in the short term to subsidize relocating straggler residents and bulldozing the highest vacancy rate blocks (80%+). The city can take the land and sell it out if someone wants to redevelop, but for now leaving them up just perpetuates crime and destitution.

7