EDITORIAL - Downtown housing project seems promising

At first blush, in the absence of better particulars, this newspaper finds interesting, and probably workable, the idea for redevelopment of homes for the urban poor, to be piloted in central and west Kingston by the Urban Development Corporation (UDC).

At the least, the idea indicates that having pulled the plug on the Inner City Housing Programme, which it deemed too expensive for the National Housing Trust (NHT) to maintain, the Golding administration has not given up on attempting to find creative ways to deliver affordable shelter in the old, blighted section of the capital.

The Government, it seems, believes that the renewal of downtown can't rest solely on commercial enterprises and that it won't be practical, or desirable, to kick out all long-term residents who may lack formal, legal right to the properties they occupy, in favour of a new and, supposedly, fashionable crowd.

It is also important for confidence in the project that the pilot scheme will be launched in central Kingston, whose residents have in recent years been consulted on several renewal programmes that, up to now, have proven stillborn, or exceedingly slow to get off the ground.

The scheme, as so far outlined, appeals to us on a number of levels. First, it targets existing communities rather than greenfield areas. Indeed, we have often complained about the penchant of government developers to see shelter solutions in terms of virgin territory rather than leveraging older communities that have basic infrastructure and, in some cases, housing that is in relatively decent shape.

Second, the design is not of multi-block, high-rise, high-density apartments, but of townhouse-type homes and a 'yard' structure that will be roughly analogous to what exists around the decayed structures to be replaced. Indeed, another overwhelming jungle of concrete - like Manley Meadows - would be a tragedy.

The fact that this programme calls for the homes to be constructed by the residents might compromise efficiency, but it should help to engender buy-in from communities that have grown to be sceptical of the declarations and promises of state agencies.

Transparency needed

There are, however, some issues to be clarified about the project, including the specific relationship between the UDC and the NHT, including how much money is being put up by the Trust and if it is by way of grant, or loan.

The UDC should also explain whether the J$1.7 million or so that residents will pay, inclusive of interest, for the 110 square-foot basic unit accounts for the full price of the home, or includes subsidies - and how much.

We raise these questions not out of any intention to find fault or to scuttle the scheme, but because we believe in transparency and the fact that Jamaica's problems of inadequacy of shelter and urban decay can only benefit from serious discussion.

Maybe if this project works, the NHT can use it as a model for renewal not only of the worst, but of those communities that are growing increasingly marginal because of the exodus of their employed and economically upwardly mobile residents.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.