By: John Rebchook

John Rebchook — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:42:29 +0000

I don’t think Lonna Harris ever said that renters, even those in dilapidated buildings, were undesirable. I raised the point that on average, home owners are more likely to vote, become involved in their communities, and have children who graduate from high school than renters. That doesn’t mean homeowners are more desirable than renters. It simply means they are more likely to vote, become involved in their neighborhoods and have children who are high school graduates.But I also have to say I disagree with you that all new homes are “beige, bland and eyesores.” Some of them maybe, but certainly not all of them. But I like interesting architecture, whether it is new or old. I never stepped foot in the old Tabor Opera House downtown, but I think it was a shame it was razed. At the same time, I think that 1999 Broadway, the last high-rise office constructed during the building boom of the late 1980s in downtown, is a handsome building. When I lived in Chicago I liked to walk around the neighborhood where I rented the worst-looking apartment in the area (it was all that I could afford) and admire the nicer homes around me. While there wasn’t a lot of infill construction in the late 1970s, I certainly would not have wanted to halt construction of a new home because I could not afford to live there. I probably would have been sad if a historical gem was razed to make way for a new home, but whether I could afford to live in the new place would not be the basis of my distress.

By: Shannon

Shannon — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:57:48 +0000

OK, I’m looking at your pictures and I must say, I stand by my original statement. Lonna Harris’ letter was insulting and elitist. Don’t assume all low-income people are “undesirable” whereas the affluent dwellers of these new eyesores have more inherent worth as neighbors.

Comments on: Not all new homes beige and bland

By: John Rebchook

By: Shannon