Presentation 02 | Team 02
Design & Policy for Humanitarian Impact class
Abandoned Buildings
Team: Ken Chu, Rene Cuenca, Eleni Katrini, Robyn Lambert, Anna Malone
2. why we care?
“Both people and land lie at the heart of
community . . . We are stewards of land, and
it supports and protects us; we neglect and
abuse land, and it soon mirrors our fractured
community”
-Frank S. Alexander, Sam
Nunn Professor of Law at Emory University
School of Law and cofounder of the Center for Community Progress
3. what are the financial costs?
Vacant properties consume $20 million in city services a year.
$8 million goes to code enforcement, boarding up buildings and demolition.
Direct Costs:
● code enforcement
● police and fire
● public works
● demolition
● Loss of tax revenues
Indirect Costs:
● Decreased property values
sources: http://pittsburghquarterly.com/images/pdfs/PQfall11_BLIGHT.pdf http://planningpa.org/wp-content/uploads/E2.-Fight-Blight-Lewis.pdf
4. what are the community implications?
The Broken Window theory suggests a broken window
left unrepaired leads to others being broken. This gives
the feeling no one cares about the neighborhood and
further lowers moral.
Places shouldering the biggest burden of vacant and abandoned properties are
usually the most economically fragile.
High vacancy rates correlate to high crime rates. Communities with more
vacant properties have more violent crimes.
sources: http://pittsburghquarterly.com/images/pdfs/PQfall11_BLIGHT.pdf
5. what’s the situation in PGH?
2010
vacancy
rates
50%
27.5%
25%
12.5%
0%
PGH average 13%
Middle Hill 18.9%
Wilkinsburg 19%
East Liberty 13.2%
Friendship 7.9%
sources: http://www.rtpittsburgh.org/wilkinsburg/ - http://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/dcp/PGHSNAP_v2.02.pdf
10. who’s working on the problem?
vacant lot
and blight
toolkits
PA
Building
Alliance
11. what are the challenges?
Most of the work currently is being done on vacant lots, rather than building
structures, because abandoned buildings face the following problems:
TAX
DELINQUENCY
1
STRUCTURAL
SAFETY
3 4
MISSING
OWNER
2
RED TAPE
BUREAUCRACY
13. where is the gap?
The existing tools and programs target
prescriptive, long-term change,
but do not engage a cultural change
in the community and how people
perceive blight.
14. we’re asking the community!
FOUR LOCATIONS
1 in Hill District
3 in Wilkinsburg Borough
17. bridging the gap
In South Bend, Indiana, they have
implemented an “Adopt-a-Block” program
whereby residents take ownership of a
block and regularly, as a group, maintain
every property in the neighborhood.
They have also created the “What Can
You Do” resource program, which offers
people in the community access to
interactive maps and a Resident
Information Booklet.
Instead of giving community members tools to do what
we think they should do, let’s empower them to do
what they think they should do
