Final answer:
The housing director's plan for the CHA to address vacancy and non-functioning elevators is not explicitly provided, but based on historical urban renewal efforts, demolition for new construction or renovation of existing structures are the most likely approaches.
Step-by-step explanation:
The plan of the housing director for the CHA (presumably the Chicago Housing Authority or a similar organization) to address the issues regarding high vacancy and elevator malfunctions isn't directly specified in the materials provided. However, based on the historical context of urban renewal strategies, we can infer possible approaches. The options described here do not align perfectly with traditional urban renewal practices of the mid-20th century, which often involved the demolition of buildings in favor of new construction, but they do align loosely with the broader goal of improving urban living conditions.
In these historical examples, urban renewal projects sometimes led to the demolition of dilapidated buildings with the aim of constructing new investments such as parks, highways, or commercial spaces. Such an approach aligns with option A, which proposes to demolish the buildings and start anew. However, the historical context also mentions that some projects simply removed slums without providing new housing, an issue that would not be resolved by demolishing the buildings without a clear plan for replacement housing.
Meanwhile, option B suggests repairing the elevators and renovating the units, which might align with a more community-centered approach to urban renewal that aims to improve existing structures rather than replace them. Options C and D seem less connected to the historical patterns of urban renewal. Option C suggests a commercial conversion—which may indirectly alleviate housing issues by potentially creating jobs—whereas option D would mean giving up on the housing project entirely, a choice that does not seem to match the proactive intentions behind urban renewal.