Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamoforange
One plan called for the eviction & permanent "destruction" of 120 units of "affordable" housing likely within the next decade and that is the path the city just took and the one your defending.
The other path, involved the expropriation (into the cities control) and eventual demolition of the units. A demolition which at this rate could be a decade away. During that time the tenants would have a home under city control that will NOT have any rent increase and would not evict them. Which should have give the city enough to to rehome anyone who wants to be into other OCH units.
It would also allow in the end for the city to have a very large site (almost the same size as 555 March Rd) to redevelop into OCH housing. That is a lot of affordable housing that the city didn't even consider...
|
That’s completely delusional. One, you have zero ability to predetermine what the rent will be for the renovated units, or when the renovations will occur to the remaining units, or whether they will remain affordable or not. Two, your wild idea is that the city pays to expropriate the residents, then pays to build an OCH building as replacement, then also pays to subsidize everyone’s rent indefinitely isn’t based in reality. Do you have any idea how many people are on the waiting list for OCH units? Over 10,000. I wish we lived in that world, but unfortunately that is wildly unrealistic. Whether these are affordable or not, losing 120 rental units during a housing emergency is problematic. If these were single family homes we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. But they aren’t, so people can whine and moan and pretend like it’s the low income families they’re worrying about, when in reality it’s completely about saving a few bucks by bulldozing all their homes.
Threaded Mode