Quote:
Originally Posted by comoneymaker
First off the new low income housing is no where near the same price as the old. My friend grew up in those places. 3 bed 1 bath. They are moved out but parents still live there. If this happens they will have to move in with their kids cause the new "low income housing" is twice as much as those places are now.
|
Do they qualify for subsidized housing? Because the rate should still be only 30% of the monthly adjusted income for everyone over 18.
Affordable housing may have increased in price, but that might be because it is based on median income or because they qualify for less subsidy with a smaller household. For example, if they make $40k with 5 people in the household they qualify for the 40% subsidy, but with only 2 it definitely doubles to 80% (as in they pay that percentage of the cost of the housing based on sq. footage)
I know people at DHA, work directly with kids and families and have close friends and family who live in DHA housing -- and I have heard a myriad of complaints, but cost issues are usually only because they make too much for HUD's income limits. And that's a horrible situation that is the fault of how we as a city and country have chosen to deal with income inequality and poverty and not because of these new developments being built by DHA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by comoneymaker
Second, you or anyone else have got kidding on thinking that area can be a entertainment anchor. The entertainment anchor is on the other side of the highway in LoDo. You will still have Federal and all the crap around it. It will see business on football Sundays but be dead the rest of the year. If it is not dead it will a different kind of entertainment that you don't want to be a part of.
|

Not my plan, but I do know the only
horrible thing about Federal south of 20th is that it isn't pedestrian friendly. Hopefully building improved housing and improved street experiences will turn the neighborhood around. Keeping the aging projects around sure isn't going to do anything positive. Not developing the lots around Mile High
definitely won't do anything positive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by comoneymaker
Oh and another example of cities demolishing the low income ghetto and it working out "fantastic" is this place called Chicago. No trouble there.
|
Oh, come on... South Chicago (I only assume you're talking about the south side) is a much better place than it was 30 years ago. Is it great? No, but that has everything to do with structural racism and economic inequality and nothing to do with demolishing the projects. The way that the PJs were constructed to section off low income residents from the rest of the community, both in Chicago and in places like Sun Valley, has been shown to be much more damaging to the residents and the neighborhoods than building mixed-income housing.
Sun Valley is isolated, has no decent retail or groceries, and is aging poorly. Making it a denser, more economically integrated neighborhood will only make it better, and hopefully provide more opportunities for the low-income residents (that DHA will still provide housing for)
You have friends there and presumably have spent a fair amount of time in the old townhomes... How can you argue that they're better than what DHA has built at Curtis Park or La Alma or Benedict? They're still air-drying their clothes, right?