Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo
Without the requirement that they build below-market apartments, they are just going to build high-end apartments. That's where the profit margins are, especially at a waterfront location. I suppose at some point, there will be trickle-down effect that helps affordable housing, but that doesn't in itself mean that we are all going to be glad for everything that gets built just to have more. There are still many places to build, and regrettable building choices don't just get knocked down at the next housing downturn.
|
I didn't make a value judgment about whether or not this particular project should get built on that location, but building more units is the only way to at least keep prices stable no matter the intended beneficiaries' income brackets. 270 units is a big chunk of demand for one building. That's 270 households not competing for existing housing stock.
There is most certainly a trickle down effect if building can keep up with in-migration. There could eventually be an equilibrium, where costs outpace rents, but we're a long ways from that. And what we have right now are 10's of thousands of extremely rent-burdened households (spending more than 50% of HH income on rent/mortgages) because of the competition from middle income families. This info is all readily available from HUD CHAS data and can be found in our local Consolidated Plans.
What I find so appalling about this particular project is the hypocrisy of the NIMBYs. Just blows my mind. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever, and even if I want to preserve the view shed, I almost want this thing to go through just to stick it to those self-righteous assholes. There's my value judgment.