Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

leavingthecold t1_is61z6g wrote

So I'm guessing these will all be rented out at market rate, is there any allotment for low income units in this building?

12

cowperthwaite OP t1_is626n8 wrote

All market rate as far as I've heard. No discussion of affordable units.

12

dexbasedpaladin t1_is7hh0h wrote

Weird that "market rate" and "affordable units" are two separate things... 🙄

0

sizzle-d-wa t1_is7ni68 wrote

Not really, "affordable housing" is by a definition a euphemism for house/apt that is sold/rented below market rates. I agree there should be more affordable housing tho. Hopefully, 41 units will increase the local supply and lower the price. Can't hurt at least.

5

[deleted] t1_is7ngp0 wrote

[removed]

−6

dexbasedpaladin t1_is7ps80 wrote

Weird that 20 years ago, they could.

4

NoMoLerking t1_is84esy wrote

Nah, definitely not. I had a white collar job 20 years ago and lived with roommates in what could best be described as a shithole.

4

relbatnrut t1_is7qk0r wrote

So you think that everyone who waits tables should live in substandard housing

Or you think no one should wait tables

Which one?

2

commandantskip t1_is69cp7 wrote

The article made no mention of a TSA, so I believe that it's not required to include affordable housing.

2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_is789kg wrote

TSAs aren't really going to guarantee that requirement. If the developers were asking for one, it would be a leverage point the city could use but most of the high profile ones where they've demanded some level (i.e. that building that has nothing to do with Superman) were because of the upfront money being given to the project.

1