Oh, Chevy Chase (DC affordable housing)!

[Anonymous]

They pretty much don't want to see black middle class workers in their neighborhood. They don't care if they're working for the city, federal government or even metro. They paid a million plus to not see the poors. Even if they make 80k per year in those government jobs they're still seen as the help to these people ranting, tiptoeing and dogwhistling around what they really want to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These complexes become eye sores quickly.

My old town way back in 1967 they let a 30 unit Garden Complex rental property in town. Only rental complex in town. Was shinny and new and affordable. All good.

By 1979 was run down already those transient tenants were annoying and disturbing to the SFH home zoned area.

The mayor and building dept. ordered building to fix it up or he would pull his CO. He did not have money.

Town worked it out he converts to Condos, would get interest free loan to fund renovation and town would fast track permits and charge no fees. He did. Building code changed rental buildings illegal.

Popping 30 lower income families in a rich neighborhood sounds good in paper. It is not.

So why allow in first place?

That’s on the building owner to provide upkeep and the local govt to enforce

but I actually agree that it’s more like warehousing poor people into a single building and that just invites issues. Better to designate units scattered through out a few buildings than put everyone in a single building.

Also I think the scheme invites low income renters to take in additional people above their lease simply bc the rents are too high relative to their incomes and taking into account all other expenses. The rents are theoretically no more than the recommend portion of income. But many people also use theoretical income to qualify as in based on 52 weeks of work, 40 hours working every week and sometimes overtime when in reality most people in hourly jobs will not always work a full week, might work a lot of overtime one year and not the next, and will miss days of work and have no leave for emergencies and illness which all adds up to less then their theoretical income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

You need only look at the enrollment numbers to know this isn’t true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

Looks like we found the realtor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These complexes become eye sores quickly.

My old town way back in 1967 they let a 30 unit Garden Complex rental property in town. Only rental complex in town. Was shinny and new and affordable. All good.

By 1979 was run down already those transient tenants were annoying and disturbing to the SFH home zoned area.

The mayor and building dept. ordered building to fix it up or he would pull his CO. He did not have money.

Town worked it out he converts to Condos, would get interest free loan to fund renovation and town would fast track permits and charge no fees. He did. Building code changed rental buildings illegal.

Popping 30 lower income families in a rich neighborhood sounds good in paper. It is not.

So why allow in first place?

That’s on the building owner to provide upkeep and the local govt to enforce

but I actually agree that it’s more like warehousing poor people into a single building and that just invites issues. Better to designate units scattered through out a few buildings than put everyone in a single building.

Also I think the scheme invites low income renters to take in additional people above their lease simply bc the rents are too high relative to their incomes and taking into account all other expenses. The rents are theoretically no more than the recommend portion of income. But many people also use theoretical income to qualify as in based on 52 weeks of work, 40 hours working every week and sometimes overtime when in reality most people in hourly jobs will not always work a full week, might work a lot of overtime one year and not the next, and will miss days of work and have no leave for emergencies and illness which all adds up to less then their theoretical income.

But designating 30 percent of the units IS scattering the units. A mixed- income community (especially with a major community benefit like a new community center) is exactly the way to get this done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

You must be joking. The majority of CCDC folks are middle class people in small houses who've been there forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

You must be joking. The majority of CCDC folks are middle class people in small houses who've been there forever.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These complexes become eye sores quickly.

My old town way back in 1967 they let a 30 unit Garden Complex rental property in town. Only rental complex in town. Was shinny and new and affordable. All good.

By 1979 was run down already those transient tenants were annoying and disturbing to the SFH home zoned area.

The mayor and building dept. ordered building to fix it up or he would pull his CO. He did not have money.

Town worked it out he converts to Condos, would get interest free loan to fund renovation and town would fast track permits and charge no fees. He did. Building code changed rental buildings illegal.

Popping 30 lower income families in a rich neighborhood sounds good in paper. It is not.

So why allow in first place?

So let me ask you something. Are you ok with “rich” people moving into “poor” neighborhoods and gentrifying them so that the housing prices go up? Or is it just that “poor” people can’t move to “rich” neighborhoods. Is this a one-way thing?

By definition, it is a one way thing. I want to live in Malibu, but I’m not rich so I can’t afford it. I also want a boat, but again I can’t afford it. Are you stupid or just being intentionally obtuse?

[Anonymous]

It’s funny how these proposals go after neighborhoods that aren’t even that particularly wealthy. You will never hear this type of proposal in actually wealthy neighborhoods — Georgetown, Woodland, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These complexes become eye sores quickly.

My old town way back in 1967 they let a 30 unit Garden Complex rental property in town. Only rental complex in town. Was shinny and new and affordable. All good.

By 1979 was run down already those transient tenants were annoying and disturbing to the SFH home zoned area.

The mayor and building dept. ordered building to fix it up or he would pull his CO. He did not have money.

Town worked it out he converts to Condos, would get interest free loan to fund renovation and town would fast track permits and charge no fees. He did. Building code changed rental buildings illegal.

Popping 30 lower income families in a rich neighborhood sounds good in paper. It is not.

So why allow in first place?

That’s on the building owner to provide upkeep and the local govt to enforce

but I actually agree that it’s more like warehousing poor people into a single building and that just invites issues. Better to designate units scattered through out a few buildings than put everyone in a single building.

Also I think the scheme invites low income renters to take in additional people above their lease simply bc the rents are too high relative to their incomes and taking into account all other expenses. The rents are theoretically no more than the recommend portion of income. But many people also use theoretical income to qualify as in based on 52 weeks of work, 40 hours working every week and sometimes overtime when in reality most people in hourly jobs will not always work a full week, might work a lot of overtime one year and not the next, and will miss days of work and have no leave for emergencies and illness which all adds up to less then their theoretical income.

But designating 30 percent of the units IS scattering the units. A mixed- income community (especially with a major community benefit like a new community center) is exactly the way to get this done.

A “poor door” as they say in NY. Makes no sense. Even the Jeffersons did not bring poor people to their deluxe apartment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

You must be joking. The majority of CCDC folks are middle class people in small houses who've been there forever.

+1

No, this isn’t true. Sorry. For one, they were never “middle class.” They were upper income, white collar professionals. And only people who have been there forever fit in that category now. Anyone moving in is priced out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny how these proposals go after neighborhoods that aren’t even that particularly wealthy. You will never hear this type of proposal in actually wealthy neighborhoods — Georgetown, Woodland, etc.

This isn’t true. We’ve already linked to the affordable units at City Center. If a new building goes up in Georgetown, it will have them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please rezone Lafayette to feed into Wells/Coolidge. These bigots are so entitled. They need to be taught a lesson.

They'll just send their kids to private. CC is my hometown. My kids are 4th generation CC. Everyone knows that neighborhood kids that stay in the area live in CCDC only if they are REALLY rich. They send their kids to private school. The mildly rich buy homes in CCMD and send their kids to MCPS.

You must be joking. The majority of CCDC folks are middle class people in small houses who've been there forever.

+1

Hilarious! A 1600 SF home in CC is over a million dollars. MC! Belly laughs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These complexes become eye sores quickly.

My old town way back in 1967 they let a 30 unit Garden Complex rental property in town. Only rental complex in town. Was shinny and new and affordable. All good.

By 1979 was run down already those transient tenants were annoying and disturbing to the SFH home zoned area.

The mayor and building dept. ordered building to fix it up or he would pull his CO. He did not have money.

Town worked it out he converts to Condos, would get interest free loan to fund renovation and town would fast track permits and charge no fees. He did. Building code changed rental buildings illegal.

Popping 30 lower income families in a rich neighborhood sounds good in paper. It is not.

So why allow in first place?

That’s on the building owner to provide upkeep and the local govt to enforce

but I actually agree that it’s more like warehousing poor people into a single building and that just invites issues. Better to designate units scattered through out a few buildings than put everyone in a single building.

Also I think the scheme invites low income renters to take in additional people above their lease simply bc the rents are too high relative to their incomes and taking into account all other expenses. The rents are theoretically no more than the recommend portion of income. But many people also use theoretical income to qualify as in based on 52 weeks of work, 40 hours working every week and sometimes overtime when in reality most people in hourly jobs will not always work a full week, might work a lot of overtime one year and not the next, and will miss days of work and have no leave for emergencies and illness which all adds up to less then their theoretical income.

But designating 30 percent of the units IS scattering the units. A mixed- income community (especially with a major community benefit like a new community center) is exactly the way to get this done.

A “poor door” as they say in NY. Makes no sense. Even the Jeffersons did not bring poor people to their deluxe apartment

Except…it does make sense.