Anonymous wrote:The likelihood of a similar project happening the Brent area is not great at the current time.
/quote]
Quote of the year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You can probably get a pretty good deal in SW, which is ripe for gentrification with the redevelopment of the waterfront.
But then you wouldn't be on MoTH and then you would be angry and sad later.
Anonymous wrote:You can probably get a pretty good deal in SW, which is ripe for gentrification with the redevelopment of the waterfront.
I wouldn't hold my breath about people being able to use those in those parts of Capitol Hill that have thoroughly gentrified.Anonymous wrote:housing vouchers are one way to increase availablity of low income housing in an area without having to actually add new buildings.
Anonymous wrote:What does "high SES" mean to you, OP? I know lots of folks at Brent that are college educated, but are also FARMs.
Anonymous wrote:housing vouchers are one way to increase availablity of low income housing in an area without having to actually add new buildings.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Isn't a lot of new development like Capitol Quarter by law mixed income? There is a difference between high density low income housing like Potomac Gardens and mixed income housing that should allow for diversity without some of the pathology.
Not to split hairs, but south of the freeway is not "Capitol Hill," even if it has begun to offer amenities used by Hill residents. In any event, it appears EYA planned to build 120 market-rate townhomes, 91 workforce-rate townhomes, 23 Section 8 units, and 88 subsidized rental units. Setting aside the public policy debate about the Hope programs and the forced dislocation of residents, the viability of this area is kneecapped given the fact that until Van Ness is resuscitated, residents will have to accept enrolling their children to Amidon-Bowen or chance to OOB lottery for another Hill school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:here is the inside scoop for Brent.
the boundry actually includes a lot of low income housing, but the housing does not look like traditional "public housing." There is a soup kitchen just around the block from Brent and and two others within three blocks, that I know of. There is a homeless shelter and a home for battered women-- but again, they are not obvious from the outside. The neighborhood is generally appalled that it is becoming so difficult for working class people to afford to live in the neighborhood and is working very hard to ensure more low to moderate income housing stock is added to the area.
Off topic, but how do you propose adding more housing stock to the neighborhood? Are you advocating developing the Congressional parking lots?
Yeah, I was wondering this as well. How in the world is the "neighborhood" working to ensure that low income housing is added to the area? Where would this be, and how would one propose to do it? Because if the recent threads on MoTH were any indication, they would put a bulldozer to Potomac Gardens if they had their way. So I'm pretty much calling BS on this big neighborhood push to add more low income housing to the Hill.
Isn't a lot of new development like Capitol Quarter by law mixed income? There is a difference between high density low income housing like Potomac Gardens and mixed income housing that should allow for diversity without some of the pathology. So you can keep your BS.