Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not sure I can agree. Allowing that kind of housing would raise all of our fire premiums and necessitate the hiring of more firefighters, not to mention the public health issues it would require.
I think the culture of 'dependency' is based more on the incentives provided by the illegal drug market. Legalize drugs and a lot of the violence will go away.
I could be wrong, but I don't think Sean was being literal. I think he was simply saying that we need more non-CHA affordable housing here. One way of doing this would be smaller places. Many CHA apartments are well over 1,000 sq/ft (and have 1 or 2 people living in them). In all honesty, why not build more apartments in the 500-700 sq/ft range? When designed the right way, such small places can feel larger than what they are.
I could be wrong, but I don't think Sean was being literal. I think he was simply saying that we need more non-CHA affordable housing here. One way of doing this would be smaller places. Many CHA apartments are well over 1,000 sq/ft (and have 1 or 2 people living in them). In all honesty, why not build more apartments in the 500-700 sq/ft range? When designed the right way, such small places can feel larger than what they are.
That's true. There are plenty of places that size uptown renting for more than $1200. The only problem would be that most of the CHA units were built for families though.
Seattle has been loosening it's codes, to encourage more single family lots to include "granny units" in back. It puts land to more intensive use, and broadens the housing base to include more small rentals. There is also the theory that a principal landlord living on-site will keep an eye on things.
Seattle has been loosening it's codes, to encourage more single family lots to include "granny units" in back. It puts land to more intensive use, and broadens the housing base to include more small rentals. There is also the theory that a principal landlord living on-site will keep an eye on things.
I think they actually did that in Charlotte and Davidson recently.
Agreed. Many folks (who can't really afford to live in Charlotte) are living in hotels and such places.
I can't afford to live in Beverly Hills but that doesn't mean that I'm looking for the taxpayers to subsidize a residence for me there. There is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees housing for people. I reject this notion.
It's not free. It's government taking money from one part of society and handing it to another.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.