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.
That's true, but we're in a period in which police are under a lot of scrutiny and just a call for stricter policing measures is considered controversial.
Pricing out all of the long-term residents doesnt help either - just moves the problem to another location.
Separate the good from the bad, and give the "bad" opportunities/incentives to become good. If they remain stubborn, punish them.
Pricing out all of the long-term residents doesnt help either - just moves the problem to another location.
Separate the good from the bad, and give the "bad" opportunities/incentives to become good. If they remain stubborn, punish them.
Are you saying that all of the long-term residents are in public housing and problems? I don't agree with either of those concepts and actually find them somewhat offensive.
I used to think that public housing was generally government-owned and permanent. However, over the past few years, I've watched as several large public housing tracts, some (if not all) of which seem to have been privately owned, in DC have been replaced by large development projects. Kelsey Gardens, Sursum Corda, and the place on U street near the intersection with sixteenth street are a few examples. It has me wondering which ones may be next, for better or worse. I'm guessing places in Shaw are highly-vulnerable, given how valuable that land is becoming, and I often wonder how long Asbury Place, the senior center at the intersection of RI and 7th street, will remain a church-owned senior center. (I rarely see lights on.)
The large building right on North Capitol and NY seems like it will be around for a while.
Anyone have thoughts on which projects are likely to stay and which will go?
Sursum Corda is still there for now but will be gone soon. There was also Temple Courts high rise on K st right behind SC. That was torn down a few years ago.
it's a very slow train, but one by one, many of these buildings will be torn down and replaced. Seeing as how there is still a large amount of traditional public housing left in the city, I don't see too many dramatic changes soon, maybe over the course of 10-20 years.
I do think the ones in Shaw though that are project-based section 8 and privately owned, those will be sold as soon as those contracts expire. Shaw is such a weird place now..beer gardens, million dollar rowhomes and small plate restaurants next to projects..anyone going through that area knows the days of the low income folks are numbered. Maybe a few token ones will be kept to show "diversity".
Tenants in DC have the "right of first refusal" under TOPA to purchase their own buildings if they come up for sale. In practice, this means that the developers who purchase large privately-owned subsidized apartment buildings usually can't just displace tenants en masse; if they so threatened, the tenants could just buy the building themselves. So, when subsidized housing gets demolished, it's usually replaced at least 1-for-1.
Tenants in DC have the "right of first refusal" under TOPA to purchase their own buildings if they come up for sale. In practice, this means that the developers who purchase large privately-owned subsidized apartment buildings usually can't just displace tenants en masse; if they so threatened, the tenants could just buy the building themselves. So, when subsidized housing gets demolished, it's usually replaced at least 1-for-1.
TOPA does not work out so well in many cases. They often just get bought out or priced out before they can even exercise those rights. In addition it requires that the person has the capital to buy the building, this is more difficult in more expensive areas west of the river. Sometimes the developer basically balks, keeps the building then makes tenants lives hell through degrading maintenance and escalating rent.
They can't replace the tenants en masse, but they can do it over time. $1000+ rent hikes are not unusual once the section 8 contract ends. Section 8 only covers up to a certain amount. Again...perfectly legal for buildings built after 1975. Again taking the billions that these buildings are worth, it is unlikely that they will be successful. Saving at most a handful of these smaller buildings in the end.
In some cases TOPA does work, but in many it does not. The tenants in most cases just get bought out.
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.
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.
