Toast119 t1_isxyqx6 wrote
The whole promise of this project was to keep 30% of the apartments affordable. Why are we giving tax breaks to millionaire landlords when the project's idea of "affordable" is $2k/month?
Insanity.
ScatmanJohnMcEnroe t1_isy5zr2 wrote
I'm no fan of tax giveaways to developers, but the people who will pay the $2k/mo for downtown apartments are currently competing for housing with those who cannot, thus driving up prices. The city (and the country) need more housing of all types.
ggill1313 t1_isygic8 wrote
Yeah, $2k a month is doable for my household, but we bought a condo in Pawtucket instead, because we didn’t feel that anything else we were looking at was “worth” what they were asking - either to rent or to buy. But we got a great deal on this condo, which in my same building, some renters are paying ~$1,700/month for a single bedroom. In Pawtucket.
I know I’m quite privileged, I fully concede that, but I’m failing to appreciate how $2k/month in the heart of downtown PVD, in one of the most historic and iconic buildings, is being met with such ire. That was always going to be expensive. Frankly, the fact that, even if it’s just a studio, it will be close in price to some rentals in Pawtucket is impressive.
I’m all for affordable housing, but the lack of housing is what’s pushing up prices for everyone. Folks who make six figures are competing with folks making less than half that. Want that to change? Give people who are making six figures somewhere else to go.
Now, if you’re upset that folks living adjacent to poverty aren’t able to afford this location and historical significance, then I don’t know what to tell you.
Dopey-NipNips t1_it1un24 wrote
They're getting tax money in exchange for affordable housing
Where is the affordable housing? If it's not there then why are they getting tax dollars
nabokovsnose t1_iszut1i wrote
The problem is that they only ever build housing of one type.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments