How is this any different than private investors purchasing dilapidated, unsafe homes and displacing the tenants (i.e., “gentrification”)?
In reality, ANY investment – private or public – which increases the stock of safe, decent housing should be embraced enthusiastically.
Let’s not settle for homeless encampments or squatters in boarded up housing. Discouraging investment to maintain the status quo does nothing to help these people.
Classic NIMBY tactic. Instead of referring to this proposal as a 48-unit affordable housing community, it’s being referred to by opponents as a 300-person apartment complex.
1) “48 units” versus “300-person”
2) “affordable housing” versus “apartment”
3) “community” versus “complex”
This sort of wordplay is really dishonest. If you have a problem with a project, attack it on its merits instead of using word manipulation or rhetoric.
From the piece:
“The uncertainty of what a two or 300 person apartment complex would bring to the area is not something we want to roll the dice on….”