Low Income Housing - Positive, Negative, or Indifferent?

R

rkp

Well-known member
starting this thread because of a post TMCC made:

The Motor Court Company said:
Mencius' mother, three moves is a very famous Chinese saying; If Mencius was born in Woodbury I'd guess his mother would move him somewhere else so he does not pick up bad habits from social economical challenged kids
Click to expand...

i personally dont agree with this viewpoint and i think diversity is a good thing, both economical and race.  i was surprised that TMCC would fully avoid raising his kids at an area like WB because of the low income housing provided.  this thread isnt to knock his viewpoint but to see how much this plays into your housing decision

one area that has maintained its value well is NWP and i always find it interesting that bulk of NWP is SFRs with some townhomes but no apartments and definitely no low income housing.  does the lack of low income housing and apartments (which one can argue is a form of low income housing) play a role in maintaining the NWP premium? 

my parents street is half SFRs and other half apartments and the street right behind them is 100% SFRs.  there is definitely a 5-10% price difference between the streets because of that and there is a real difference in the day to day of the street.  my parents street never has enough curbside parking as the apartments typically only provide 1-2 spots per unit and these days, there are just more cars than that.  the street behind is empty all the time and feels quieter and cleaner. 

but i dont think the 5-10% comes from people feeling any safer or more distance from the apartment dwellers as its literally the next street over.  its purely from the benefit of having an empty street that looks cleaner
 
Sounds like you are mixing low income housing with high density housing.  High density housing, even the crazy expensive ones, will always have more traffic.
 
The reality is it does have an impact.

Not only in the neighborhood street parking but as TMMC says, in the schools. It's the reason private schools exist and there are demands for some schools over others within the same villages.

While we all talk about diversity, who would you want as your kid's BFF... the kid who obeys his parents and focuses on studies and extracurricular activities or the kid who is latchkey and just watches TV all afternoon/evening?

Isn't that the plot line of countless movies? The cache system among kids?
 
NOBODY wants low income housing in their neighborhood.  Yes, people want diversity as long as they're not too different from themselves and with the same core values, it's normal human nature.  It also affects resale.  There's really no great reason for subsidized housing...except it's needed.  The people that pick the strawberries and sweep the floors need a safe place to live also.  My family emigrated to the US with nothing.  We were dirt poor.  The section 8 housing in Woodbury would have been a slice of heaven, just like it probably is for the residents that live there now.  But, if I had a choice between having low income housing in my neighborhood or not, I would prefer them being elsewhere.
 
I don't know how low income housing can be any positive unless I can benefit from it (i.e.  leeching off from the system like some of the people do).
I spotted a BMW 7 series in Doria's parking lot this morning.

 
Instead of low incoming housing, executives making over $400,000/year should have their salaries halved and worker bees making under $50,000 should get a 100% salary increase.

 
I wonder how property values are affected here.

tuca-vieria.jpg

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top