Quote:
Originally Posted by cardeza
Im not sure what this development will entail in terms of rentals vs ownership units, etc. Some PHA projects have mixed income goals and will offer ownership units- this was done in East Falls, South Philly and other places in the city. PHA owns the land- I'm not sure I follow the "subsidized" parking accusation. I dont know the zoning of this parcel, but Im not sure why anyone would've expected 2 story units to be replaced with some CC type density considering the location. There are very few mid or high rise buildings in this areas outside of TU's campus- mostly 2 story rowhouses to the east.
edit- 44 spaces for 133 units? That is what people consider excessive parking for this site? Sorry, I think Philly has much bigger fish to fry.
|
Public housing in the US, including PHA, is a massive whale of a problem that we need to harpoon, carve up and boil down the blubber. They spend massive amounts on these new units (more than $400k per unit, I believe) - money that could be spent much, much better and provide much more housing to people who need it. Or maybe we should take that money and subsidize home repairs for houses that are falling apart rather than spending so much for such little housing output. Like public transportation and infrastructure (which are also massively wasteful with their funds compared to similar developed nations), I would love to have a huge increase in spending for housing for the poor, disabled, elderly, etc. But not in our current wasteful system. Admittedly, this is a far bigger problem than the city can address on its own.
Also to answer your question, the parking is taxpayer funded because the publicly funded agency bought or acquired the land and then decided not to build houses on it or sell it to fund other development but instead pave it over for parking.