Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli
That block of "old low-rise apartments" is reasonably-affordable rental housing. I don't know about you but I think it would be pretty immoral to replace affordable housing with luxury condos.
Who said anything about luxury condos?
And the owner doesn't have an obligation, moral or otherwise, to continue providing affordable housing. Getting off-topic, I don't think the city does either. I wish they'd get out of the business and instead of providing subsidized buildings they would just provide rent subsidies.
Closing the loop, those on subsidies should have their rental agreement as a sublet from the city, and the rental laws should be changed so landlords are prevented from disqualifying them based on income. If they fail to pay then the city cancels the rental agreement and claws back the subsidy from any future rental request. The city shouldn't be in the business of owning or managing rental properties.
I swear the public housing authority is more about keeping "those people" out of good neighbourhoods than about providing a decent and affordable place to live.