I'm joking of course but this is unironically the shit people are arguing and instead of getting 750 affordable income limited homes they end up with none.
Look at the stupid stuff they say though
Harry Doby, a member of the Save Open Spaces group, told Reason that the “environmental impact of developing on green space instead of walking across the street and developing those hundreds of acres made no sense whatsoever.”
You know golf courses are famous for being great environmentally friendly places open to all /s
Developers that are supposed to build some % of affordable units tend to just build what they wanted to anyways and/or begin phasing those units out immediately. They lobby local gov to make it so they only need to pay a modest fee to make them all high-rent units. In the cases where there is some small %, they often create totally separate entrances/exits and drag their feet on actually renting them out, lest the other residents be exposed to the poors.
Gotta go 100% of the building being affordable and have strict policies on what that means for the decades to come.
A great example of why housing shouldn't be a commodity. All the zoning and legislation and agreements in the world will never change the fundamental fact that as long as these buildings are owned by speculants they will work tirelessly to make them as profitable as possible to them.
This is not a radical position. Most developed capitalist economies realised this and built public housing to ensure an adequate supply. Where this housing has not been wrecked by neoliberalism it always outperforms speculative housing in terms of rents, cost of operations and availability.
Honestly golf course destruction is good, but 25% is honestly not enough. Especially since those flats are often the bad ones you wouldn't want in any case. For example ground level directly towards the road. Just do communal housing / housing co ops etc.
But uh, have you considered that there might not be enough affordable housing to replace it? If it's not higher than 25% then it's better to leave as a golf course where there's zero affordable houses instead.
I'm joking of course but this is unironically the shit people are arguing and instead of getting 750 affordable income limited homes they end up with none.
Look at the stupid stuff they say though
You know golf courses are famous for being great environmentally friendly places open to all /s
Have you considered that "affordable housing" is neolib bullshit and that housing should be free?
Sure but using that as a reason to keep a fucking golf course around is still ridiculous.
Oh damn, let's not build anything until that's the case
Developers that are supposed to build some % of affordable units tend to just build what they wanted to anyways and/or begin phasing those units out immediately. They lobby local gov to make it so they only need to pay a modest fee to make them all high-rent units. In the cases where there is some small %, they often create totally separate entrances/exits and drag their feet on actually renting them out, lest the other residents be exposed to the poors.
Gotta go 100% of the building being affordable and have strict policies on what that means for the decades to come.
A great example of why housing shouldn't be a commodity. All the zoning and legislation and agreements in the world will never change the fundamental fact that as long as these buildings are owned by speculants they will work tirelessly to make them as profitable as possible to them.
This is not a radical position. Most developed capitalist economies realised this and built public housing to ensure an adequate supply. Where this housing has not been wrecked by neoliberalism it always outperforms speculative housing in terms of rents, cost of operations and availability.
I think people unironically believe that golf courses and lawns are just totally natural.
Honestly golf course destruction is good, but 25% is honestly not enough. Especially since those flats are often the bad ones you wouldn't want in any case. For example ground level directly towards the road. Just do communal housing / housing co ops etc.
Harry Doby, what a name