also every housing unit is a diversion of resources, and every unit at any price point excludes every "hard working person" who can't afford that price point. a school itself is a diversion of resources. so is a fire station. these are the decisions we make. this isn't unique
-
-
Replying to @upwithppl @markasaurus and
just like the mix of who is housed in any particular development is a key point of contention and struggle, because it says something about who our society collectively prioritizes to exist there, vs who it does not
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @uhshanti @markasaurus and
again, less housing for more money. Cool.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
i like how you always fit that phrase into every discussion, as though it actually meant something. i admire the consistency
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @upwithppl @kimmaicutler and
in this case, it seems to be an argument against the kind of workforce housing you were arguing for last night. a handy phrase-- useful for every occasion!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @upwithppl @uhshanti and
There are always trade-offs! Want 100% affordable? It will eat half the bond.pic.twitter.com/4EVjz1qVqT
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
"there are always tradeoffs"-- some wise housing sage one time
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @upwithppl @uhshanti and
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted Kim-Mai Cutler
Want 33% affordable cross-subsidized by a wild jobs-housing imbalance? It will be done on the back of Oakland's rental market!https://twitter.com/kimmaicutler/status/1148658286666739713 …
Kim-Mai Cutler added,
3 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
we were just talking about the efficacy of building teacher housing on school-owned land, i thought?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @upwithppl @uhshanti and
I was illustrating other examples of trade-offs. But because teacher housing can't really qualify for state/federal programs, you either have do it at $500K/ unit local funding or you have to cross subsidize.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That's what Katy Tang originally tried to do with HOME SF/density bonus for middle-income housing. She didn't want to divert $$ from low/very low-income so she tried to structure a custom city program, but it got whacked so much it's not used often relative to the state program.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
san jose, for example, is trying to use Measure A funds
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @upwithppl @kimmaicutler and
i mean, definitely thanks for illustrating trade-offs, a concept which until this conversation was foreign to me, but i just don't know if it was apropos to this particular phase of the discussion
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.