Slog Comments

 

Comments (7) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
True.
Posted by Foonken2 on February 8, 2013 at 8:26 AM · Report this
2
Of course, this is clearly a parody. I'm not sure what it's a parody of. No serious commentator would claim that replacing 561 low income units with 1701-1801 (including replacing all 561 original ones) is a bad thing. Right?

On the other hand, perhaps Charles is right. It's really never been clear to me how it can be cost-efficient to build low-income housing on prime downtown Seattle real estate. Perhaps abandoning Yesler Terrace as Charles appears to be suggesting could be the first step to locating low income housing where development is cheaper.

I didn't realize how much of a conservative you were, Charles!
Posted by saeculorum on February 8, 2013 at 8:31 AM · Report this
undead ayn rand 3
@2: "No serious commentator would claim that replacing 561 low income units with 1701-1801 (including replacing all 561 original ones) is a bad thing. Right?"

Where are you getting this? Perhaps I've missed it, but all I see is that it's a 120 unit apartment complex and

"McKinstry says they also plan to devote 25 percent of the units for people earning 80 percent or less of the area median income."
Posted by undead ayn rand on February 8, 2013 at 8:54 AM · Report this
lark 4
Good Morning Charles,
Sad to see Yesler Terrace go. I read your piece on it Wed.
I tutored kids from that neighborhood in reading for three years oh, about 12 or so years ago. I remember the YT Community Center. My students were good kids.

Posted by lark on February 8, 2013 at 9:00 AM · Report this
5
@3: " Where are you getting this? Perhaps I've missed it, but all I see is that it's a 120 unit apartment complex"

The entire Yesler Terrace redevelopment plan includes selling a (relatively small) portion of Seattle Housing Authority land for private use as mentioned in the KOMO article, and redeveloping the remainder for subsidized and market rate apartments. The net result is more subsidized housing. That is a good thing. Criticizing the means to that end is ridiculous. It is not an affront to subsidized housing to build more subsidized housing even if it means developing more market rate housing as well. To say otherwise is, frankly, absurd.
Posted by saeculorum on February 8, 2013 at 9:04 AM · Report this
the idiot formerly known as kk 6
It's pretty amazing how you could write an article about Yesler Terrace without going to Holly Park, Rainier Vista or High Point to see what happens when SHA redevelops 70-year old war-workplace duplexes. But then, that would require you to analyze "evidence," rather than spout theory.
Posted by the idiot formerly known as kk on February 8, 2013 at 10:55 AM · Report this
7
It's not that they're nicer;the anti-Blackist cake here is eating with a fork,a plate,instead of head-first as is the tradition in Dixie . . . --- http://www.blackagendareport.com
Posted by 5th Columnist on February 9, 2013 at 12:44 PM · Report this

Add a comment