The Affordable Housing Debate in Austin

[Seamus McBundy]

Thanks for the clarification 7 Iron. I still think the government should have a role in placing low income families in safe affordable homes and not let developers come in make a quick buck and leave the families high and dry when it comes to repairs...etc. I understand the desire for having less government, but it’s not a reality. And it’s hard for me to believe that less fortunate people should be left to fend for themselves and adopting a survival of the fittest mentality.

End of my $.02.

 

[Longhorn_Fan68]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Basil Your Face]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[kgp]

If a landowner wants to cater to a less-well-heeled crowd and therefore make less money than he otherwise might have made, that is his right. If his contemporary wishes to develop and sell his property for market value, that is his right. Neither is acting objectively better than the other-- each is exercising his freedom as a property owner.

If party C wishes to use the power of the government to force one of the above behaviors or pay for it with the (involuntary) contributions of others, I take exception.

 

[Upgrayedd]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Namewithheld]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[guy4321]

City of Austin acquires affordable housing property near Domain​

Oh goodie

 

[lkainer]

City of Austin acquires affordable housing property near Domain​

Oh goodie

The Domain is a nice area. They need to introduce more "diversity".

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

The Domain is a nice area. They need to introduce more "diversity".

That land must become equitable and inclusive.

 

[guy4321]

The Domain is a nice area. They need to introduce more "diversity".

That's what the Domain is missing. Too much Tiffany's and not enough Zale's.

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

That's what the Domain is missing. Too much Tiffany's and not enough Zale's.

Too much Neiman Marcus and not enough Plato's Closet.

 

[Chop]

Too much Capital Grille and not enough Salt Grass.

 

[Chop]

Austin needs a big low-rent /subsidized-rent district where only musicians and artists are permitted to rent.

Maybe permit a small number of starving T.A.s in there as well. And Daily Texan independent cartoonists.

 

[Monahorns]

Houses per square foot still cost the same in gold as they have over the last 200 years. Maybe the problem isn't the houses.

 

[Chop]

Houses per square foot still cost the same in gold as they have over the last 200 years. Maybe the problem isn't the houses.

You could be onto something there...

 

[Chop]

In the late 1980s-early 1990s, the fight in Austin was between the developers and the anti-development folks, and the battle was the hill country in West and Southwest Austin and surrounding areas.

The anti-development folks warned against creating a "Houston in the Hills" (pretty clever), the traffic, and ruining the character of Austin. In retrospect, they were right about a lot of that. But you can't stop progress. Even if half of W. and SW. Austin was one giant nature preserve, Round Rock, Leander, Pflugerville, and all those other places would still have grown and grown anyway.

For the cool character of the town, seriously--some sort of subsidized housing only for practicing artists and musicians, and lots of them.

 

[ViperHorn]

Agree Chop. However, it seems to be one of the characteristics of living in the US. Grow up in a small town; go to school; find work in/near the comfortable city; more people discover the comfortable city and turn it into a big city eventually ruining it. Spin, wash, repeat.