Posted on 03/20/2004 8:04:03 AM PST by staytrue
30 low-income rent units cost city $7 million
Housing: Buying and fixing up vacant houses to scatter subsidized tenants among middle-class neighborhoods proves expensive.
Baltimore officials are spending nearly $7 million to quietly buy and renovate 30 homes in mostly white, middle-class neighborhoods for use as public housing rental units - an effort to comply with a longstanding federal court order.
The purchase and renovations, done by a nonprofit housing group and paid for with federal and state funds, average out to $231,583 per house - more than twice last year's average sale price of a city home.
Acknowledging that there are cheaper ways to provide public housing, city Housing Commissioner Paul T. Graziano said rehab costs averaging about $80,000 per unit were driven by federal regulations, ranging from lead paint abatement to historical preservation, and by the decision to install new roofs and heating systems to lower future maintenance costs.
"It's fairly expensive but I don't think it's exorbitant," he said of the program. "I think we're getting value for our money. When you're trying to get into some markets that are healthy markets, you're going to pay more for it."
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
If this is value, I would hate to see what they thought was a ripoff.
The purchase and renovations, done by a nonprofit housing group and paid for with federal and state funds, average out to $231,583 per house - more than twice last year's average sale price of a city home.This is the cost before you account for plunging property values in the rest of the neighborhood as home owners flee to the safety of exurbs and edge cities.
The value is, the left has once again screwed the white tax payers. And they'll do it again and again all over America. This is just a trial run.
$115,000 median price seems a wee bit low? Any freepers from Baltimore around.
An aside, another reason I am glad to leave California. On my way to work, I pass through a neighborhood that is gang ridden, with alot of grafitti. They just put up some "luxury condos" there next to the 7-11, on a 4 lane major strip. The 2,400 sq foot models are advertised at "starting at $580,000". Makes me wanna puke.
I'd guess that it's a bit high, not a wee bit low.
All Maryland house assessments are on the Internet. MD assesses at 100% of "fair market value". I just checked the house that I lived in the 1950's (NE Baltimore), and the neighboring homes. They are all single family homes, on about 1/6 of an acre of land.
The assessments range from about $75K to $90K.
Most of the row homes in the more densely populated parts of the city would assess at a much lower value.
Obviously there are more valuable properties, but we're talking median price.
It's not that they're stupid -- it's that too many of them use the project as an opportunity to steer business to their buddies and relatives in the building trades. As far as making money thru discreet kickbacks, they can be absolute GENIUSES
OUR MONEY ?
YOU MEAN MY MONEY !!
Baltimore City has lost about 200,000 people over the last 20 years. The suburbs are vibrant and healthy. City real estate is low because of the population flight.
This kind of mindless blather can only make sense to a loser who has never held a real job.
The notion that taxpayer money is not real is infuriating. I would be campaigning to get this loser fired ASAP and as far away from my pocket as possible.
Nothing. B/c you are almost probaby 100% right.
In threads like this I like to tell the story of the two towers in San Francisco. One was built in a normal area, and the other was built in an area badly in (perceived) need of "upgrading". This was the direct result of the social engineers insisting on the latter as a condition of allowing the normal units. The towers were identical in every respect except location.
The units in the "funny" area would not sell (D'OH!) and eventually were bought by the City of San Francisco and converted to "subsidized low cost housing". I know all the details because I knew both the developer (a biggie at the time in the entire bay area) and the specific superintendent on both projects.
The ultimate result? The "low cost" tower was dynamited a number of years ago. The other? thriving, and all units worth at least $1 million.
The winners? Nobody.
The losers? the buyers of the rationally located units and the San Francisco taxpayers.
The cause? Liberal, brainless, criminal bureaucrats, both in and out of government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.