Council considers opposing low-income developments; Reisz building, intersection near I-265 eyed for affordable housing
Zurschmiede said the city, primarily through the New Albany Housing Authority, has an abundance of low-income lodging options. Instead of bringing more of the same, Zurschmiede said the city should be concentrated on building a more diverse housing stock including upscale homes.
“The vast majority of people feel the city provides enough low-income housing,” he said.
The article goes on to explain something we've known for a long time, that New Albany has a big per-capita block of public housing, which I'm reading as being not quite the same thing as "low-income" housing even if used interchangeably here and elsewhere.
One unspoken reason for this prevalence might be that we're collectively poverty-stricken, a fact actually experienced by some who rarely attend council meetings, while being more often cited by those who do, and are relatively wealthier but unwilling to pay taxes and fees in that familiar, entitled, better-off-white-dude's sort of way.
Oddly, Diane Benedetti then makes this observation to the reporter Suddeath:
“We have so many vacant homes, lets fill them.”
It made me rub my eyes. This objection to new blocs of lower-income housing, when inhabitable buildings already exist, is just about the same as NAC's objection to publicly-subsidized upscale housing in the form of River View's Someday We'll Actually Build Condos, which if I recall, Benedetti and Zurschmiede have supported in the past, presumably as reflecting a better way to exhaust public monies than worrying about the poorer folks, who after all, are poorer because they refuse to take jobs at (wait for it) ... Taco Bell.
Even more confusingly, one of the two projects targeted by the resolution isn't at all low-income housing in the traditional sense, because it is age-based:
One is the proposed 74-unit Legacy at Riverside project, which would occupy the former Reisz Furniture building along Main Street and offer affordable senior living ...
... During the October meeting, The Sterling Group’s Director of Development John VanMeter said the Reisz building would be rehabilitated and a four story structure added to house the development.
“There’s certainly a growing demand for senior housing,” he said.
As a side note, has anyone else noticed that the word "legacy" is being used both in the context of New Albany's Bicentennial Park (Legacy Square) and the senior housing development (Legacy at Riverside)? And some of you scoffed when I suggested that the word "legacy" was code for funeral homes and assisted living?
Is there some type of fear that a rehabilitated Reisz city block filled with seniors would impact unfavorably on the desired demographics of the River View project? But while River View remains a far-away (and increasingly unlikely) dream, isn't the Sterling Group ready to move now on its project? Haven't we been saying that we want so badly to rebuild downtown that we're willing to give it all away to River View? Speaking of which, the realtor extraordinaire Mike Kopp is involved in both downtown projects. Why fluff him on one, and not the other?
And, most importantly: What does the Asian health spa on the corner of Pearl and Main have to do with all this? Does it charge less for low-income persons than others?
Isn't the spa the fulcrum of this whole case?
Perhaps tonight, for the first time ever, Zurschmiede and Benedetti can clearly explain their notions of useful social engineering in the context of government's interest in buttressing housing options for varying income levels, and why the city's vast and uninhabited housing stock is suitable for redevelopment for the wrong type of person (the poor ones) and not the right kind of person (the rich ones). If I could sip red wine while listening, I would.
I will NOT be holding my breath, though. Incoherence is a New Albany city council birthright, after all, because voters seem to prefer it that way.
