Skibum1321,

Listen boy,

Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style.

Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times.


As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny.

Not to belabor this 'discussion', however a few points about Wheeler Brook Housing (aka Blue Tooth). It is about 18 units of single and multi family dwellings over a total of 9 acres. While not all the acreage is suitable for building, it is a good sized parcel. Financing for these units may be obtained via the VT Housing Finance Agency, where, btw, I would qualify if I were buying a home.

madhavok wrote:

Skibum1321, Listen boy, Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style. Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times. As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny.

Actually it is not funny.
I can't argue with your experience but I have seen other "projects" blend in quite well without degrading the surrounding neighborhood. Are there problems, of course, there are bad apples in every bunch, but that doesn't mean all those of lessor means should not have access to decent housing. Furthermore, without the hard work of a lot of people earning small incomes, SB as we know it would not exist.
I know in NY and NJ, towns are required by law to provide low/moderate income housing in some way shape or form when other development is happening. I assume this is true of VT and the project at issue is in response to this mandate.

Me too, noski!

Somehow, I don't see this project as decreasing property values on the Access Rd or driving anybody out of the neighborhood. However, noski is a known perpetrator of extortion, pillaging and mayhem, so I may be wrong.

John

madhavok wrote:

Skibum1321, Listen boy, Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style. Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times. As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny.

It's called "Affordable Housing", and it's nothing like "Low Income Housing" as seen in the urban areas.
It would provide for certain people (only 20+/- owners) who work in the valley financial feasibility to own property and live here, which the valley desperately needs.

Here's the lingo from the town meeting in 2006:

Application 2006-05-SD, 2006-06-CU, 2006-03-PRD, Preliminary Plan Approval/
Subdivision Approval, Blue Tooth HLP, for Summit Ventures(Blue Tooth Property),
(Continued from July 19, 2006) Preliminary Plan Review for a planned unit development of
20 Units of affordable housing.

I put the chimp with the gun on my ignore list months ago so I guess I'm missing some of the comments here. Just ignore him/her.

madhavok wrote:

Skibum1321, Listen boy, Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style. Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times. As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny.

First of all, by the description these are not projects. I realize that there are problems and the bad apples come in every group and I'm certainly not saying that everyone will be people that fell on tough times. These will provide housing to many of the resort's employees. Do you really think that lifties are making the big bucks? We shouldn't force lower income employees to live in the middle of nowhere where housing is cheaper. This just exacerbates the problem because then people can't find jobs nearby and need to spend too much money in transportation to get to a real job.
Is affordable housing perfect? No. If you have a better solution, then by all means put it out there.

MOD:

Split thread and move to Misc.

-Please

madhavok wrote:

Skibum1321, Listen boy, Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style. Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times. As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny.

Chimp chump -

Your "experience" with affordable housing projects in the cities and burbs of the flatlands has little, if any, relevance to the purpose and residents of those properties in ski country. Building affordable housing in ski towns is widely recognized as a critical requirement for promoting and maintaining sustainable, year-round communities. As ski towns attract wealthy second home owners, the value of real estate and the tax burden generally increase at a much faster rate than the incomes of local residents. As a result, these folks tend to get shunted further and further away from the ski area and the towns they feed on and from. In order to have a ski town with any sort of vitality, you need the lifties, the shop owners, the waitresses and the civil servants who are actually present from Monday through Friday and during shoulder seasons. What good would the growth of Sugarbush and MRG be for the MRV if the only way to afford a house as a result was to buy in Lower Granville? towns like Aspen and Telluride are going to great lengths to build affordable housing, as they realize that having their critical workers live 40 minutes down valley isn't the optimal solution for a healthy outlook. I have very close friends who have lived in the Aspen affordable housing projects/system - a nice young married couple (and their dog), one of whom worked for the city and one who worked at the Nell. Guess I should associate with some less shady folks than that, huh?

Your conflation of affordable housing with a criminal elements is not only staggeringly ignorant, it's incredibly embarrassing - for you. Please stop and direct your creative writing efforts towards a subject where you actually bring something to the table other than your own prejudices and lousy grammar.

007 wrote:

madhavok wrote: Skibum1321, Listen boy, Low-income housing is just a sugar coated umbrella term for a project. Have you ever even been to a project? Have you seen the impact they have on a neighborhood? Well I’ve been to them, I’ve done my share of work in them, and I personally know people who were driven out of their neighborhood because of them. And just so you know I’m talking about projects built in nice, good to live neighborhoods not NYC ghetto style. Let me tell you the end results are always the same. They attract the wrong crowd, depreciate surrounding property values, and bring an increase in crime. You must be pretty naive to think the only people who move into the project are going to be hard working, good, honest people who have hit tough times. As for calling me an "elitist a**hole" that’s just too funny. It's called "Affordable Housing", and it's nothing like "Low Income Housing" as seen in the urban areas. It would provide for certain people (only 20+/- owners) who work in the valley financial feasibility to own property and live here, which the valley desperately needs. Here's the lingo from the town meeting in 2006: Application 2006-05-SD, 2006-06-CU, 2006-03-PRD, Preliminary Plan Approval/ Subdivision Approval, Blue Tooth HLP, for Summit Ventures(Blue Tooth Property), (Continued from July 19, 2006) Preliminary Plan Review for a planned unit development of 20 Units of affordable housing.

007
First I was only replying to whatever Ski_resort_observer mentioned in his post.
Second, same difference.

Skibum1321
I was not aware that the affordable housing was EXCLUSIVLEY for Sugarbush employees. Is this really the case?

Also it was my understanding that these are ONLY rental units only, but reading this thread gives me the impression that Sugarbush employees will be able to purchase them. Are some or all of the units going to be sold off?


Now Obviously I know Lift ops don’t make the big bucks and that they are necessary for skiing; So of the 18 units how many do you anticipate will be rented by lift ops? Will the lift ops be renting these units all year round? If so where will they work to pay for the rent during the off-season? If not who else would be renting these units in the off-season?

Tin you and I both know the only tax burden is on out of staters so how does that have anything to do with what the local income is?

And now tah every unit is going to be sold to happily married couple with a dog I have nothing to worry about!

Ah, now we are making headway. We'll work on this point- Seasonal jobs are common in the MRV- not just lift ops, but much of ski area ops as well as those who plow snow- and there is a fair number of those. "Off season" is just another season. Many of those people become golf course employees, landscapers and property maintenance workers (there are lots of those too). They go into construction/excavation work. Not all of those jobs are in the Valley proper, but within an easy commute to Montpelier/Burlington. Some simply move on.

Some of Wheeler Brook housing will be rental, some will be sold.

noski wrote:

Ah, now we are making headway. We'll work on this point- Seasonal jobs are common in the MRV- not just lift ops, but much of ski area ops as well as those who plow snow- and there is a fair number of those. "Off season" is just another season. Many of those people become golf course employees, landscapers and property maintenance workers (there are lots of those too). They go into construction/excavation work. Not all of those jobs are in the Valley proper, but within an easy commute to Montpelier/Burlington. Some simply move on. Some of Wheeler Brook housing will be rental, some will be sold.

How many of the 18 unuts will be sold? Will the new owners be allowed to rent them to others?

madhavok wrote:

Skibum1321 I was not aware that the affordable housing was EXCLUSIVLEY for Sugarbush employees. Is this really the case? Also it was my understanding that these are ONLY rental units only, but reading this thread gives me the impression that Sugarbush employees will be able to purchase them. Are some or all of the units going to be sold off? Now Obviously I know Lift ops don’t make the big bucks and that they are necessary for skiing; So of the 18 units how many do you anticipate will be rented by lift ops? Will the lift ops be renting these units all year round? If so where will they work to pay for the rent during the off-season? If not who else would be renting these units in the off-season?

I actually never said that they would be rented exclusively by Sugarbush employees. But there are plenty of people living in the valley that would qualify for these units. As others have said, those people that live in and support the valley are being priced out by all of the second home buyers. I imagine that there is significantly more demand for low income housing in the valley than these 18 units will produce. I'm not familiar with the specifics of the plan, so I can't comment on whether they will be rentals or not.