Rancho Palos Verdes affordable-housing plan aired

Rancho Palos Verdes has taken its first tentative steps toward approving a 40-unit affordable senior-housing complex, despite concerns from residents in affluent surrounding neighborhoods.

[Reject the NIMBYs]

Yes, this should be built in RPV. I hope it's expedited, and I hope more are built on the Hill. It's far past time they accept their fair share of low income residents. And this is for our seniors.

[jc in rb]

fascist

[Torrance Mom]

From what I understand, this is affordable housing for seniors. People who have worked all their lives and live on fixed incomes. Just because people have low incomes doesn't mean they aren't good people. Isn't their enough prejudice in the world already?

[Stuart]

Torrance Mom wrote:

From what I understand, this is affordable housing for seniors. People who have worked all their lives and live on fixed incomes. Just because people have low incomes doesn't mean they aren't good people. Isn't their enough prejudice in the world already?

Great idea Mom. In other news, Torrance is relocating the Puerto Rican Heroin Addict Recovery Home right next door to your shanty. I hope you don't have daughters.

[Go Figure]

Well, there goes the view from that corner! And by "affordable housing" what exactly is meant by the term "affordable"? Affordable in RPV is a joke. This development is being planned at a busy intersection, not to mention drivers flying up Crenshaw at 90 mph. I certainly wouldnt want to live there in my senior years or the one they've just built next to the Post Office at the corner of Silver Spur & Crenshaw.

[Appauled]

Chuck Taylor needs to be dragged out to the street and shot. What a horrible example of a human being. This article states that it would be a 40-unit affordable senior-housing complex. What is wrong with senior citizens? They are quite and good neighbors. It's not like they are talking about putting a prison on the site. Who the hell does he think he is? Chuck, Get of your high horse.

[RPV RESIDENT 43YRS]

Why are we building affordable housing in Rancho Palos Verdes ? This makes no sense! Wake up City Council ?? Mayor ???? Sell the land! I urge all of you RPV residents to speak up! Don't let this happen!!!!!

[RPV RESIDENT 43YRS]

Reject the NIMBYs wrote:

Yes, this should be built in RPV. I hope it's expedited, and I hope more are built on the Hill. It's far past time they accept their fair share of low income residents. And this is for our seniors.

You are so way off it's not even funny!

[RPV RESIDENT 43YRS]

jc in rb wrote:

fascist

spoken like a true resident of Redondo Beach!

[Paul]

As a resident of Long Beach that has seen the terrible results of this type of housing,I say don't do it. Seniors who are harmless at first, then their grandkid gang bangers come to visit, and it goes on from there. Stand up and be a NIMBY. You have worked for what you have. Don't let the bleeding hearts or your Council give your peace of mind and your City away. They did not earn it, you did.

Much of Long Beach is a defacto Federal Housing project with the middle class driven out. Our far left Council cannot figure why no one with money wants to shop Downtown Long Beach? Look at the characters and the crime in Downtown Long Beach. Many honest people have been suckered into buying there with their hard earned money, only to have gangers move in with so much allocated to low or "affordable" housing. Then the trouble starts. It is a far left Socialist experiment, on your hard earned dime to push this type of housing where it does not belong.

Don't allow the name callers any quarter. It's your city, not Barack Obama's or Rev. Wrights.

[Paul]

"It's far past time they accept their fair share of low income residents. And this is for our seniors,'said Reject.

What in the heck is "fair share"? If the low income person earns more money there is no reason to keep them moving to PV. You want to give them something for nothing. What you are talking about is a soicial experiment. By the way, you are the one indicating that low income a sort of classism, by saying that it is "past time," as if there is such a thing as a "time" for low income people. How about a "time" for me or anyone else to be given a place in Beverly Hills? Having taught in the public schools, it is clear to see that you are a product of them.

[Willy]

RPV RESIDENT 43YRS wrote:

Why are we building affordable housing in Rancho Palos Verdes ? This makes no sense! Wake up City Council ?? Mayor ???? Sell the land! I urge all of you RPV residents to speak up! Don't let this happen!!!!!

The property is not buildable to an average citizen. It has a zoning problem which is OH or Open area Hazard.

The city seems to be above that so they are building it. Additionally who else can get a 20 plus foot retaining wall built.

[Willy]

This is why I moved out of RPV and to Rolling Hills. No one messes with you and we will never put in any affordable anything here.

[formerly really]

I am curious as to what their definitions of "low-income" and "affordable" are. Since the average for 90275 is about 1.1 million, is 100K a year "low income" for the area? Consider that by the usual real estate rule of thumb, you can afford a house about 3 times your income, meaning average incomes would have to be around 300K. So, what does low income mean when the average is 300K?

[formerly really]

RPV RESIDENT 43YRS wrote:

Why are we building affordable housing in Rancho Palos Verdes ? This makes no sense! Wake up City Council ?? Mayor ???? Sell the land! I urge all of you RPV residents to speak up! Don't let this happen!!!!!

Not many buyers for unbuildable land.

[Willy]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
Not many buyers for unbuildable land.

Yes you are correct if you are refering to the OH (open area hazard) zoning.
The city seems to use it as they seem fit. They let Trump use and and abuse it and now they are doing the same for themselves.

But try as a citizen of the city and watch how quickly they stomp you. That's why I moved to Rolling Hills

[jc in rb]

RPV RESIDENT 43YRS wrote:

<quoted text>
spoken like a true resident of Redondo Beach!

not sure how to take that. I am totaly against any gov. agency telling anyone what kind of housing they have to put up.

[formerly really]

jc in rb wrote:

<quoted text>
not sure how to take that. I am totaly against any gov. agency telling anyone what kind of housing they have to put up.

Well, technically the State is telling them that they have to either use that land for the as yet undefined low income housing or sell it. The city can choose to sell the land but they will have to give up the State tax break for having a percentage of low income housing. It sounds like they are desperately trying to keep the tax advantage by doing the absolute minimum the State requires.

[Willy]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, technically the State is telling them that they have to either use that land for the as yet undefined low income housing or sell it. The city can choose to sell the land but they will have to give up the State tax break for having a percentage of low income housing. It sounds like they are desperately trying to keep the tax advantage by doing the absolute minimum the State requires.

This is all fine. However, the City should treat that OH zoning fair across the board. If they are going to allow Trump and themselves to build in that zoning they should also allow the residents to do the same on their homes.

[jc in rb]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, technically the State is telling them that they have to either use that land for the as yet undefined low income housing or sell it. The city can choose to sell the land but they will have to give up the State tax break for having a percentage of low income housing. It sounds like they are desperately trying to keep the tax advantage by doing the absolute minimum the State requires.

AHHH , so its a fascist blackmail sorta deal!?