An article headed “Groups hatch $15 million plan to revive 2nd block of South Queen Street” opens “More than a year ago, Lancaster Alliance President Jack Howell identified the 100 block of South Queen Street as a neighborhood teetering on the edge.”
It later states “When completed, South Square will have 62 one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments that would be on the “upper end of affordable housing,” Michael Carper said.
It continues “The units would rent for between $400 to $800 per month.”
WATCHDOG: That comes to $242,000 per unit, as much as the value of most suburban homes and twice as much for the typical Lancaster row house in good condition.
How can our society afford grants and funds in such large amounts for units that will receive so paltry a rental?
And is this location suitable for affordable housing?
Make no mistake about it. This isn’t relief for the poor. If they wanted housing for the poor, they could go buy an apartment complex at $60,000 a unit. This is relief for affluent bankers, lawyers, architects and builders.
Had the original smaller version of the convention center gone into the Brunswick and the Watt & Shand site been developed for mixed housing / retail use, both as originally envisioned, gentrification would have moved southward into this very block and private money would have accomplished more for half the cost.
So very sad. Growl!
Dividing $15 million by 62, I get a tad under $242,000, not $288,000.
Watchdog’s argument need not be any different at the lower figure, but it would be a lot more credible if the numbers checked out.
The article in the Intelligent Era says that the current occupants of the apartments were people who paid $65 a week, and couldn’t meet the rent consistently. Those people obviously can’t afford $400 to $800 a month. Where are those people to go?
At $125/SF, you ought to be able to build 70,000 square feet of residential housing for less than $9 million. Sounds like someone’s brother-in-law is collecting $6 million on this deal.