Interesting. I think it is a decent idea, at least one worth looking at again. Times are tougher now, perhaps there might be more people interested in creating accessory apartments on their properties.
It seems to me that the unpopularity of this option in Woodstock is evidence of widespread NIMBYism. Those with the most land and the most money certainly do not want anybody else living close to their houses. It is preferable for the wealthy to have some centralized project somewhere, as long as that somewhere is far away from them. If enough people make accessory apartments, and affordable housing is integrated into the community, there would not be a need to construct a ghetto of affordable housing.
The word ghetto is very controversial. A ghetto is defined as a region of a city where a population is segregated based on racial or economic separation. Also, the Jews of early twentieth century Europe lived in religious ghettos. Ghettos encourage segregation, not integration.
Paul Shultis Jr. had the right idea.
I have never heard anyone speak out against accessory apartments. Everyone I speak to thinks it is a great idea.
ReplyDeleteIt's a great idea only if the town makes it simple enough to do, and also financially favorable to do, or at least financially neutral. There should be a Town-driven effort to making it a packaged process, not just theoretically possible.
ReplyDelete