(07-06-2018, 09:03 AM)tomh009 Wrote: (07-05-2018, 11:12 PM)embe Wrote: Don't get me wrong. Your translation(s) come across as biased in a certain way and I'm curious why. What would you like to see with this development?
I believe we need more affordable housing. That's my bias here.
The comments from the two people are almost exclusively driven by the fact that it would be (partly) affordable housing, and they don't want "those kind of people" living near them. I don't approve of this type of discrimination.
This is always going to be an issue, especially in places like Cambridge and Waterloo.
What I think is needed though, is more dialogue with the neighbours with what the definition of 'affordable" actually means in this case. Affordable doesn't always equal 'welfare' or government housing. There's a difference. My inlaws used to live in an 'affordable' apartment (not for them, but about 50% of the tenants were geared to income), and there were zero issues for the 5 years that they were there. And this was Hamilton close to Gage Park.
And really, doesn't matter where you go, you can have nightmare neighbours in the best neighbourhoods. You can have homes being used to grow marijuana (I'm not talking about personal use here) and meth labs, right in suburbia, or other neighbours that blast their music to all hours of the night.