Jump to content

Condos with 'Poor Door' For Lower-Income Residents


Coma16

Recommended Posts

My wife works at a place processing and assessing applications for a place like this in my province. Assisted living is what they call it here. Hearing the stories she tells me, there's nothing but lazy people who cheat and abuse the living hell out of our governments system just to consistently live on a 300 dollar a month rent fee. Which is outrageous to me. I'm a homeowner, I pay 1200 a month mortgage, the government takes minimum 450 bucks a paycheck for taxes. I bust my ass to simply make ends meet (sometimes barely), and we have lazy people who couldn't care less. Society blows sometimes. I personally disagree with the system we have in place based on that. Sure some people use it legitimately to live while they get on their feet, but the amount of people abusing it unfortunately outweigh that. At least where I live anyways, can't personally speak for anywhere else.

Yes but some of them have mental health issues so we need to be PC about it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What ever happened to personal choice and freedom?

People cry about the government controlling too much of our lives, but then they think idiotic things like separate entrances to a building needs to be monitored by the politically correct police and the government?

If you don't want to use a specific entrance to get into a building, then DONT BUY a condo in that building. Pretty simple.

Bars, lounges, airports, sporting events, , casinos, country clubs, hotels, rock concerts - they all have special VIP entrances based on the amount of money you've spent on their product. Are you people complaining about that as well? Are you upset that you can pay a premium price and bypass general admission to the next GnR concert???

Go stay at a hotel and rent a premium penthouse suite. Guess what, you'll get a special key (or code) that gives you access to the penthouse area that the customers renting normal rooms WONT have access to. Are you guys going to start crying about that?

Heck, look at this forum. If you pay money you get access to sections that non-paying members can't participate in.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

With all the crap that is screwed up in this world, people are really crying about a condo full of million dollar units that has two different entrances based on the price of your condo? Seriously? Don't like their rules, buy a condo somewhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.



Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Bummer. I'd gladly pay an extra $50 to not have to wait in line for thirty minutes on each ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Bummer. I'd gladly pay an extra $50 to not have to wait in line for thirty minutes on each ride.
I pay extra at my grocery store for the same products.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Bummer. I'd gladly pay an extra $50 to not have to wait in line for thirty minutes on each ride.

The reasoning was that it's detrimental to the kids. 'Mommy, why can those kids go first ? We've been waiting here longer.' 'Those people have more money, honey.'

Can't say I disagree with that reasoning actually. :shrugs:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Bummer. I'd gladly pay an extra $50 to not have to wait in line for thirty minutes on each ride.

The reasoning was that it's detrimental to the kids. 'Mommy, why can those kids go first ? We've been waiting here longer.' 'Those people have more money, honey.'

Can't say I disagree with that reasoning actually. :shrugs:

On a serious note - why is that a problem?

Being successful at what you do is now a bad thing in the world?

Funny, if that question was asked when I was a kid, the parent says

"Go to college, work hard and you'll have enough money to be able to cut in line."

But today it's the exact opposite.

"You are right little Johnny. It isn't fair!!! Let's protest. Damn those successful people. Nobody should have more money than anybody else. We should all be equal. The government should mandate that everybody is equal at all things. After this protest, I'm going to protest schools using red ink to grade papers, and then strive to eliminate all varsity or all star teams from sports. Everybody that plays should get the same trophy, and we shouldn't count wins and losses any more."

(Lio - not a personal attack at you. Just at this concept people have now that being successful is a bad thing and that everybody should be equal at everything)

Edited by Groghan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reasoning was that it's detrimental to the kids. 'Mommy, why can those kids go first ? We've been waiting here longer.' 'Those people have more money, honey.'

Can't say I disagree with that reasoning actually. :shrugs:

On a serious note - why is that a problem?

Being successful at what you do is now a bad thing in the world?

Funny, if that question was asked when I was a kid, the parent says

"Go to college, work hard and you'll have enough money to be able to cut in line."

But today it's the exact opposite.

"You are right little Johnny. It isn't fair!!! Let's protest. Damn those successful people. Nobody should have more money than anybody else. We should all be equal. The government should mandate that everybody is equal at all things. After this protest, I'm going to protest schools using red ink to grade papers, and then strive to eliminate all varsity or all star teams from sports. Everybody that plays should get the same trophy, and we shouldn't count wins and losses any more."

(Lio - not a personal attack at you. Just at this concept people have now that being successful is a bad thing and that everybody should be equal at everything)

Don't worry, I don't take it as a personal attack.

Who says the people that are paying more are succesful ? Maybe they were born into a rich family and never had to lift a finger in their lives. Maybe they live off benefits, but have no clue as to how they manage their budget. Maybe your kid isn't smart enough to go to college and get a job that pays a lot of money. I'd hate it is he saw himself as a failure because he was taught that if he'd worked hard, he would've been able to earn enough money to cut in line. (Or whatever, of course this is just an example.)

But that aside, I'd rather protect my daughter's innocence for a little longer. I'm trying to teach her that all people are equal and I'd have a hard time explaining that to her. In due time, she'll have to learn what this world is like, but not just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite all the amenities, within their own home at least...

Residents living in the lower-income part of 40 Riverside will be prohibited from using the attractive amenities commonly found in Extell properties, including a gym and a swimming pool.

Because they're not paying for said amenities. Simple as that really.

If you are paying condo fees within that building, you are paying for staff and amenity upkeep and maintenance thereof within that building, they can try to slice that any way they want, but that's the bottom line..regardless of square footage or exclusivity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:no:

I hate when you do that.

:lol:

What do you mean?

Hm, wonder what interesting thing Mags has to bring to the table... *clicks thread* :no:

Apologies. I'm exhausted. My work schedule is nuts right now. Besides, I don't really want to get into it given the tone some of the posts have taken. Main idea behind the sad head shake? While I don't have any interest in the whole "poor door" issue, the lack of empathy and compassion routinely shown on this forum toward people in less fortunate circumstances never fails to bum me out.

There you go. You dumb shits don't deserve the brilliance I bring on a daily basis, so sometimes you get the lone emoji. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:no:

I hate when you do that.

:lol:

What do you mean?

Hm, wonder what interesting thing Mags has to bring to the table... *clicks thread* :no:

Apologies. I'm exhausted. My work schedule is nuts right now. Besides, I don't really want to get into it given the tone some of the posts have taken. Main idea behind the sad head shake? While I don't have any interest in the whole "poor door" issue, the lack of empathy and compassion routinely shown on this forum toward people in less fortunate circumstances never fails to bum me out.

There you go. You dumb shits don't deserve the brilliance I bring on a daily basis, so sometimes you get the lone emoji. :lol:

:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite all the amenities, within their own home at least...

Residents living in the lower-income part of 40 Riverside will be prohibited from using the attractive amenities commonly found in Extell properties, including a gym and a swimming pool.

Because they're not paying for said amenities. Simple as that really.

If you are paying condo fees within that building, you are paying for staff and amenity upkeep and maintenance thereof within that building, they can try to slice that any way they want, but that's the bottom line..regardless of square footage or exclusivity.

Not if your fees are calculated to exclude payment of said amenities.

For example, poor people pay $5 per sf for their standard maintenance. Un-poor people pay $5 per sf for their standard maintenance PLUS an additional $50 per unit per month for use of the additional amenities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I hear, I think this is a great concept. We don't have that here, a mix of expensive apartments and subsidized living in one building. We basically have highrises that are like ghettos, with only people who live off benefits. Only now are they trying to do a better mix a richer and poorer people.

Sadly, you will always have abuse like Gunner55 talked about. People who really need help don't get it because others who should be able to sustain themselves abuse the system. You have that too if you put all the poor people in one place. But the idea of mixing it up seems a good one imo.

Last time I went to Disneyland I paid extra for a fast-track ticket thing that allowed us to skip the long lines. Are you going to protest that?

Funny you should say that. An amusement park here tried to do that last year. They eventually didn't because there were so many protests. So, yes!

Bummer. I'd gladly pay an extra $50 to not have to wait in line for thirty minutes on each ride.

The reasoning was that it's detrimental to the kids. 'Mommy, why can those kids go first ? We've been waiting here longer.' 'Those people have more money, honey.'

Can't say I disagree with that reasoning actually. :shrugs:

On a serious note - why is that a problem?

Being successful at what you do is now a bad thing in the world?

Funny, if that question was asked when I was a kid, the parent says

"Go to college, work hard and you'll have enough money to be able to cut in line."

But today it's the exact opposite.

"You are right little Johnny. It isn't fair!!! Let's protest. Damn those successful people. Nobody should have more money than anybody else. We should all be equal. The government should mandate that everybody is equal at all things. After this protest, I'm going to protest schools using red ink to grade papers, and then strive to eliminate all varsity or all star teams from sports. Everybody that plays should get the same trophy, and we shouldn't count wins and losses any more."

(Lio - not a personal attack at you. Just at this concept people have now that being successful is a bad thing and that everybody should be equal at everything)

Good post.

I've been called a bleeding heart liberal numerous times, but maybe I'm just getting old and some of my views are changing. I have a lot of things- nice material things- that I've worked very hard for. None of it was handed to me, I earned it all. And I make no apologies for it.

I pay a lot of taxes, more of which should be going towards government assisted programs , I donate to charities, I cough up spare change to panhandlers on the street, so really, what do those who complain about these things suggest. Come up with a legitimate workable plan, that doesn't include mere bitching, and I'll gladly listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite all the amenities, within their own home at least...

Residents living in the lower-income part of 40 Riverside will be prohibited from using the attractive amenities commonly found in Extell properties, including a gym and a swimming pool.

Because they're not paying for said amenities. Simple as that really.

If you are paying condo fees within that building, you are paying for staff and amenity upkeep and maintenance thereof within that building, they can try to slice that any way they want, but that's the bottom line..regardless of square footage or exclusivity.

Not if your fees are calculated to exclude payment of said amenities.

For example, poor people pay $5 per sf for their standard maintenance. Un-poor people pay $5 per sf for their standard maintenance PLUS an additional $50 per unit per month for use of the additional amenities.

It all goes in the same account for the same bills mate.

Don't know about American condo laws but under the Canadian Condo Law Legislation this would never be allowed to stand if so decreed by the owners.

The Developer can hawk all the exclusivities they want, once the project is completed and units sold, the titles and ownership are legally passed to the people who purchased and own units within the building (still feel good about not being able to use the pool?). Even if the "poor people" clause(s) are within their declaration they can be reversed or overturned, and it comes down to a quorum of residents that usually needs to exceed a certain percentage in a vote and the "poor people ride at the back of the bus" class structuring within an ownership based residential dwelling is declared null and void. In fact, it doesn't always take a majority vote to change condo bylaws, as I stated earlier, there have been cases where one owner has taken a condo related case before the courts and won. "Adults Only" buildings (as an example) do get challenged and anyone who moves into a building deemed as such with children have successfully had that ruling changed. It's the same with condo buildings or buildings operating under "life lease" titles claiming you have to be "Over 55" to buy there, if a 49 year old person or couple bought or wanted to buy within such a building and they challenged that declaration, they would win.

Personally, I would find it abhorrent that whatever my salary level might be (and any related self aggrandized sense of monetary or class structure self importance)...that I would expect my neighbours and fellow building owners to use any sort of secondary entrance or deny them access to gyms or swimming pools. I would never consider such a living arrangement, I find that utterly repugnant. But hey...different strokes. :shrugs:

Edited by Zint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would someone with children move into a building that is for adults? That's inconsiderate to all others living in the building and ignorant.

You would have to ask them.

Many times condos that operate under such titles as "Adults Only" are doing so because years before, the Board of Directors consisted of senior citizens who didn't care for the sound and joy of exuberant children and thus self proclaimed the building for "adults only". You might think I am exaggerating that, but I know it to be true. There is new Condo Law that pretty much forbids such activity now, but it used to be commonplace. So, one has to ponder who indeed is being inconsiderate and ignorant.

I know of one building where the Board of Directors imposed a bylaw stating that children could only use the outdoor pool from 9am - noon. A by-law so decreed by the "elders" of the Board of Directors who felt a sense of entitlement because they had lived there longer than most. It took ONE man, one owner, who lived there.. to stand in that pool at 2 in the afternoon and shout at the top of his lungs when he was told his grandchild had to leave "I pay my god damn condo fees like every other god damn person out here now, and if I want to take my god damn grandson swimming at two in the god damn afternoon, I god damn well will do it". Point made, by-law challenged, man won, pool open to all children at all hours throughout the hot summer. Exclusivity put to rest, sense of entitlement by the seniors and long term residents quelled, by a man who refused to be considered a lesser owner than any other, and whose square footage condo fees was smaller than most. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...