Demolishing 60 low income senior apartments.. why not 60 in new proposed build? Take new buildings elsewhere.. State money available to refurb existing buildings at a much lower expense. Why isnt RMI utilizing these state funds?
The Planning Commission, by their 4-2 vote to let this travesty continue has, by themselves, eliminated 40 low-income senior apartments from our neighborhood and community.
The current 60 tenants will have a place to live at their current rental rates in the proposed new build, but folks seem to be oblivious to the fact that that as each of these "original" tenants vacate their apartments (either by moves to assisted living, nursing homes or death), ONLY 20 OF THE 104 UNITS WILL REMAIN AFFORDABLE TO LOW-INCOME SENIORS. The remaining 84 proposed units will NOT AFFORDABLE to seniors on a limited income and include 28 (tax exempt) market-rate apartments. How does the City of Rochester justify the removal of 40 low-income senior apartments and approve 84 market-rate and affordable units (including townhouses)?
Really? Multi-storied buildings in historic Cobbs Hill Park? Fix what is there and let the seniors stay!
Re: “PLEX residents worry about Vacuum Oil plans”
once again, city council ignores concerns of neighborhoods.