At a time when there is an affordable housing crisis, I find the concept of 50+ apartments, mobile home parks and condos to be adding to the problem. I love living here and thankfully can afford to do so. I rent in a 50+ simply because when I needed a place, anything else in my price range was either sketchy or had no vacancy.
I have lived in a variety of housing as a senior, where there have been a range of disturbances to me that have nothing to doing with children or youth: vandalism of my property, cutting down of common land trees for a view, the smell of pot wafting under doors, fire alarms going off because of burnt toast, a neighbour’s boyfriend creeping me out because of his alcoholism, etc. How much better to include in that neighbourhood the joy of meeting a small child out for a wagon ride or stopping to chat with a youth about her band concert or hiring her to do some gardening?
I so often hear seniors (including myself), using the term ‘entitled’ when referring to youth, and yet some seniors feel ‘entitled’ to their own private condos or mobile home parks, where families might have a fighting chance at affordable housing! This is absurd, and in my mind, a violation of human rights.
I just read that in the RDN, there are a total of 12,960 people living below the poverty line. When older ranchers in our area are upward of $350,000 and all-age, multi-dwellings rarely available, how can we accept another development like the one coming on McAllister for condos priced at $650,000-plus, likely adult-oriented as well?
The city said there was a need for this kind of housing. I say BS to that! What is needed is for all housing to be developed with all ages welcome.
Let’s think carefully about creating real, genuine neighbourhoods.
Eleanor Thompson
Parksville