Dave C



February, 2022

Recent Activity

Commented on 440 Arden Way 6 months, 3 weeks ago
August O!, I suspect D2 Council member's precipitous decline was highly engineered by aligned power brokers sympathetic to this project. Though the Council Member was certainly vulnerable to those attacks, it does not take a genius to trace them back to those who seek power and wealth above all else. You probably think your perspective is from a place of social equity which would be commendable if it were true. You, like most of the YIMBY movement, have been highly manipulated by corporate forces you do not understand. They are a class unto themselves completely, ensconced in a cocoon of corporate social welfare. The people who work for those corporations probably wonder why the economic/class divide is ever worsening when they're company is doing so much good in the world (sarcasm).
Supported a comment by John f on 440 Arden Way 7 months ago
John f
We live behind the project and we are concerned about the night time lighting directed towards our house. What does your lighting look like at night.
Commented on 440 Arden Way 7 months ago
Tone deaf is putting it mildly.
Supported a comment by Stuart Gow on 440 Arden Way 7 months ago
Stuart Gow
The new design has strong vertical lines and high up heavy horizontal details which enhance the verticality of the building. This goes exactly against community feedback you have received. The design should do the opposite and have strong horizontals that lower the visual weight of the facade. if Bridge moves forward with the new designs the critical reception will be that it is tone deaf.
Commented on 440 Arden Way 7 months ago
I think your response to Karen above is misleading. My understanding is 25% of those 124 units will be reserved for very low to no income and that section 8 vouchers have already been established for those households. Your response above makes it seem like all residents will be at least at 30% of Area Median Income when in fact 37 of those 124 units will be reserved for very low to no income households using Section 8 vouchers. Thanks Bridge Housing for bringing SRO style hotel living to this community. It seems like a forced urbanization of a very suburban area. I do have compassion for those households that will benefit. In fact I think all the public subsidies that will be benefiting Bridge Housing should instead be used to subsidize an ownership stake for the future residents instead of Bridge Housing maintaining an ownership stake in perpetuity. For what its worth, I do not think this project will have a negative impact on area property values. I do think this is a social engineering experiment designed to benefit the developers over the housing recipients and that the fiscal costs of this experiment are completely out of wack with reality. It looks like your closing in on one million dollars per unit not including all the public subsidies that will benefit Bridge Housing. We need fewer landlords and more individual ownership to fix a gerrymandered economy that has artificially restricted housing supply.
Commented on 440 Arden Way 7 months, 3 weeks ago
All three of those plans have one thing in common that your plan does not. They have limited the height and density to common sense levels. They have embraced architectural aesthetics that you just can't match because your maximalist ethos and brutal architecture. Read the room, your design doesn't fit in this location culturally, socially, or aesthetically. I guess it pencils out for you though.