Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

88138813 t1_j8sl26c wrote

I'll one up this article. The amount that DCHA pays in rent is purely based on the number of bedrooms a unit has, whether the configuration of the unit makes sense or not. I've seen people buy 3 level rowhomes, make each level it's own unit and jam 3-4 bedrooms in each level to the point of there not even being living space. It's just a kitchen and 3-4 bedrooms in a ~800 sq/ft unit.

Since DCHA only cares about the bedroom count, they'll pay the same exact rate for this ridiculous apartment custom-designed to game their system than they will for say a standard ~2000 sq/ft 3-4 bedroom rowhome. Times that by 3 units in the former single family home, and the landlord is pulling in somewhere around $12-$15K/month depending on the property's subdivision. It's totally ridiculous.

247

ahtigers10 OP t1_j8slfhf wrote

Yep, the article mentions that exact scheme. Pure profiteering off poverty. Disgraceful.

148

Baryon-Sweep t1_j8v4se1 wrote

What is it in the US where we just can't do anything efficiently or competently.

Almost every program is rife with incompetence, profiteering, and fraud.

14

[deleted] t1_j8vjdfk wrote

> What is it in the US where we just can't do anything efficiently or competently.

I mean - there ARE well run government programs. You just don't read about them because no one publishes new articles about things going well.

22

Bitterfish t1_j8wmtdz wrote

A lot of the time the culprit is regulatory capture, where the industry that is meant to be governed by an agency ends up defining the terms of its governance. A famous recent example is Boeing and the FAA, among many others. It seems likely that DCHA is extremely cozy with landlords and this is one result.

6

[deleted] t1_j8usm9s wrote

Well, its disgraceful on multiple levels. Disgraceful of the developers/owners to reconfigure buildings in this shameful way. Disgraceful of DC officials to pay the money, either knowing or deliberately failing to know of the bogus reconfiguration. And disgraceful of any politicians and their voters who allow this to continue to happen.

10

Oldbayistheshit t1_j8sv3oi wrote

And each of these rooms has a window and closet?

17

SolarFlanel t1_j8sxe77 wrote

Fun fact- A closet is not legally required for a room to be a bedroom.

There are sq ft, height/width, and access requirements.

51

88138813 t1_j8sy4bc wrote

Correct. Here are the requirements from DCHA. See the last bulletpoint. A bedroom pretty much just needs to be over 70 square feet. It mentions "living spaces" needing two means of egress (door & window), but not bedrooms specifically.

27

GinGimlet t1_j8t6qex wrote

I saw a place with an internal 'bedroom' that had a tiny window in one wall facing the rest of the apartment. Just so they could say it was a bedroom lol

16

whatwasthatdudesname t1_j8tmqm5 wrote

lived in a "two bedroom" basement in mount pleasant when i first moved to DC; my room was a 10x8 box with a 7' ceiling and no window.

8

Blue_5ive t1_j8tpiv5 wrote

I was viewing apartments and one had a door with windows for the same reason lmao.

5

[deleted] t1_j8usqq8 wrote

In fact they do. And each closet has an additional bedroom within it.

1

RJSSUFER t1_j8t73g1 wrote

I dont see how that is worse than what the article describes. That is generating extra bedrooms for people that would have not existed in the city.

8

yoofoureeyah t1_j8tlgfe wrote

Because four walls don’t make home. There needs to be minimum living space requirements, natural light requirements, etc. Things humans need to be healthy.

31

MAX_cheesejr t1_j8xhd7z wrote

When you go through HCVP you need to go through both the BBL inspection and HCVP inspection. Landlords can't just do whatever they want. Once you start adding multiple units they have start getting rent control from DC.

0

imightbethewalrus3 t1_j8v16mf wrote

You'll live in your glorified closet that makes you feel horribly depressed as if you're an animal in a cage and you'll like it!

3

RJSSUFER t1_j8x3am1 wrote

Not sure you have seen the news about McPherson, but my gut says that this bedroom is better than living on the street. I have never lived on the street, so maybe I am mistaken.

0

imightbethewalrus3 t1_j8xj4nd wrote

Yes, presumably it's better than sleeping on cold concrete in the rain. Still doesn't make it a humane living situation.

1

[deleted] t1_j8tv7kg wrote

[deleted]

1

RJSSUFER t1_j8ty7vi wrote

Do u think a 70 sq ft bedroom is similar to a 18 sf house?

0

throwaway66285 t1_j8u21x3 wrote

Relatively speaking, yes. The average bedroom size is 200 square feet. 70 square feet is 35% of that. Sure, it's greater than 9% of that, but they're both pretty small in comparison to 200. I'd bet neither meet minimum living standard requirements.

It's similar to how cockatiels can live in smaller cages, but they need a 24" x 18" x 24" cage to be happy.

Not to mention other things that humans need to live, like natural light.

1

snowednboston t1_j8ugm3g wrote

Can confirm this is happening in CH—SFH houses that can’t be profitably flipped for “luxury” condos are being restructured this way. Not the way to stabilize neighborhoods, DC.

7

pizzajona t1_j94vizd wrote

Do you know if 3-4 bedrooms in a unit means at least 3-4 are housed in those units or would it be just one person?

1

Quiet_Meaning5874 t1_j8tjt2d wrote

damn almost like the government keeps messing up the housing market and it would be so much better if they got out the damn way!

−9

Xanny t1_j8u2nqa wrote

The "free market" is not going to house the homeless.

21

Quiet_Meaning5874 t1_j8u3jh5 wrote

Heavily regulated housing with huge subsidies obviously ain’t.

Way less homeless existed in the US before they outlawed SROs and rooming houses and flop houses and a million other dignified housing options. And now, as the article states, the government is actively harming the housing market making it so it is far more expensive for the vast majority of people. All around failure.

2