# NC - 55+ Affordable (low income as it's called) Apartments



## YodaRules in NC (Jun 12, 2022)

New member checking out the posts.... some thoughts on affordable living. I found here in NC one can move into a 55+ "affordable living" independent apartment complex with retirement annual income under 35K (one person two bedroom apartment) for right under 1K monthly. AND, was pleasantly surprised to learn the powers that be signing off on this do not care how much assets you have (example, 500K in mutual funds that nothing is drawn on).

Of course, it's all government controlled but hey......... sure beats paying big bucks. Anyone else in the NC Triangle area?



Patsy


----------



## Geezerette (Jun 12, 2022)

Welcome! I’ve found (the hard way) that one catch in low income or lower cost housing is that the apts rarely have their own washer or dryer; maybe one or two units, possibly poorly maintained, somewhere in the bldg. In the one I moved out of, I gave up & started  taking my stuff out to a laundromat after I saw one of my neighbors put stuff with dog mess on it into the washer. Eventually moved out& paid more elsewhere to have my own units in the Apt.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jun 13, 2022)

I'm not in N.C. but your _"pleasantly surprised to learn the powers that be signing off on this do not care how much assets you have (example, 500K in mutual funds that nothing is drawn on)."_ is a *sweet* deal ! I saw on the news a couple of days ago that average two bedroom apartments in the U.S. are $1,750 a month. By New Jersey standards, that's still cheap.  Many 2 bedrooms in my county run from $1,900 to over $3,000 a month. In the infamously expensive Bergen County they can start in the $2,400 range and go up to over $5,000 a month. So called "affordable" apartments aren't usually desirable ones.

I'm blessed to be the owner of a co-op apartment for 51 years.  Our carrying charge is only $644 a month (as of Feb this year due to an assessment) and includes heat and hot water. @Geezerette One has to wonder what are people thinking. Putting an item with dog doo in a community washer is so inconsiderate...insane really! I said if I ever had to move from here (due to a catastrophe or some unexpected event), I'd be looking to rent a luxury apartment with an in unit washer and dryer. But for now, our laundry room, which I have to go outside and down steps to access, was renovated again a couple of years ago and is well kept. I have a mini washer and spinner but it's not fully automatic, so washing is "a process" so I don't use them often.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Jun 13, 2022)

Welcome to SF, Patsy.

IMO having no cap on assets, revocable trusts, etc... is a great example of the taxpayer's poor representation in government.

I think senior housing based on income is great, but I don't think that someone with substantial assets should be able to enjoy a subsidy at the taxpayer's expense.


----------



## Lee (Jun 13, 2022)

Aunt Bea said:


> I think senior housing based on income is great, but I don't think that someone with substantial assets should be able to enjoy a subsidy at the taxpayer's expense.



Could not agree more, and here in Canada assets are taken into consideration for housing. Yet they do not seem to put the same cap on other senior benefits. Go figure!


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jun 13, 2022)

Aunt Bea said:


> Welcome to SF, Patsy.
> 
> IMO having no cap on assets, revocable trusts, etc... is a great example of the taxpayer's poor representation in government.
> 
> I think senior housing based on income is great, but I don't think that someone with substantial assets should be able to enjoy a subsidy at the taxpayer's expense.


Good point Aunt Bea !


----------



## rgp (Jun 16, 2022)

Aunt Bea said:


> Welcome to SF, Patsy.
> 
> IMO having no cap on assets, revocable trusts, etc... is a great example of the taxpayer's poor representation in government.
> 
> I think senior housing based on income is great, but I don't think that someone with substantial assets should be able to enjoy a subsidy at the taxpayer's expense.



 Agree here.


----------

