Developers In San Francisco Create A Line Of Stackable Micro-Apartments For The Homeless!

Developers in San Francisco have created a line of stackable pods as a potential solution to the city's overwhelming homelessness crisis. Nearly 7,000 homeless people in SF.

a reply to: omniEther

This is great!

And just a mandatory drug testing each month and no visitors after 10PM..

Didn't someone already try this and the government ended up just stealing the houses out from under them?

Link

a reply to: omniEther

I like the idea but I have a few questions....

How much per unit? (Up-front cost and maintenance/utilities).

Who pays for it?

Where are they going to place them?

How does a person qualify for one?

Who profits from it? (Keep in mind I have no issue with a contractor/supplier making a profit.... as long as it's within reason).

Would there be a requirement that able-bodied people that live in them would be required to provide a service? Either work for pay or volunteer?

I like the design of the thing. It's a little tight for my liking but a great first step for someone who needs some help getting up on their own feet.

a reply to: omniEther

Hope it works out. I know around the world they have been using discarded shipping containers for housing. The problem is only get more prevalent as Jobs fast food, Grocery stores (Amazon Go) etc function without a large workforce.

a reply to: ugmold

From time to time I wonder if the "Tiny House" fad is a way to condition some people to accept that they will NEVER have that typical "American Dream" of owning a home with nice front and back yards and white picket fence and all that.

So - they are building these for San Francisco.

I wonder if this has anything to do with their Sanctuary city plans.
Perhaps they plan on a flood of people coming in to the city from other areas that are not sanctuary cities.
There are going to need some quick housing to meet the growing demand.

a reply to: eluryh22

I am no fan of white picket fence. I like 6-8 foot wrought iron fence with those spikes on top. Those are much cooler looking, and intimidating to intruders. I want a fence that leads to people's deaths when they try and jump it. Thats how our border should be

Developers In San Francisco Create A Line Of Stackable Micro-Apartments For The Homeless

Well they're assholes.

Imagine a whole blockl of those. 50 years from now.

Total waste of time and money.

This would be a dream for so many suffering in the cold- subject to violence etc. The problem is now-hopefully with not many restrictions except to take care of themselves and not hurt others. With the majority mentally ill-there would need to a process but most homeless like it that way-can't force them-so therein lies the biggest problem-mental illness and their right to personal freedom.

Prolly easier to settle the homeless out of the city, even if they get jobs they will NEVER be able to afford to live in San Fran with those jobs they are given. The problem with San fran is lot/square footage price. no amount of government boondoggles is going to fix the fact that San Frans geography limits the sprawl which means the cost of living is extreme.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: eluryh22

I am no fan of white picket fence. I like 6-8 foot wrought iron fence with those spikes on top. Those are much cooler looking, and intimidating to intruders. I want a fence that leads to people's deaths when they try and jump it. Thats how our border should be

I would argue that if our borders had the "death fences"... as they should.... the white picket fences would be adequate.

Good fences make good neighbors.

We have no fences in our front yard but 6' fences in our back yard. We sincerely like our neighbors but we also value our privacy.

Good fences make good neighbors.

a reply to: omniEther

The homeless need homes of course but many of them need psychiatric care as well. In the 80's, Reagan pretty much destroyed the nation's mental health system when such things were put on the chopping block by ideological "small government" conservatives (who have never managed to actually shrink the government but rather defund what they don't like with that excuse and throw the money behind something that aligns with their agenda).

Psychiatric facilities were shutdown. Patients were basically just turned loose in the street to become homeless and to wind up in prison. We need to reinvest in mental health. We need to invest in drug treatment. We REALLY need to do something about weakening employment. I'm all for housing the homeless but it's only logical that we also focus resources addresses the root causes.

a reply to: BlueAjah

The sanctuary cities are writing their their own death warrants. Think Chicago. Overpopluation by uneducated, angry, hungry
who cannot assimilate to Americanism and terribly disappointed in their lives all around. They will turn on us, those who tried to help because of the illusion promised them.

We need to build up our national guard. And, no, the churches don't have enough to assuage the newcomers.

Gonna be ugly and get uglier. California, get ready for a big change your quality of life-every penny sucked out of you to take care of your new friends who won't be able for generations if ever to be able to take care of themselves.

a reply to: omniEther

I heard an Australian female politiican say on radio some time ago that under Agenda 30, their plan is have the masses living in a living space that is equal to the size of a car parking bay. Got the ides that this was on a per person basis.

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: ugmold

From time to time I wonder if the "Tiny House" fad is a way to condition some people to accept that they will NEVER have that typical "American Dream" of owning a home with nice front and back yards and white picket fence and all that.

Tiny Homes are usually individual and stand alone homes. I will say this is EXACTLY the american dream on a more practical and affordable scale. Lots of Tiny Homes do indeed have a yard as well. It's way past the time of McMansions and excess. In reality homes used to be built of a reasonable size and it's something we need to get back too.

Speaking for myself, I've cautioned my kids to not get anything larger than they can inexpensively maintain because I prefer they live life, not spend all their free time doing maintenance on a home. The trade-off's are too costly JMO.
So many baby-boomers are downsizing and those I know that didn't, now can barely afford their utilities. In my area lots of properties are run down and becoming more so as seniors just can't physically keep up with things.

Just something to think about.

Drop one of those in the woods somewhere and I'd be happy, but unfortunately I think half of those would be wreaked within a year

I don't really understand why these stackable homes are considered an innovation.
I also don't understand the fascination with the Tiny Home fad.

Modular/manufactured/mobile homes have been around for decades - for longer than I have been alive.
We have quite a few mobile home parks in my area, and many of the homes are very pretty.
Some parks are admittedly run down, but some are higher end with beautiful landscaping.
They are comparable to neighborhoods of normal homes - different income levels.
You often see them placed on their own piece of land, which is even better.

They are usually an inexpensive alternative to a large home.
Today they are manufactured with better quality and esthetics, and they come in all sizes from tiny to larger ones that are more like a small ranch home.

We lived in one for a couple of years when we first got married, and moved into our own home when my son was 2.
I have very happy memories of living there - some of the best of my life.

So, I don't get it.
This is not a new thing.

a reply to: BlueAjah

yea the concept doesn't make that much sense, a lot of these tiny homes are not cheap. They are often built with expensive material which defeats the purpose. I believe this is more of a hipster trend than something realistic for the average person.

Their whole argument is flawed they use the pretense that the average american home is 2600 square feet thus people are drowning in debt.
Yea if you want to live in a nice low crime area with certain zoning laws a person is going to pay. Or you can move to the midwest or south where lots are cheap and built/buy a decent house for cheap.

If they were realistic they would build dorms for the homeless to maximize lot space but projects usually do not work out because of the inhabitants include a few bad actors.

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: ugmold

From time to time I wonder if the "Tiny House" fad is a way to condition some people to accept that they will NEVER have that typical "American Dream" of owning a home with nice front and back yards and white picket fence and all that.

It's more an attempt to stretch the American Dream and lower the standards, to a much smaller home to own.