Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 176 posts

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#81

Post by porkbeer »

thriftwy wrote: post #29
johnnyanmac wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, but many cities do not have reliable transit. Hourly busses that stop after 9pm doesn't help at all. And thars the case for a lot of the western part of the US. Also, thst grocery store may not exactly be profitable and be worth keeping up. Especially if Walmart or something use to station there and then left.

I believe this is an unique US situation where you are unable to scale down Walmart. Just make a Walmart Lite with no jeans or TVs but only food. Then these can be built practically everywhere, offering the same competitive prices. There are half dozen of chains like this in Russia and they often open on the other sides of same street.

They have these, they are Dollar General and they are gutting rural and low income area mom and pops. They are not a better solution.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#82

Post by alamortsubite »

Podgajski wrote: post #60

I am homeless and I am permanently disabled with bipolar disorder schizoaffective type. I want to say first that housing first works. The stress of me being homeless is worse for my mental illness. And I applaud Austin for actually doing something. Secondly, the biggest mistake they make is that they want to segregate low income people out of society. this is part of the problem. I don’t know if the solution to this,…

> putting these far outside of the city takes people away from resources like other people said

Thanks for sharing your experience. What are some examples of these resources?

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#83

Post by brudgers »

As intended, I read the headline and the beginning of article picturing tiny houses.

Which sounds like treating the unhoused like I would want to be treated. Then:

most of its homes lack bathrooms and kitchens

And it all made sense, it’s a campground.

But written so I imagined tiny houses.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#84

Post by cpursley »

crooked-v wrote: post #27
cglan wrote: post #12

Definitely not against this, since any housing is good, and I hate letting perfect be the enemy of good, but not sure why we are so intent on scaling the concept of a single family home down to 200sqft. Townhouses in NYC have existed for over a hundred years, and generally across the world are an extremely viable concept for dense and cheap housing. It's perfectly possible to build cheap townhomes that can house 6 or…

The reason you don't see those is that middle-density housing is indirectly or directly illegal in almost every major US metro area. Developers would love to build that kind of thing because it gets snapped up immediately wherever it's available, but they're not allowed to do so.

Yep, there’s even a website dedicated to this:

https://missingmiddlehousing.com/

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#85

Post by thriftwy »

wolverine876 wrote: post #46
thriftwy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just not sure how you get these problems unironically. What's so hard about having a grocery store and reliable transit to downtown? The notorious St. Petersburg's Murino district is located outside city's boundary but it has a metro station, several grocery stores, bakeries, bars and other shops. It's not like US poor have no disposable income at all. Kudrovo has worse transit options but features an absolutely…

What the GP describes is a generally accepted need by planners, etc. Regarding grocery stores, look up 'food deserts'. Also, when you are working multiple jobs, you have even less time for overhead like commutes to distant jobs and services.

You do not have to have food deserts, that's self-inflicted.

If you are working multiple jobs, at least you should afford to live somewhere near. If you work multiple jobs and is forced to live very very far away/in ghetto, then you should realize people live better than you in third world countries, and relocate to Laos to teach English and lie on the beach. Seriously.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#86

Post by brudgers »

As intended, I read the headline and the beginning of article picturing tiny houses.

Which sounds like treating the unhoused like I would want to be treated. Then:

most of its homes lack bathrooms and kitchens

And then:

The tiny homes that make up two-thirds of the dwellings go for slightly lower rent but have no indoor plumbing.

And it all made sense, it’s a campground.

Though the village is open to people of any religious background, it is run by Christians, and public spaces are adorned with paintings of Jesus on the cross and other biblical scenes. The application to live in the community outlines a set of “core values” that refer to God and the Bible.

A church campground.

TANSTAAFL.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#87

Post by Podgajski »

alamortsubite wrote: post #82
Podgajski wrote: post #60

I am homeless and I am permanently disabled with bipolar disorder schizoaffective type. I want to say first that housing first works. The stress of me being homeless is worse for my mental illness. And I applaud Austin for actually doing something. Secondly, the biggest mistake they make is that they want to segregate low income people out of society. this is part of the problem. I don’t know if the solution to this,…

> putting these far outside of the city takes people away from resources like other people said Thanks for sharing your experience. What are some examples of these resources?

Grocery stores, doctors, coffee, shops to socialize. The truth is that socializing, with all the other people who are having financial trouble lessens the probability that I’ll connect with someone who can possibly help me.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#88

Post by cpursley »

pyuser583 wrote: post #31
ozten wrote: post #16

I’ve volunteered to build a tiny home in Seattle and have seen this deployed in my neighborhood and a few other sites. It is a feel good thing, but the reality is… These are a fraction of what is actually needed. It is symbolic. The residents are removed from mental health and other services and plopped into a suburban neighborhood without community or resources. The host families are not trained social workers, but…

“Housing First” is such a bit like communism - perfect in theory. The problem is you need “second” and “third” things too, and the political will often just doesn’t exist. I lived near a “housing first” facility that was no better than a homeless encampment.

I’m on the opposite end of the spectrum as communist but let’s be honest, the well run communist regimes got all their people housed, and quickly.

The real answer is not tiny homes, it’s prefabricated apartment blocks that can be put up cheaply (in master planned super blocks where people can walk to stores and work).

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#89

Post by cyberax »

wolverine876 wrote: post #41
TexanFeller wrote: post #2

Looks like this housing is built outside of town, so it might actually work! One things cities do wrong is trying to house homeless people near downtown. It's dramatically more expensive to do it there, so there will never be enough housing or will to pay for it. The housing that was built for "low income artists to be able to live here" was even more of a joke. A bunch of condos downtown that were priced uncomfortab…

People, including unhoused ones and artistic ones, need to live near downtown because that's where jobs and services are, including needed social services, and transportation to the rest of the city, as well as community. In typical cities, the art galleries, museums, schools, etc. are downtown. If you have a family and spend your time with them and at work, a home away from the city center makes sense. If you need t…

Well, provide jobs outside of misery centrals (downtowns). This is coincidentally the ONLY way that will actually help housing affordability.

Re: Austin takes a bet on tiny homes to ease homelessness

#90

Post by CapitalistCartr »

cglan wrote: post #12

Definitely not against this, since any housing is good, and I hate letting perfect be the enemy of good, but not sure why we are so intent on scaling the concept of a single family home down to 200sqft. Townhouses in NYC have existed for over a hundred years, and generally across the world are an extremely viable concept for dense and cheap housing. It's perfectly possible to build cheap townhomes that can house 6 or…

Society would be better served, but the whole system is stacked against it. Zoning, banking, and buyers. When a developer builds a luxury single-family suburban development, they make good money for less complexity, less risk. Marketing is easy, contractors in all the trades are easy, customers are easy, mortgages are easy (party due to federal gov't), etc. Everyone from masons to marketers to moms are comfortable. Change requires the gov't at all levels to put a metaphoric thumb on the scale.

In the interests of full disclosure, I despise doing resi new construction, but many guys do it exclusively.

Post reply on HN