Interesting, though, the lessons learned from mobile homes (trailer parks), which in theory offer cheaper housing but end up being swindled. We need to avoid these mistakes:
The answer is nonprofit Community Development Corporations. They get lots of special funding sources which allow them to buy or develop housing and rent it out affordably.
I recently finished a degree focused on this model at SFSU. There are a few really good examples like CCDC and TNDC in SF. Both of these have acquired about 4,500 units of housing so far, all of which are affordable. Many of the other districts have or want something similar.
This is the only general-purpose solution I've found to nonprofit affordable community development of not just housing but also many other types of infrastructure projects.
It's just not possible to build for-profit inventory that's affordable; the cost per unit is too high. But there are lots of exciting ways to fund nonprofit affordable housing, and the CDC model
The term homeless in California is mostly a politically expedient mislabeling.
Most of the homeless are drug addicts that are not able to maintain a job or pay for car insurance. They aren't going to be able to pay rent.
Recognizing this ends up turning this into a way harder problem, with extremely divergent suggested solutions.
Instead people work on the easier problem of housing people, that at least is solvable, and that most people can agree on, even if it absolutely doesn't solve the actual problems of the drug addicts (that are being called homeless because that's nicer to think about and easier to work on).
(Agreed about tax dollars should not be spent building in flood plains.)
> The term homeless in California is mostly a politically expedient mislabeling.
> Most of the homeless are drug addicts that are not able to maintain a job or pay for car insurance. They aren't going to be able to pay rent.
I'm going to say this straight up, without the passive aggressive "citation needed" business: I do not believe you, but you have the opportunity to convince me by providing sources.
I recently finished a degree focused on this model at SFSU. There are a few really good examples like CCDC and TNDC in SF. Both of these have acquired about 4,500 units of housing so far, all of which are affordable. Many of the other districts have or want something similar.
This is the only general-purpose solution I've found to nonprofit affordable community development of not just housing but also many other types of infrastructure projects.
It's just not possible to build for-profit inventory that's affordable; the cost per unit is too high. But there are lots of exciting ways to fund nonprofit affordable housing, and the CDC model