
Can Oregon's tiny houses be part of the solution to homelessness? - taivare
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/01/oregon-tiny-houses-solution-homelessness
======
cauterized
Probably not. Most homelessness is due to either mental illness and substance
abuse or due to a shortage of affordable housing in places where jobs are
available - typically dense cities where the only way to add housing within
reasonable commute distance of the jobs is to build upwards, not building
inexpensive 1-story buildings on vacant land.

Furthermore, both types of homeless tend to congregate in places where there's
a density of social services available because they rely on those services for
food, clothing, health care, or assistance seeking employment, in addition to
shelter. Those areas tend not to be within walking distance (for the vast
majority who also lack cars) of anywhere that has space to build dozens or
hundreds of these tiny houses.

There are plenty of places in this country that have a ton of vacant housing
stock, and even some of those have a homelessness problem (see also: Detroit).
The problems underlying homelessness are far more complicated than the size of
the houses we build.

~~~
angdis
Agreed that homelessness has complex underlying issues, but homelessness can
ALSO be a temporary condition triggered by any number of problems (loss of a
job, insurmountable debt, etc). The people are still technically "homeless"
though rarely classified as such. Anything that provides more options for
housing will help people who are homeless or on the verge of becoming
homeless.

~~~
cauterized
But moving them to the area 3 hours drive away from the city where there's
actually space to build some of these things doesn't help them deal with
joblessness (or needing a second job to pay down debt, when you lose 6
hours/day to your commute) since employment is generally easier to find in a
city. In most of these cases, what's needed is not to expand low-density areas
with marginally higher density, but to increase density in higher density
areas so that housing there becomes affordable, or to offer temporary
free/subsidized housing in those high-density areas until people are back on
their feet.

~~~
WalterSear
Which is essentially the underlying plot of City of God. And which was based
on a true story in the Brazilian favelas.

It's just hipster hubris. If someone suggested building apartment blocks with
the same square footage as those twee little houses, they would be accused of
trying to warehouse the homeless, but it's actually a much better idea.

~~~
adekok
Don't underestimate the power of green space. Having small homes in the middle
of lawn, trees, and plants is _much_ better than having small apartments in a
dense apartment building.

There's still the problem of services / jobs, of course. But that's a bit
separate.

~~~
normloman
What preserves greenspace more: 1000 people living in a tower block, or 1000
people, each with their own homes and lawns, sprawling across an entire
suburban neighborhood?

Of course, it's not as simple as that. Greenspace is important, which is why
cities have parks.

------
SwellJoe
I would love to live in a tiny house village...but, the zoning laws in my home
city (Austin) make it literally impossible.

It is also illegal to be homeless here, with fines for illegal camping costing
several hundred dollars. It's sickening to see all the new construction, often
with enthusiastic support of much of city council and the mayor, that is
targeted at people who can afford $3000/month rents, when there are so many
families being pushed out of their neighborhoods.

I've kind of idley been shopping for houses or land in New Orleans and its
fascinating how tiny some of the old houses are. There was a time when it was
not considered crazy or illegal to construct a two room, 250 square foot,
house for one or two people to live in. It don't understand how we've gone so
far in the McMansion direction. It's entirely possible to live happily in a
tiny space (I did it for four years, living and traveling full-time in a
motorhome).

~~~
TheBeardKing
I'm curious, what is a specific zoning ordinance which prohibits small houses?
In my county, the building code does not mandate a minimum size, but many HOA
covenants do. Or is it just the grouped houses that are outlawed, like minimum
parcel size of 0.25 acre or something?

~~~
robkix
The IRC and IBC do specify minimum sizes, so if your county adopted either of
those then there is a built in minimum.

> Every dwelling unit shall have at least one habitable room that shall have
> not less than 120 square feet (11 m2) of gross floor area. Other habitable
> rooms shall have a floor area of not less than 70 square feet (6.5 m2).
> Habitable rooms shall not be less than 7 feet (2134 mm) in any horizontal
> dimension.

The 2015 revision removes or modifies this.

~~~
TheBeardKing
Interesting, I did not know international building codes existed.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Building_Code](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Building_Code)

~~~
wlesieutre
It's not an internationally enforced document or anything, more of a "base
code" that jurisdictions can choose to adopt (often with local modifications)
to avoid writing their own from scratch.

Similar codes exist for electrical (NEC, which I guess is national because of
voltage differences internationally?) and fire safety (IFC).

------
stuart78
Salt Lake City's approach seems to be going pretty well [1]. On another note,
naming these places 'Dignity' and 'Opportunity' seems, at least to my ear, to
sap the residents of both. Why not give them more innocuous names?

[1] [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/22/home-
free](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/22/home-free)

~~~
Kephael
Sounds like something out of _Anthem_.

------
CalRobert
At points in my life my apartment has been pretty much a place to sleep for 8
hours, and little more. It was always maddening that the options were still
expensive (even studios are cavernous when you're a 22 year old with almost no
belongings, no car, and no family).

------
CapitalistCartr
Here in Florida mobile home parks used to be common, to the point of being 50%
of housing in some counties. My entire life they've been tearing them down,
sometimes to build expensive stuff, whether residential or commercial,
oftentimes because the community politicians want to eliminate any low-cost
housing to upscale "their" community. Poor people aren't represented by the
government at any level; the economic top third is precisely represented.

~~~
toxican
Are you sure the stupidity of flimsy housing in a hurricane hotspot wasn't a
huge part of it? Shots of decimated trailer parks are usually the first things
to hit the national news when a big hurricane hits you all.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
That does get airplay but it's not accurate. Millions of people live in mobile
homes, a few get damaged by storms, as do regular stick-built homes. Tornadoes
trash a few every now and then. But none of that is why they're being cleaned
out; it's arrogance. Pricing the poor out of housing altogether isn't
improving their safety. Modern tie-down codes had already solved that problem
years ago.

------
nickhalfasleep
I think there will be a point where some people at an early stage of their
life opt for a small mobile house.. that is actually a car, perhaps even self
driving. If hourly jobs and limited urban real estate make home (e.g.
land)-ownership an unrealistic expectation, why not live out of your car?

Would really turn the heads of people who expected their plot of land to be
worth something because younger generations would aspire to it and have no
other option.

------
datashovel
To the argument that homelessness is because of mental illness / substance
abuse. I think there's probably another (as yet unproven) side of this. And
that is substance abuse / mental illness can and probably to a large extent is
derived from the environment you're in. How many people would not fall into a
funk if all they were ever worrying about were their bills, and never capable
of making a dent in them. Let's face it. Some people get themselves into
situations where they're never going to accumulate the skills necessary to
make it out of borderline poverty. Most of the times it probably takes several
generations to get into that situation. How many generations (in today's
economic environment) could it possibly take to get out? It's sad to see that
most of them feel such small amount of hope they put all their "money" on
getting their kids to the NFL / NBA / etc. The system has failed them and it's
not taking any steps to help them get out of those situations.

------
alextgordon
Didn't the previous occupants already solve this problem?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipi](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipi)

For something more hardy, you could steal an idea from the central asian
people and build yurts. They're more homely, portable, easier to construct,
and surely cheaper.

[http://www.rontravel.com/Web_Photos_Happy_Cannibal/X_Siberia...](http://www.rontravel.com/Web_Photos_Happy_Cannibal/X_Siberia/Mongolia_Ulan_Bataar_Suburb_Yurts_View.jpg)

[http://www.rontravel.com/Web_Photos_Happy_Cannibal/X_Siberia...](http://www.rontravel.com/Web_Photos_Happy_Cannibal/X_Siberia/Mongolia_Yurt_Group_Interior.jpg)

~~~
cowsandmilk
Not really, half the problem is land. A portable structure that is illegal to
set up is not really a solution. Where are you going to set up your tipi in
Portland when doing so on public land is illegal[1]?

[1]
[http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?a=15427&c=28...](http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?a=15427&c=28513)

------
ssharp
> A top-of-the-line tiny house with RV-like conveniences can set you back
> $60,000 or more. The 30 dwellings at Opportunity Village, made of prefab
> donated materials, cost “around $3,300 a unit”. The savings come from the
> fact that they are basically detached bedrooms, with no utilities or running
> water.

Why do these things cost $3,300? They look like garbage and have no electric,
plumbing, HVAC, etc. They also look like they are either on blocks or a large,
shared, concrete slab, so you don't need to pour a slab for each one. You
could put one of these things together with a few hundred dollars of material.
These can't be much more than the shed kits at big box stores like Home Depot
that run a couple hundred dollars.

~~~
michael_h
Let's have a look:

    
    
      Cheapest Home Depot Shed[1]: $800 ($649 +$250 delivery)
      Windows[2]: $210 (3x$70)
      Wall Insulation (shed walls are ~10x10): $113.50 ($11.35 for a 40 ft^2 roll of minimum R13 batt)
      Ceiling Insulation (approximating @100ft^2)[3]: $118.28 (2x$59.14)
      Actual Door[4]: $99
      Drywall[5]: $84.80 (approx. 10 peices)
    

Total: $1524.58

Looks like you're correct, it could be cheaper. Wait a minute, we just have a
pile of materials now. Let's put it together. Judging by [6], it's about $1500
of labor to hire a professional to build you a shed. Let's assume that you can
negotiate installation of the insulation, drywall, and windows for free (it's
for a good cause!). You are now at $3,024.58 final cost. Hmm.

[1] [http://www.homedepot.com/p/Handy-Home-Products-
Princeton-10-...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Handy-Home-Products-
Princeton-10-ft-x-10-ft-Wood-Storage-Shed-18250-1/100350323?N=5yc1vZbu93)

[2] [http://www.homedepot.com/p/Handy-Home-Products-
Princeton-10-...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Handy-Home-Products-
Princeton-10-ft-x-10-ft-Wood-Storage-Shed-18250-1/100350323?N=5yc1vZbu93)

[3] [http://www.homedepot.com/p/Owens-Corning-R-38-Kraft-Faced-
In...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Owens-Corning-R-38-Kraft-Faced-Insulation-
Batts-24-in-x-48-in-BF81/202585891?N=5yc1vZbay7Z1z0uu2vZ1z0zyay)

[4] [http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-Premium-6-Panel-
Primed-...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-Premium-6-Panel-Primed-Steel-
Front-Door-Slab-THDJW166100317/202036386)

[5] [http://www.homedepot.com/p/SHEETROCK-
UltraLight-1-2-in-x-4-f...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/SHEETROCK-
UltraLight-1-2-in-x-4-ft-x-8-ft-Gypsum-Board-14113411708/202530243)

[6]
[http://www.diyornot.com/Project.aspx?ndx2=10&Rcd=332](http://www.diyornot.com/Project.aspx?ndx2=10&Rcd=332)

------
amsheehan
This probably wouldn't do much to solve the homeless problem in NYC. In a
neighborhood like the East Village or Williamsburg, I could see it being
rented for $1,000/month.

------
choward
I was hoping there would be some pictures of the interior.

------
venomsnake
When I hear homeless ... I always think of Carlin - they are not homeless,
they are houseless. People need cheap affordable housing - that's it.

~~~
DanBC
> People need cheap affordable housing

That's not going to get rid of homelessness. People with severe and enduring
mental illness, or addiction, might need support to stay in their cheap
affordable housing.

~~~
protomyth
That ship sailed, badly. Democrats don't like mental institutions (evil,
scary, and corrupt) and Republicans don't like in community projects (bringing
the insane to our homes), so both solutions got trampled. To be fair, both
sides have their points, but the problem is a spectrum. We really do need top
flight institutions that are safe, healthy, clean, and well monitored. We also
really need community outreach and assisted living. Our current policy of
drugging people to the key of G is not really solving the problem (looking at
you VA).

------
karlheinz
The only solution to homelessness is to abolish the class structure that is
fundamental to capitalism. Our current model of private ownership has
encouraged the ruling class to grab enormous amounts of land, because of it's
speculative value on the realestate market. Look at a place like New York,
homelessness has in recent years reached the highest levels since the Great
Depression of the 1930s. Still plenty of aparments are empty _. Does this seem
rational to anyone?

_ [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/nyregion/more-
apartments-a...](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/nyregion/more-apartments-
are-empty-yet-rented-or-owned-census-finds.html)

