in practice and academia, there's much work/discussion over low-income housing. some cities even require all residential developments to have a certain number of "affordable" units. yet, even low-income housing remains unaffordable to the homeless, and homelessness is a growing issue in modern urbanities. what governmental policies and/or architectural solutions are there to ameliorate this issue? any examples?
here is my solution;
%1 mandotory tax for every real estate transaction (%.5 buyer and seller) to go to homeless fund per county.
and watch the architectural solutions to come in by hundreds..
I like the idea they had in NYC, where they put all the homeless on a cruise ship in the East River and let them live there.
But as we all know, their real intent was to pump chemicals through the vents so it would be "lights out" for the ship's population, after which they would tow it out to see and sink it.
Don't call it a solution, but don't call it unreasonable either.
Actually I think that SF bought bus tickets to LA for the homeless when the Democratic convention was to be in town (in the 80's) and it worked temporarily, but then LA did the same thing and sent them back to SF.
The SF Chronicle has had thousands of articles on the homeless situation in SF but this feature that was done last year is really interesting. Check it out: http://www.sfgate.com/homeless/
This is a problem with no solution because it involves an agreement from both sides (the groups trying to help the homeless and the homeless themselves). Some people actually prefer to be in the situation that they are in – I know that sounds strange, but in some cases it is true. Asking for a solution of this kind – you might as well as for world peace while your at it. Apologies for the pessimism…
SF shipping off the homeless or tempting them with one way tickets is part of Newsom's typical policy, sweeping the problem away or under the rug. granted, his Care Not Cash program ahs gotten some people into supportive housing, but many question at what costs. it is one big shuffle. newsom wants to do it his way, with his people, and fudned his way. this means a lot of people already in programs, and service providers who have been doing this for years and who may have opposed Newsom's plan are suffering cuts and fall backs. Care Not Cash recipients are receiving treatemnt at the displacement of those already receiving treatement who simply decide not to sign up for his program. and before, he was all about his anti-pan handling and anti-loitering and anti-littering ordiannces, which are really geared at just removing the problem from plain view, and tax the poor people who actually live in the garbage of the streets.
There is much to say on Newsom-Homeless Policy and his opponents.
DEtroit, that article you posted, while not a bad piece of reporting, was really just a primer in the Chron for newsom's mayoral campaign, and fails to really tease out the issues underlying. typical Chron reportage, rolling a glamourized red carpet for their man in office.
there are the groups trying to help the homeless, those WHO DONT WANT TO HELP the homeless, those groups that have differing methods for effecting the crisis, and the homeless themselves. you're notion that some homeless just would rather be and remain homeless is a bit worrisome. If you consider why those people have been represented that way, you might dig deeper and see that it is the conditions of the solutions themselves, the skepticism of the shelters, the painful logjam and false hopes that the system has provided for them. many have no faith in the system helping them and for good reason. i think most given the opportunity for a fresh srtart and w/ community support in a safe and promising dignified place would probably go for it.
i think the contraversy of the bus tickets was not caused by newsom. it was a gesture by the san francisco police department, who were tired of dealing with homeless related incidents. they took polls and found out that the homeless majority wanted to visit relatives but couldnt afford because of obvious reasons. the SFPD thought it would be a good gesture to offer on way tickets to visit relatives during the holidays...
i think that is the syrup on top that duped the public into thinking it was a real sweet holiday gesture, especially coming form the SFPD. a one-way ticket sounds pretty obvious to me though (we'll pay to get you out of here, and hopefully you'll never make it back). And I don't think that many people actually took up the offer for that reason, they wouldn't be able to get back, and the skepticism set in. I do recall Newsom was a little giddy over the idea though.
Sounds like you are not too happy with Newsom as mayor. Even though he has not succeeded where all others have failed, I applaud the ‘Care not cash’ program. Handing out a monthly stipend is wreckless and ignorant of the problems that have brought about homelessness. Not to mention there were numerous cases where people would catch the train to the city, collect their check then head back to their homes outside of the city.
Probably half (or at least a third) of the homeless population has mental disorders – which cannot be fixed by giving them money, clothing or affordable housing. They need psychiatric help. But with what I had said earlier – if they do not want the help you cannot force it upon them.
Yes, there are those that if given the opportunity – would appreciate the assistance and hopefully there will be an agreement amongst all sides that will someday provide it. But with seeing how things have progressed or regressed in the past few years I don’t expect anything soon. In SF things tend to get discussed exhaustively over and over and over again, and in the meantime no progress is made. The possible redesign of the Bay bridge (after partial completion is a perfect example).
Another good article (which you may also generalize as being Newsom propaganda) was in the last San Francisco magazine about a homeless gentleman named Shalock(sp) whom the reporter originally bumped into and developed a friendship with. The story helps illustrate the numerous problems with the system, but also brings to light his problems with drugs and alcohol – that help perpetuate his situation.
Ha ha, here in Minneapolis we don't have a huge homeless problem....too f'in cold for them I guess. I may be a bit cold hearted. Usually I'd tell them to get a damn job at burger king. They are always hiring. I often don't buy their argument that they can't get a job, etc. Regardless, good homless housing is something we should provide as a society. On my travels to Canada they have refered to homless shelters as the "omeless Hilton" as it's much nicer than most apartmetns. Lets not do that but I feel that we as architects can find a viable solution to the homless. What about transient lodging where they just get some heat and running water for a night? Face it, the homeless are part of our society and they will not dissappear even in good times. All they want is a place to stay here and there. Let it be.
when america stops having abused kids running away from home, drug and alcohol addiction, no beds for the mentally ill then maybe the homeless problem will solve itself. until then perhaps the government put some effort and energy into these issues.
“disorders – which cannot be fixed by giving them money, clothing or affordable housing. They need psychiatric help. But with what I had said earlier – if they do not want the help you cannot force it upon them.â€Â
I think ‘supportive housing’ responds to all of those.
Perhaps even more reckless than you may think general assistance is, is taking it away suddenly without guaranteeing solid services in return. Effectively holding their rent and power over their heads. When CNC was proposed, there was nothing solid in his legislation that would have promised GA recipients anything more than a cot in a shelter, clearly not a real solution. So, it was heavily contested, his policy was checked, and even though CNC was upheld in court he knew in order for it to work he was going to have to do a lot more than build shelters. Well, more supportive housing has been brought on line, but at the expense of others who have already been waiting for that opportunity, CNC gives those who sign up a huge butt in line. Here’s a breakdown from last December . Also, many people are not chronically homeless, need that cash to keep from becoming deeper into homelessness, taking that cash away has logically only encouraged more panhandling than before. now with the enforcement of anti-panhandling laws, the police get to fine a few, shift the homeless around sidewalks like pawns, the criminalization of homelessness continues, ultimately the poor pay the price of their civil rights.
since CNC is primarily focused on the chronically homeless, many fear the program’s negligence of the other groups will make them suffer more, and counter any progress made overall.
Those numbers on the out of town GA recipients were never exacted I don’t think, though presumed large they seem ambiguous means of justifying “newsom’s resultsâ€Â, sadly most residents still feel little if any progress is visible. CNC has made even the SF Coalition for Homeless more skeptical, they lost their grant recently and were forced to let go of their leaders. Financing wars between Newsom’s services gang and these long time core progressive crews I think have worsened, especially when the mayor failed to campaign for Prop A after a deal was struck to mutually support it. Certainly Newsom hasn’t mended the different clans here, but will give him credit for his successes so far and breaking up the monotony of previous debate.
Ok, I have a few things to say about this. I am going to take some time before I post so I don't unleash a torrent of profanity at some of these comments.
I will say one thing. The average age of a homeless person is 11.
urban homelessness
in practice and academia, there's much work/discussion over low-income housing. some cities even require all residential developments to have a certain number of "affordable" units. yet, even low-income housing remains unaffordable to the homeless, and homelessness is a growing issue in modern urbanities. what governmental policies and/or architectural solutions are there to ameliorate this issue? any examples?
here is my solution;
%1 mandotory tax for every real estate transaction (%.5 buyer and seller) to go to homeless fund per county.
and watch the architectural solutions to come in by hundreds..
levels...
do it like they (tried to) do in San Francisco... as the holidays approach, offer free one-way bus tickets to anywhere the bum wants to go...
If i cant see it, it dont exist.
that sounds like fuckin final solution man..but i know you are joking..
I like the idea they had in NYC, where they put all the homeless on a cruise ship in the East River and let them live there.
But as we all know, their real intent was to pump chemicals through the vents so it would be "lights out" for the ship's population, after which they would tow it out to see and sink it.
Don't call it a solution, but don't call it unreasonable either.
(*)that sounds like fuckin final solution man..but i know you are joking..
While I haven't gotten through this entirely myself, check out UC Berk PHD Darren Noy's policy study for SF.
Actually I think that SF bought bus tickets to LA for the homeless when the Democratic convention was to be in town (in the 80's) and it worked temporarily, but then LA did the same thing and sent them back to SF.
The SF Chronicle has had thousands of articles on the homeless situation in SF but this feature that was done last year is really interesting. Check it out: http://www.sfgate.com/homeless/
This is a problem with no solution because it involves an agreement from both sides (the groups trying to help the homeless and the homeless themselves). Some people actually prefer to be in the situation that they are in – I know that sounds strange, but in some cases it is true. Asking for a solution of this kind – you might as well as for world peace while your at it. Apologies for the pessimism…
SF shipping off the homeless or tempting them with one way tickets is part of Newsom's typical policy, sweeping the problem away or under the rug. granted, his Care Not Cash program ahs gotten some people into supportive housing, but many question at what costs. it is one big shuffle. newsom wants to do it his way, with his people, and fudned his way. this means a lot of people already in programs, and service providers who have been doing this for years and who may have opposed Newsom's plan are suffering cuts and fall backs. Care Not Cash recipients are receiving treatemnt at the displacement of those already receiving treatement who simply decide not to sign up for his program. and before, he was all about his anti-pan handling and anti-loitering and anti-littering ordiannces, which are really geared at just removing the problem from plain view, and tax the poor people who actually live in the garbage of the streets.
There is much to say on Newsom-Homeless Policy and his opponents.
DEtroit, that article you posted, while not a bad piece of reporting, was really just a primer in the Chron for newsom's mayoral campaign, and fails to really tease out the issues underlying. typical Chron reportage, rolling a glamourized red carpet for their man in office.
there are the groups trying to help the homeless, those WHO DONT WANT TO HELP the homeless, those groups that have differing methods for effecting the crisis, and the homeless themselves. you're notion that some homeless just would rather be and remain homeless is a bit worrisome. If you consider why those people have been represented that way, you might dig deeper and see that it is the conditions of the solutions themselves, the skepticism of the shelters, the painful logjam and false hopes that the system has provided for them. many have no faith in the system helping them and for good reason. i think most given the opportunity for a fresh srtart and w/ community support in a safe and promising dignified place would probably go for it.
i think the contraversy of the bus tickets was not caused by newsom. it was a gesture by the san francisco police department, who were tired of dealing with homeless related incidents. they took polls and found out that the homeless majority wanted to visit relatives but couldnt afford because of obvious reasons. the SFPD thought it would be a good gesture to offer on way tickets to visit relatives during the holidays...
i think that is the syrup on top that duped the public into thinking it was a real sweet holiday gesture, especially coming form the SFPD. a one-way ticket sounds pretty obvious to me though (we'll pay to get you out of here, and hopefully you'll never make it back). And I don't think that many people actually took up the offer for that reason, they wouldn't be able to get back, and the skepticism set in. I do recall Newsom was a little giddy over the idea though.
Bryan –
Sounds like you are not too happy with Newsom as mayor. Even though he has not succeeded where all others have failed, I applaud the ‘Care not cash’ program. Handing out a monthly stipend is wreckless and ignorant of the problems that have brought about homelessness. Not to mention there were numerous cases where people would catch the train to the city, collect their check then head back to their homes outside of the city.
Probably half (or at least a third) of the homeless population has mental disorders – which cannot be fixed by giving them money, clothing or affordable housing. They need psychiatric help. But with what I had said earlier – if they do not want the help you cannot force it upon them.
Yes, there are those that if given the opportunity – would appreciate the assistance and hopefully there will be an agreement amongst all sides that will someday provide it. But with seeing how things have progressed or regressed in the past few years I don’t expect anything soon. In SF things tend to get discussed exhaustively over and over and over again, and in the meantime no progress is made. The possible redesign of the Bay bridge (after partial completion is a perfect example).
Another good article (which you may also generalize as being Newsom propaganda) was in the last San Francisco magazine about a homeless gentleman named Shalock(sp) whom the reporter originally bumped into and developed a friendship with. The story helps illustrate the numerous problems with the system, but also brings to light his problems with drugs and alcohol – that help perpetuate his situation.
Keep 'em around as long as they're voting democrat.
Ha ha, here in Minneapolis we don't have a huge homeless problem....too f'in cold for them I guess. I may be a bit cold hearted. Usually I'd tell them to get a damn job at burger king. They are always hiring. I often don't buy their argument that they can't get a job, etc. Regardless, good homless housing is something we should provide as a society. On my travels to Canada they have refered to homless shelters as the "omeless Hilton" as it's much nicer than most apartmetns. Lets not do that but I feel that we as architects can find a viable solution to the homless. What about transient lodging where they just get some heat and running water for a night? Face it, the homeless are part of our society and they will not dissappear even in good times. All they want is a place to stay here and there. Let it be.
I should quit posting to Archinect when drunk.....
when america stops having abused kids running away from home, drug and alcohol addiction, no beds for the mentally ill then maybe the homeless problem will solve itself. until then perhaps the government put some effort and energy into these issues.
DEtroit,
“disorders – which cannot be fixed by giving them money, clothing or affordable housing. They need psychiatric help. But with what I had said earlier – if they do not want the help you cannot force it upon them.â€Â
I think ‘supportive housing’ responds to all of those.
Perhaps even more reckless than you may think general assistance is, is taking it away suddenly without guaranteeing solid services in return. Effectively holding their rent and power over their heads. When CNC was proposed, there was nothing solid in his legislation that would have promised GA recipients anything more than a cot in a shelter, clearly not a real solution. So, it was heavily contested, his policy was checked, and even though CNC was upheld in court he knew in order for it to work he was going to have to do a lot more than build shelters. Well, more supportive housing has been brought on line, but at the expense of others who have already been waiting for that opportunity, CNC gives those who sign up a huge butt in line. Here’s a breakdown from last December . Also, many people are not chronically homeless, need that cash to keep from becoming deeper into homelessness, taking that cash away has logically only encouraged more panhandling than before. now with the enforcement of anti-panhandling laws, the police get to fine a few, shift the homeless around sidewalks like pawns, the criminalization of homelessness continues, ultimately the poor pay the price of their civil rights.
since CNC is primarily focused on the chronically homeless, many fear the program’s negligence of the other groups will make them suffer more, and counter any progress made overall.
Those numbers on the out of town GA recipients were never exacted I don’t think, though presumed large they seem ambiguous means of justifying “newsom’s resultsâ€Â, sadly most residents still feel little if any progress is visible. CNC has made even the SF Coalition for Homeless more skeptical, they lost their grant recently and were forced to let go of their leaders. Financing wars between Newsom’s services gang and these long time core progressive crews I think have worsened, especially when the mayor failed to campaign for Prop A after a deal was struck to mutually support it. Certainly Newsom hasn’t mended the different clans here, but will give him credit for his successes so far and breaking up the monotony of previous debate.
Ok, I have a few things to say about this. I am going to take some time before I post so I don't unleash a torrent of profanity at some of these comments.
I will say one thing. The average age of a homeless person is 11.
Don’t get all hot and whatever. .This is a 16 year old thread resurrected by a spam bot.
Ok, it is a necropost but I am willing to bet the comments are still relevant.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.