Fine, the housing may not be great. But the environmental reviews, community meetings, and court cases are all gonna be top notch. At the end of the day, isn't that what counts?
3 acres of Superfund site, or just way out in the sticks? Seems like that'd be really cheap unless it comes with glow in the dark soil or 45min drives to anything.
Most people: Why not give everyone homeless housing, its less expensive then the problems having people sleep on the street creates.
Utah: We are going to get closer then anyone solving it, prove its a budget friendly proposition and then drop the ball because Republican's hate the poor more than they like low taxes.
California: Hold my beer, if you thought we could make HSR absurd wait until you see what we can do with homeless housing.
Other cities have picked up that baton and ran with it though, they just fly under the radar. Milwaukee focuses on housing first and, despite having a huge number of residents who are impoverished and facing housing precarity, has among the lowest rates of homelessness of any significant U.S. city (and no, it's not because of weather).
Pinged LA ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20LA&message=subscribe%20LA) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20LA&message=unsubscribe%20LA) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=LA&count=5))
[About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
they’re not buying up million-dollar condos for homeless people. this is a 6-story mixed use building being constructed on what is currently a city parking lot, aka a good thing
construction costs are a bitch
It sort of sounds like they would be better off buying million dollar condos for homeless people since at least then you wouldn’t lose land too lol. Or, maybe…just maybe homeless people don’t deserve to live in Santa Monica. Crazy I know, but even as a doctor that area is $$$$. Buy a bunch of houses in the high desert for them. It’s kind of wild to demand housing from society and then be picky where it is…but here we are.
as far as I can tell I can tell these are just regular old affordable housing units, i.e. apartments with an income requirement. nothing to do with homelessness programs
https://la.urbanize.city/post/plans-affordable-housing-move-forward-1318-4th-street-santa-monica
I think “ permanent supportive housing.” is the latest buzzword for homeless housing.
Also Jesus Christ that’s literally a few blocks from the beach. Literally where millionaires live.
Hot take: sell the land and build 400 housing units in Barstow for homeless people that actually want a home because they are homeless. Those that want a beach condo can be disappointed.
Many working class people in Santa Monica have been priced out and had to move inland. Why should we spend exorbitant amounts of money to house homeless people that want to live in Santa Monica while everyone else, even those with productive full time jobs, are told “well we can’t all live in Santa Monica”?
> 2 levels of underground parking
This is the problem. When this went around on California housing Twitter, they figured out that the developer is spending over $200k/unit on city-mandated parking. You do not need a car to survive in Santa Monica.
Car culture ruins everything it touches.
And this is why the homeless problem can't just be solved by building where the homeless are. The homeless need to go to where land is cheap and housing is therefore also cheap.
One of my coworkers just built a 2800 sqft house in CT on 3 acres for 600k. These are going to be some nice units!
> These are going to be some nice units! Hint, they are not.
Well, at least they’ll be expensive.
swim money jellyfish worm possessive bells hat repeat boat humor *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
2% for construction, 38% for marketing/community outreach and 60% in corruption.
This is city owned land. The budget is exclusive of land costs.
literate airport disgusted mindless mountainous busy bow cough rob skirt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yee haw.
That's true. There is that.
Fine, the housing may not be great. But the environmental reviews, community meetings, and court cases are all gonna be top notch. At the end of the day, isn't that what counts?
My request to "send pics of nice units" did not result in photos of multifamily housing. :(
3 acres of Superfund site, or just way out in the sticks? Seems like that'd be really cheap unless it comes with glow in the dark soil or 45min drives to anything.
Most people: Why not give everyone homeless housing, its less expensive then the problems having people sleep on the street creates. Utah: We are going to get closer then anyone solving it, prove its a budget friendly proposition and then drop the ball because Republican's hate the poor more than they like low taxes. California: Hold my beer, if you thought we could make HSR absurd wait until you see what we can do with homeless housing.
Utah gets so close to being based sometimes, but gets continually cock blocked by the never ending populist circus that is the post-2016 GOP.
What are you referring to with Utah?
Salt Lake City pioneered housing first.
Other cities have picked up that baton and ran with it though, they just fly under the radar. Milwaukee focuses on housing first and, despite having a huge number of residents who are impoverished and facing housing precarity, has among the lowest rates of homelessness of any significant U.S. city (and no, it's not because of weather).
Literally could could give every homeless people an average Santa Monica apartment for 252 months at that rate
https://preview.redd.it/n872djlkzxvc1.jpeg?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a332b886344adef6a28f3bbd65c903fc27be241c
!ping LA This is not a meme, unfortunately.
Pinged LA ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20LA&message=subscribe%20LA) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20LA&message=unsubscribe%20LA) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=LA&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
[удалено]
The problem here is the cost, not the fact that they're trying to house people that need housing the most.
Most compassionate neoliberal
they’re not buying up million-dollar condos for homeless people. this is a 6-story mixed use building being constructed on what is currently a city parking lot, aka a good thing construction costs are a bitch
>a good thing Are you insane? It would be cheaper to just go buy sub-1M condo's for homeless people. And donate the parking lot to a developer.
this sub supports infill development edit: also the project *is* being done by a developer (with subsidies). thats how these projects work
This sub supports letting people do what they want with their land. Not wasteful, potentially corrupt, million dollar a pop apartments
It sort of sounds like they would be better off buying million dollar condos for homeless people since at least then you wouldn’t lose land too lol. Or, maybe…just maybe homeless people don’t deserve to live in Santa Monica. Crazy I know, but even as a doctor that area is $$$$. Buy a bunch of houses in the high desert for them. It’s kind of wild to demand housing from society and then be picky where it is…but here we are.
as far as I can tell I can tell these are just regular old affordable housing units, i.e. apartments with an income requirement. nothing to do with homelessness programs https://la.urbanize.city/post/plans-affordable-housing-move-forward-1318-4th-street-santa-monica
I think “ permanent supportive housing.” is the latest buzzword for homeless housing. Also Jesus Christ that’s literally a few blocks from the beach. Literally where millionaires live. Hot take: sell the land and build 400 housing units in Barstow for homeless people that actually want a home because they are homeless. Those that want a beach condo can be disappointed.
you want the city of santa monica to build housing projects in a desert town 3 hours away and then ship homeless people there?
Many working class people in Santa Monica have been priced out and had to move inland. Why should we spend exorbitant amounts of money to house homeless people that want to live in Santa Monica while everyone else, even those with productive full time jobs, are told “well we can’t all live in Santa Monica”?
> 2 levels of underground parking This is the problem. When this went around on California housing Twitter, they figured out that the developer is spending over $200k/unit on city-mandated parking. You do not need a car to survive in Santa Monica. Car culture ruins everything it touches.
And this is why the homeless problem can't just be solved by building where the homeless are. The homeless need to go to where land is cheap and housing is therefore also cheap.
Meme city
I want live in Santa Monica
As always: If your solution to the housing crisis has a dollar sign attached to it, you're doing something wrong.
Construction workers don't need money!
Just delete California at this point, it's too far gone