The Chico Housing Action Team is determined its mission that a “tiny house village” will serve the homeless population in Chico.It wont happen immediately, but no worries. The team has a plan that members are confident will serve the homeless population this winter.
Pictured here is a house at Opportunity Village in Eugene, Oregon. Folks in Chico, California are now considering something similar. Read more about Bringing a tiny house village to Chico.
As much as I want to see the homeless helped, I hate to see tiny houses associated with the solution as it takes tiny houses out of the realm of housing solution for those who simply don’t want to live the current American Dream of huge mortgage and bills. If tiny housing is associated with homeless (and incomeless) living, society as a whole will not want to see them in their neighborhoods or rural areas as homelessness (albeit unfair) is often associated wih the very things the above rules say is not allowed…alcohol, drugs, violence, stealing, etc., problems which have landed many people in the homeless population to start with, and as I have stated elsewhere, giving a person a piece of property without any obligations other than legal behavior, but not obligating them to job training, and thereby to a means of buying their own tiny house, is not helping the problem at all, it is just geographycally spreading it out. There has to be a better way, such as making the tiny house part of a package to completing the necessary steps to getting back into the job force after training, and requiring that a job be maintained as long as the person lives there. Most of the above rules and obligations listed above are not enforceable, and I wonder how long it would take to evict someone who was a detriment to the village? The picture above already shows cloth sheets and blankets left out in the weather (perhaps molding) over a chair on the front porch, a broom and box not put away, and unwanted lattice simply propped up along side the house instead of repurposed or given away or stored properly. There are pots of plants still not planted, and odd sheets hung haphazardly in the windows rather than real window treatments. In other words, the above pictured house does not give the overall appearance of being kept up on the outside, so what makes one think they will care about the overall upkeep of the village? I am not trying to sound harsh. I have been homeless wih my children before. I know what it is like to be on the streets, so don’t think I am judging the homeless, I am not. I am judging the program discussed above, and from the viewpoint of a formerly homelss person, I see it as inadequate and its premises unenforceable. It is just another place for the homeless to stay out of sight and of society. There has to be more…
I agree with the above poster. I have also been homeless, with one child, and we were living in my car hiding in the woods. Eventually, I was able to get a job where I could take my daughter to work with me, and dug my way out. I did receive help, although Nothing was just handed to me for free. But during that time, I met many other people who were also homeless, and the vast majority of them were homeless because of their own stupid choices. They blamed everyone else, but kept making the same stupid choices that guaranteed they would Never get out of their mess. I would have loved to be able to purchase a small home like this, but even then, one needs enough income to maintain the property, and most homeless people just want a hand out and do not want to be responsible for their own wellbeing. The exception to that were the many veterans with psychological traumas that I also met. They are a whole different story, and it was heartbreaking.
These villages, of necessity would have to have Associations that the homeowners are subject to, in order to protect them from becoming nothing more than run down trailer parks.
The houses are mostly So Beautiful, it would be a real tragedy.
Conclusion: Build the villages with reasonable prices appropriate to the property sizes and value of the houses placed on them. Let the market decide. Those who are homeless, and are willing to do what it takes to dig their way out of their situation, will still have a much easier time affording one of these homes, than the monstrous palaces many people feel are necessary. Having worked for their own small home, and owning it, will give it the value in their hearts that these homes should have, and they will take pride in them and maintain them.
@Marsha
You ARE being judgemental based entirely on assumptions and your own narrow views of what is right and proper.
The lattice is clearly actively supporting a plant. People choose to grow plants in containers for a variety of reasons including ease of access, weed control and portability. Just because you feel they should be planted in the ground you have assumed laziness on the part of the occupant.
You went off on a totally separate rant because their window decorating tastes don’t match yours and you have constructed a horror scenario of slovenliness and mold based on nothing more than a chair cover and quilt. Horrors! A broom left outside! I am glad you are not my neighbor.
On topic:
About 20 years ago a tiny home village was constructed by the County at Kawaihae on the Big Island of Hawaii. It was very successful. Rules were set regarding occupancy levels etc. It was run by a rotating committee of all the residents. It was not an eyesore, crime levels did not rise. It filled a need and allowed homeless families and single people to move off the beach into a stable environment.
I’m currently a resident of CHAT’s first house for formally homeless. Previously I was an outsider in Chico for a little over 4 years. I can tell you from firsthand experience that the reality of the situation is that there is no difference in personalities between people living inside or those living outside. We all have the same vices and virtues. Inside the walls, these attributes are hidden. Outside, we are totally exposed.