Building integrates private, social, and affordable housing
December 27, 2024 10:42 PM   Subscribe

Stigma-breaking housing model offers dignity for all with owners and renters living side by side. Meet Sandra and Sandra — one is a tenant and the other a home owner in Australia's first building to integrate private, social, and affordable housing without segregated facilities.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries (5 comments total) 8 users marked this as a favorite
 
the apartment I lived in Tokyo 1995-2000 had the owner on the first floor, his son in one of the two 2nd floor units, and two renters on the top floor, all in the ground space of my current house's front lawn & driveway.

I was able to rent an ADU room from a nice elderly lady in West LA 1986-88 – for $90/week since she still kinda lived in the 1920s-40s. That's a $2M house today because "location location location".

If I were Lord Protector I'd regulate housing such that rentals were only allowed if the owner(s) were on-site 24/7 like those experiences.
posted by torokunai2 at 11:44 PM on December 27 [3 favorites]


How does Australia distinguish between “social” and “affordable” housing? Is the former what we in the U.S. would call “supportive” housing, i.e., very low-cost housing with services attached for the chronically homeless/severely mentally ill/long-term substance abusers?
posted by praemunire at 11:49 PM on December 27 [1 favorite]


How does Australia distinguish between “social” and “affordable” housing?

Social housing is for people who are on the old-age pension; disability support pension; or long-term unemployed. It does not necessarily include any support services, but the rent is well below market rent (and is often a percentage of income, rather than a set dollar amount.)

Affordable housing is for people who work full time but have a low-paying to medium-paying job - for example, cleaners, teachers, nurses.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 11:57 PM on December 27 [8 favorites]


> Stigma-breaking housing model offers dignity for all

Therefore it will not be embraced in the Land of the NIMBY.

Americans are such shitty neighbors, they cannot imagine giving up their single-family detached-structure dwellings for any kind of apartment or multi-occupant condo. Because the neighbors would be insufferable.

> If I were Lord Protector I'd regulate housing such that rentals were only allowed if the owner(s) were on-site 24/7 like those experiences.

Sounds like a recipe for renters always being under the thumb and surveillance of busybodies who want complete control over what happens on their property. No thanks.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 9:12 AM on December 28 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I hate to agree with Aardvark (may I call you Aardvark?) but living with your owner-landlord can be an absolute shit-show. Good owners are going to be good people, whether onsite or off.

I haven't rented in mumble-mumble years, but a good landlord can be amazing, a bad one can be misery. Rental companies/property management people just generally make your life hell on earth, but because they are known to be scum, they can be easier to sue.
posted by BlueHorse at 10:48 AM on December 28 [1 favorite]


« Older Some animals have one weird eye trick   |   An inflatable tube man wielding a pool noodle... Newer »


You are not currently logged in. Log in or create a new account to post comments.