Ending homelessness in Portland

[Fez Hammersticks]

Construction could start as soon as November on an eight-story, $46.6 million complex in Old Town to provide temporary shelter, housing and social services to the homeless.

The Resource Access Center, a key element in the city of Portland's plan to end homelessness in a decade, will be built near Union Station on Northwest Broadway between Hoyt and Irving streets.

When finished in mid-2011, the center will include a 24-hour shelter for 90 men on the first floor, 130 studio apartments on floors four through eight and social services on the second and third floors. The Housing Authority of Portland will manage the apartments, and Transition Projects Inc. will operate the shelter.

The ground-floor shelter will include showers, lockers and toilets for daytime use. It will replace an existing temporary shelter operated by Transition Projects in Old Town.

LINK

 

[chris_in_pdx]

"ending homelessness"? I'm a liberal, and even I recognize the ridiculousness of that statement. For better or worse, "homelessness" is something you can't cure. There are people out there who WANT to be homeless, whether due to mental illness or simply preferring the lifestyle. Unless Portland becomes a neo-Gestapo state where being homeless is a crime and you either land at this facility or jail.... which I *CAN'T* see in a million years because of the permissive nature of city government... Old Town and it's surrounding areas will continue to see people who live on the streets.

That being said, I welcome this facility to help the people that really want to escape that life, and hope that it is a success.

 

[ucatchtrout]

If you build it....they will come.

 

[DaRizzle]

man, you hippies sure try....Im sure the local land owners are thilled a bunch of homeless people will be moving in...or is it already a hellhole in that area?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

This wont end it but it'll put a dent in it.

 

[barfo]

Is it for males only? I'm surprised by the mention of shelter for 90 men.

barfo

 

[Paxil]

I think you are better off looking at the reasons people are homeless and trying to deal with them. Homeless will just flock here from other cities. =)

 

[DaRizzle]

[video=youtube;xMsr0cLnQPI]

 

[KingSpeed]

I hope it's helpful. It's good that there will be a home to social services but spending that much money on what will be basically known as "Free Place To Live" creates a lot of problems. What about the struggling people who work and make ends meet. Once they get a look at these new studio apartments, they might want to quit their job and move in, no?

 

[ucatchtrout]

This wont end it but it'll put a dent in it.

No it won't.

They WILL fill it up. And they will do so PDQ.

And like a magnet it will help attract homeless to Portland from other cities.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

No it won't.

They WILL fill it up. And they will do so PDQ.

And like a magnet it will help attract homeless to Portland from other cities.

So what's the answer? Or is there one? One that doesn't trample the civil liberties of an individual?

 

[Pontius]

"ending homelessness"? I'm a liberal, and even I recognize the ridiculousness of that statement. For better or worse, "homelessness" is something you can't cure. There are people out there who WANT to be homeless, whether due to mental illness or simply preferring the lifestyle. Unless Portland becomes a neo-Gestapo state where being homeless is a crime and you either land at this facility or jail.... which I *CAN'T* see in a million years because of the permissive nature of city government... Old Town and it's surrounding areas will continue to see people who live on the streets.

That being said, I welcome this facility to help the people that really want to escape that life, and hope that it is a success.

There are people who WANT to be homeless. But very few. Mental illness is the greatest factor that leads one to homelessness. Maslow's theory says that security is the the first step towards self-actualization... Having a home IS a great part of that security. Most of all mental illness has to do with anxiety. I feel this anxiety has most to do with insecurity. This is a step in the right direction as it counters the main problem with homelessness - THE LACK OF SECURITY.

 

[Pontius]

I hope it's helpful. It's good that there will be a home to social services but spending that much money on what will be basically known as "Free Place To Live" creates a lot of problems. What about the struggling people who work and make ends meet. Once they get a look at these new studio apartments, they might want to quit their job and move in, no?

You have very little understanding of why people work.

 

[maxiep]

Jesus, it's like taking a thimble hoping to empty an ocean.

By my math, $46.6MM for 130 apartments equals $358,461.54 per unit. Heck, let's be nice and inclue the 90 beds and call it 220 units total. That's still $211,818.18 per unit. That amount is shocking and shows just how wasteful this project is.

If you're interested in offering housing options for the homeless, you'd be better off buying apartment building for around $40-$60K/unit, which is the going rate for class B apartment properties in Portland currently go for. And they'd be 1,2 and 3 BR units, not just studios. Even using the high range, you're talking about 777 units. Let's say they average 1.5 bedrooms. That means you can house 1,165 homeless people instead of 220. Of course, then you wouldn't get a shiny new building.

I'm sure someone will come on this board and call me a "hater" or "anti-homeless", but if you really want to help these people, building a shiny new project isn't the answer. There are all kinds of underutilized multi-family units all over the city that could be acquired instead.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

^Well, look on the bright side: It'll provide a lot of construction jobs

$200,000-$300,000 per unit is insane for a homeless shelter.

At first this project was planning on being 350' - roughly 32-34 floors.

 

[The Professional Fan]

Being homeless in Portland is more of a lifestyle choice than bad luck or mental illness. The majority of the homeless people you see downtown are kids that choose the lifestyle and have migrated TO Portland due in large part to our local governments liberal minded stance to the problem. This shelter will do nothing but lure even more of this punks to Portland. It's getting unbearable downtown, and it kills me because I love spending time down there. Portland needs to quit being so fucking liberal about it's homeless problem, and make it illegal for these kids to loiter all over the city. Our local government is beyond embarrassing.

 

[Idog1976]

"ending homelessness"? I'm a liberal, and even I recognize the ridiculousness of that statement. For better or worse, "homelessness" is something you can't cure.

Kind of like a war on flanking attacks, or sneak attacks, or a war on night time attacks. You can't cure homelessess anymore the you can win a war against a tactic, like terror. What you can do is to address the root cause of homelessness and/or terror. Both of which are primarily driven by extreme poverty. Fighting homelessness during an economic crisis is pointless. No doubt the deep poverty and homelessness in our city and our nation is a huge problem. However, this structure is akin to putting a bandaid on your 12 year old skateboarder but not buying him knee pads and a helmet. You aren't addressing the real problem.

Far better to hold accountable those who created it (the international banks along with the heads of a number of Central and Private Banks) and reforming those institutions and possibly arresting a number of the people who caused the collapse through fraudulent financial instruments rated AAA and numerous other pseudo-legal enterprises.

I'm a big believer in relieving poverty and the basic human right of desiring shelter. Unfortunately, our economy is held hostage to the banks and the Basel II accounting standards of the Bank of International Settlements. Our banking system desperately needs reform and oversight. We need to limit our regulations of the banks, but the current system is unsustainable and practically - if not actually - a criminal enterprise. The banks can't lend because they lack sufficient collateral per the Basel II requirements. The work around of credit default swaps removing the risk aspect of mortgages has now blown up in their faces.

The reality is that the vast majority of our banks, including the behemoths, are insolvent. Liquidity (most of the bailouts) isn't the problem, it's solvency. We are creating conditions ripe for frightful inflation by stuffing the banks with cash. Currently, it's sitting with the FED drawing interest, but when released inflation will hit. The Chinese are sick of it and are diversifying away from the dollar even as we speak. What's worse is these banks are writing even more derivatives right now, sowing the seeds of a future crisis.

While I appreciate the gesture of this facility it is, like the soccer stadium, a huge waste of public funds during an emergency. If they could just add water create this place it would be great, we don't need it in two years it's needed now. There are cheaper and faster ways of housing these people using existing structures. Sadly, until the financial crisis is resolved this problem will only worsen.

 

[Ed O]

So what's the answer? Or is there one? One that doesn't trample the civil liberties of an individual?

I don't think there is one. There will ALWAYS be poor people... it's just a question of how poor.

Given the limited nature of urban space and natural tendency of homeless people to congregate in cities, I don't know that it will EVER be cost-efficient to provide free housing in perpetuity for anyone who wants it.

Of course, that doesn't stop government from trying, occasionally...

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

Kind of like a war on flanking attacks, or sneak attacks, or a war on night time attacks. You can't cure homelessess anymore the you can win a war against a tactic, like terror. What you can do is to address the root cause of homelessness and/or terror. Both of which are primarily driven by extreme poverty. Fighting homelessness during an economic crisis is pointless. No doubt the deep poverty and homelessness in our city and our nation is a huge problem. However, this structure is akin to putting a bandaid on your 12 year old skateboarder but not buying him knee pads and a helmet. You aren't addressing the real problem.

Far better to hold accountable those who created it (the international banks along with the heads of a number of Central and Private Banks) and reforming those institutions and possibly arresting a number of the people who caused the collapse through fraudulent financial instruments rated AAA and numerous other pseudo-legal enterprises.

I'm a big believer in relieving poverty and the basic human right of desiring shelter. Unfortunately, our economy is held hostage to the banks and the Basel II accounting standards of the Bank of International Settlements. Our banking system desperately needs reform and oversight. We need to limit our regulations of the banks, but the current system is unsustainable and practically - if not actually - a criminal enterprise. The banks can't lend because they lack sufficient collateral per the Basel II requirements. The work around of credit default swaps removing the risk aspect of mortgages has now blown up in their faces.

The reality is that the vast majority of our banks, including the behemoths, are insolvent. Liquidity (most of the bailouts) isn't the problem, it's solvency. We are creating conditions ripe for frightful inflation by stuffing the banks with cash. Currently, it's sitting with the FED drawing interest, but when released inflation will hit. The Chinese are sick of it and are diversifying away from the dollar even as we speak. What's worse is these banks are writing even more derivatives right now, sowing the seeds of a future crisis.

While I appreciate the gesture of this facility it is, like the soccer stadium, a huge waste of public funds during an emergency. If they could just add water create this place it would be great, we don't need it in two years it's needed now. There are cheaper and faster ways of housing these people using existing structures. Sadly, until the financial crisis is resolved this problem will only worsen.

I think you're way off-base if you think that homelessness is caused by--or ever HAS been caused by--international financial institutions.

It seems like you just want to go off on a rant against them, and are putting a square peg into a round hole.

Ed O.

 

[Idog1976]

I think you're way off-base if you think that homelessness is caused by--or ever HAS been caused by--international financial institutions.

It seems like you just want to go off on a rant against them, and are putting a square peg into a round hole.

Ed O.

Really? You don't think that the recent banking crisis has increased homelessness? I guarantee you it has. I'm just going to say it. I'm a Social Worker and I can tell you first hand that homelessness has dramatically increased due to the financial crisis. I'm not guessing I know it as fact.

 

[Ed O]

Really? You don't think that the recent banking crisis has increased homelessness? I guarantee you it has. I'm just going to say it. I'm a Social Worker and I can tell you first hand that homelessness has dramatically increased due to the financial crisis. I'm not guessing I know it as fact.

Who cares?

Homelessness has been around forever. Stating that bad economic times cause homelessness is blindingly obvious. Blaming international bankers for these bad economic times ignores that there have been decades and decades of good economic times, including many years where banks were very very active.

Your complaints are akin, in my opinion, to complaining about the sun causing skin cancer when it also feeds and clothes us.

Ed O.

 

[Idog1976]

Who cares?

Homelessness has been around forever. Stating that bad economic times cause homelessness is blindingly obvious. Blaming international bankers for these bad economic times ignores that there have been decades and decades of good economic times, including many years where banks were very very active.

Your complaints are akin, in my opinion, to complaining about the sun causing skin cancer when it also feeds and clothes us.

Ed O.

So they get credit for good times, but it's just magic that bad times happen and no one bears responsibility? By the way those Decades and Decades weren't under the new Basel II accords which upended the apple cart. Also most of our best decades happened under a gold standard which commanded some fiscal discipline. In addition, the repeal of Glass-Stegall under Clinton got rid of the depression era laws that prevented the worst excesses we are seeing now. This was just a furtherance of Reagan's removal of limitations on banks speculating on land and housing which led to the Savings and Loan crisis.

So please illuminate me on how there has been some consistent standard of behavior that got us both the good times and bad times. My read of financial history says when certain key regulations that had existed for 40 to 50 years (the good times) were removed and we accepted non-domestic accounting standards (Basel II accords) a financial crisis was to follow as surely as winter follows autumn.

I'm a social worker but spent quite a bit of time studying globalization, macro economics and international finance when I was in school. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that the international financial crisis was preventable and that it has exacerbated homelessness worldwide which of course includes Portland. People act like decisions politicians and businessmen make happen in some TV sitcom land far away with zero impact on them, until it impacts them and then they sit across from me at my desk saying "Oh my god why did this happen to me! I worked there for 20 years!"

The economic crisis and it's impact is not only real, but it has real causes. Some folks thought they could make epic profits by removing certain critical regulatory laws. They removed the laws via their friends on capitol hill and the White House, made the obscene profits and then dumped the losses in our collective laps (bail outs). Now after buying up their peers for pennies on the dollar, they (JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs in particular) are out doing the same kind of manufacture of complex financial instruments that created the crisis. I think the blame lies squarely in their court. This isn't a random event, it's a logical result of removing regulations and enforcing certain international accounting rules.

 

[Nate Dogg]

Another reason to go POSTAL across the street.

 

[Idog1976]

Jesus, it's like taking a thimble hoping to empty an ocean.

By my math, $46.6MM for 130 apartments equals $358,461.54 per unit. Heck, let's be nice and inclue the 90 beds and call it 220 units total. That's still $211,818.18 per unit. That amount is shocking and shows just how wasteful this project is.

If you're interested in offering housing options for the homeless, you'd be better off buying apartment building for around $40-$60K/unit, which is the going rate for class B apartment properties in Portland currently go for. And they'd be 1,2 and 3 BR units, not just studios. Even using the high range, you're talking about 777 units. Let's say they average 1.5 bedrooms. That means you can house 1,165 homeless people instead of 220. Of course, then you wouldn't get a shiny new building.

I'm sure someone will come on this board and call me a "hater" or "anti-homeless", but if you really want to help these people, building a shiny new project isn't the answer. There are all kinds of underutilized multi-family units all over the city that could be acquired instead.

Well said MaxieP. That's what I was driving at when I said this money is being spent poorly. That is an ideal illustration.

 

[barfo]

Jesus, it's like taking a thimble hoping to empty an ocean.

By my math, $46.6MM for 130 apartments equals $358,461.54 per unit. Heck, let's be nice and inclue the 90 beds and call it 220 units total. That's still $211,818.18 per unit. That amount is shocking and shows just how wasteful this project is.

If you're interested in offering housing options for the homeless, you'd be better off buying apartment building for around $40-$60K/unit, which is the going rate for class B apartment properties in Portland currently go for. And they'd be 1,2 and 3 BR units, not just studios. Even using the high range, you're talking about 777 units. Let's say they average 1.5 bedrooms. That means you can house 1,165 homeless people instead of 220. Of course, then you wouldn't get a shiny new building.

If this were a non-homeless project (like, say, a condo in the pearl of a similar size) would $46.6 million be a reasonable sum? Or would it still be high? Not making a point here, just curious about the numbers.

Unrelated comment - I think one problem with your proposed solution is that existing apartment buildings are mostly in places other than old town - places where other residents would not welcome a homeless shelter.

barfo

 

[Idog1976]

If this were a non-homeless project (like, say, a condo in the pearl of a similar size) would $46.6 million be a reasonable sum? Or would it still be high? Not making a point here, just curious about the numbers.

Unrelated comment - I think one problem with your proposed solution is that existing apartment buildings are mostly in places other than old town - places where other residents would not welcome a homeless shelter.

barfo

I'm sure there are plenty of "ghetto" apartment buildings in awful areas of Gresham that are a bare step above homelessness that would suffice. At least then some families would have immediate shelter. The huge complex would have been nice were it to have been built in the roaring 90's.

 

[BenDavis503]

man, you hippies sure try....Im sure the local land owners are thilled a bunch of homeless people will be moving in...or is it already a hellhole in that area?

It is pretty much a hell hole in that part of town anyways. Streets are filled with failures in life.

I am mixed on this structure though. Why put it up? Why give people who don't deserve it a place to live? Homeless people are loser, drug addict fucking idiots who fucked up in life so bad that now they live on the street. I feel no remorse. You can ALWAYS find some kind of job. These losers failed at life and don't deserve our tax dollars for this.

But then again, if it gets their nasty, disgusting asses off the streets so I do not have to look at their filthy, worthless, waste of a human life faces then I am okay with it.

 

[Ed O]

So please illuminate me on how there has been some consistent standard of behavior that got us both the good times and bad times.

There is a consistent pattern of modernization and freedom of currency, people, and information movement.

You pointing out Basel II as if it's some sort of nuclear bomb seems quite simplistic to me and, while I understand and appreciate that you are a social worker and have studied economics in school, I don't think that you can really rely on either of those things as any kind of evidence.

Social workers are always going to see the bottom of the food chain in terms of success, so whether times are good or terrible, you're going to have horror stories.

Taking an economics class or two and then thinking that one can understand the international banking system is like someone taking a year of Spanish and then pontificating on how South American should speak differently.

I'm not trying to slam you--even though I have a degree in economics I don't consider myself an expert, either--it, again, seems like you're looking so hard for why bankers and government are out to get you that of COURSE you're going to convince yourself of somethings.

Ed O.

 

[BenDavis503]

So what's the answer? Or is there one? One that doesn't trample the civil liberties of an individual?

The answer is let them die on the streets. These people do not deserve a place to live. They are worthless piles of shit who fail at life.

 

[ucatchtrout]

This shelter will do nothing but lure even more of this punks to Portland.

Exactly. Which is why I said.... If you build it, they will come.

As far as all homeless being mentally ill, that is debatable. Besides the young punks a lot of them are alcoholics and drug addicts. You call call that a disease, or you can call it a choice.

But for heavens sakes we are in a recession. Its not like there is lots of extra money floating around to throw at public works projects like this.

And this frickin project is expensive. These homeless who live there are going to get a free ride into a brand spankin new place while working poor live in ratholes and are taxed and see their tax dollars paying for this.