Seniors have been a growing part of the homeless population, and this will continue. A major reason is Social Security increases aren't keeping up with healthcare and housing costs. COLA increases are based on a measure of inflation, which doesn't always take into account rising healthcare and housing costs (especially housing costs in expensive coastal urban areas). Modern, alternative housing options are needed to deal with this.
The most common solution to date for affordable housing is development using LIHTCs. This system probably isn't the most efficient because it involves several players and is kind of complicated. These projects aren't the most effective for the growing number of needy seniors. Sometimes, they're kind of trophy projects, in that they have features which aren't necessary when it boils down to cost and survival. They may have excessive design (appearance) features, and features which are nice to have, but ultimately aren't necessary, such as washers and dryers, storage and community areas.
 |
| Affordable housing developments in Missoula |
What would be really helpful here, is if someone started a nonprofit that went around building minimalistic micro-apartments in certain areas. There are smaller towns (population 5,000-15,000) in states such as Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma where lots in the 1/4 to 1/3 acre size are
cheap, from 5,000 to 10,000. Many of these towns have
declining or stagnant populations. These states have mild climates, and
are affordable.
The nonprofit could have land use attorneys that push the plans and permits through, and work on zoning exceptions and variances, if that's an issue. Places like these usually aren't hard to build in. They have minimal bureaucracy, and would probably welcome the economic gains (including property taxes) and demographic.
These developments could be about 30-40 units (able to fit on a good sized residential lot), and two to three story so they can be
wood framed. 200-250 square feet units would be ideal, with minimal features: a micro fridge, maybe just a microwave for cooking, no washing machines in the facility, basic everything. New construction is always a plus, and they can look nice without becoming cost prohibitive.
Even a lot of the newer micro-apartments in cities have things that aren't necessities, such as laundry facilities, gyms and common areas. Also, they're for certain people, so there's location and transportation considerations. Here, cost would be the priority. The same designs could be used across multiple developments to save on costs.
These places could be built for people 55+ that receive SSI, SSDI or Social Security (not seriously handicapped), and have that as a requirement to stay. The types of towns mentioned above have basic necessities, and job opportunities wouldn't be an issue. Just someplace where someone can live, rather than be on the street, in a shelter or in a car.
Loans for the projects could come from or through HUD. Rent could probably run 500-550 per unit. The places would pay for themselves. The nonprofit could make a cost estimate on a project, get the loan, buy the land, then build and rent. They would require only about one parking space for every 2 units, because most of them wouldn't have cars (or, some wouldn't be allowed to park on the property as a condition). It's easy to get around smaller towns.
The key would be having just one nonprofit handling numerous developments across multiple states, so economies of scale can apply.
