Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian
The point of this thread is that the US should do like Europe which is absurd.
Parts of the US, at least, have been doing these mixed use projects for decades. San Francisco is full of them. EVERY new market rate housing project now must have a component of "affordable" (subsidized) housing. Every one.
The difference is that these are not "public housing". Nothing is managed by the government--they are managed by the same management responsible for the rest of the building if in a mixed building. However, since the law also allows developers to contribute to an "affordable housing fund" rather than put the affordable component in their market rate buildings (a better idea when it comes to for-sale housing IMHO), the fund is used by non-profit developers to build and manage entire affordable buildings.
Once again, in San Francisco these affordable components and non-profit affordable buildings are thriving while the government "public housing authority" was recently shut down by the feds for incompetence and corruption.
By the way, I believe the "poor door" issue was first raised in New York, not the UK. It hasn't come up in San Francisco because the Planning Commission would never have allowed such a thing.
|
Erm what exactly is your point?
The Celotex insulation and Arconic cladding (which was banned in its native US) was indeed approved by the council - the Public Enquiry found the council at fault for using 2013 strategy rather than the 2016 one, which would have vetoed its use and demanded the safest ones on the market, and thus guilty. However the companies were found to have 'pointed the gun and pulled the trigger' after knowingly missold the product, and offloading the banned product into the UK in 2013-14 where it was sold as a Class 0 (classed as minimum safe) but unbeknownst had recently failed European tests (downgraded to Class E, the second lowest possible, after a similar fire in France- minimum legality requires Class B).#
Arconic (Arcoa metals group) is currently denying release of its documents by citing an old French law, after lawsuits from fire victims in France, UK and US. Celotex (from France) was also mis-sold as it's insulation gave off cyanide when burned, unless combined with fire-resistant cladding which Arconic wasn't, and that it knowingly lied about. In the UK testing it even submitted a different material, which was how it got approval. Thus in reality the combined materials used had NEVER been tested.
https://www.ft.com/content/8a63066a-...6-9bf4d1957a67
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44200041
But also note Celotex/ Arconic was widely used throughout the private market also. Your attempt to obfuscate applies to both markets, you can point that exact same finger at say a for-profit, private development agency, or a university, which were just as easily duped as the council (about 160 buildings have it in the UK), and which would also make your point moot.
And the fact poor doors was an issue in NYC and London? What is the point there? Or was it purely dick measuring?
Also, if you want to take a look, this is the bidding process for building the council housing in London, to curb the housing crisis. In short the European approach in fact has long been using similar as San Francisco with govt funding and support, a halfway house of private and public (but more to public in terms of funds and set up, and reliant on
Housing Assocations, which are privately run non-profits funded by the govt):
https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do...omes-londoners ($6.2 billion fund just for the next 2 years)