“The micro-modular shelter is working,” Morgan told CTV News. “People are finding indoor spaces. Certainly, there are still people outdoors, but [there’s] a big decline in the numbers of both encampments and people living unsheltered through the winter.”

Last fall, London City Council approved $7 million to construct and operate the 60 unit community (50 single-occupancy and 10 double-occupancy) that will house up to 70 people until April 2027.

The municipality’s Coordinated Informed Response (CIR) Team, who offer support to the unhoused, enforce encampment policies, and respond to the concerns of businesses, has witnessed the transformation of several people who moved into the MMS.

“An incredible change, we visibly see it in folks,” said Debbie Kramers, CIR manager. “We’re now visiting the MMS, going there regularly, and the conversation has changed. It’s about their future and it’s about housing. They’re actually having conversations with my team about what [life] looks like next.”

top 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] enbee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 39 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Holy shit giving people free housing improves their lives we cracked the code

[–] enbee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You won’t believe what happened when we started giving them money!

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Or food?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago

Doug Ford yellling "get a job" over a megaphone wasn't working?

[–] Tigeroovy@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

Guess we better keep testing this theory until it turns out the way capitalists want it to and then we can finally say it doesn’t work.

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Someone alert Gregor Robinson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SozqexLpyXE

Of course he might only want people to have shoeboxes, as he owns a lot of sprawling mansions downtown.

[–] IAmYouButYouDontKnowYet@reddthat.com 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Did they just dump them on the ground like a bag of Halloween candy and be done with it?

Edit... Nvm I see they are in horseshoe shapes.

[–] tangonov@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago

They're frigging cuboids from No Man's Sky 🤣

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"WE WANT SOCIAL HOUSING IN ACTUAL HOMES WHERE PEOPLE CAN GET OFF THE STREET AND LIVE IN SAFETY AND DIGNITY!"

"Best we can do is a fancy heated box with a mattress."

Like, c'mon! This is barely an upgrade from living in a cardboard box or a camping tent. Where's the investment in social housing Carney promised during the debates? People need apartments or a room in a shared apartment at least. Near amenities and services. A real home. Not some fucking box out in a field in the middle of nowhere.

[–] brianpeiris@lemmy.ca 20 points 3 months ago (2 children)

"I KNOW YOU'VE TOLD US THAT THESE MICRO-SHELTERS ARE MUCH BETTER THAN THE ENCAMPMENTS, AND YOUR LIVES HAVE IMPROVED REMARKABLY IN JUST SIX WEEKS, BUT WE'RE SHUTTING IT DOWN BECAUSE ZOMBIECYBORGFROMOUTERSPACE INSISTS THAT WE CAN'T GIVE YOU THIS SOLUTION UNTIL WE'VE IMPLEMENTED AN ABSOLUTELY PERFECT SOLUTION, AND THAT WILL PROBABLY TAKE A FEW YEARS, IF YOU'RE LUCKY. SORRY!"

Nothing wrong with having higher expectations, but you don't have to shit on a good thing in the mean time.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 3 months ago

Yeah it kinda feels like the palestine thing. biden would be just as bad. well no. not really. I would rather have heat and a mattress than cardboard. down the road hopefully it can be improved but if this can be done today then I wish my city would do it. I really do wish they would just create enough public housing.

[–] a9249@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Those little cubes are 100k? Whos getting the bribe for this one?! I can build one for 10k easily.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I assume it’s for upkeep, land, power, etc. I believe that was a multi year quote.

[–] TheDoctorDonna@piefed.ca 2 points 3 months ago

People got mad about those being built here and burned a bunch down out of spite. They expect us to believe that the unhoused people burned them down but I just can't believe that someone with no home would intentionally burn down the only shelter they had. And if they did burn them down, why haven't they burned down the two shelters that are always full?

[–] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

$7 million for 60 units?

I love the idea, but that's about $115k each. I built my kids a playhouse of similar size and materials for like $5k. There should also be some efficiency of scale here.

Granted they need to pay for heating and a few other things, but that seems crazy expensive. Do they have plumbing? I would think they would be able to build hundreds of units for that investment.

[–] brianpeiris@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It's a fair question, but the cost might include land rental, property taxes, and salaries for support staff. It's not just the physical housing that's important. What makes it successful is the services available to the residents. I think it's worth digging into the financials, but I don't think it's fair to assume that it's $115k just to build each unit.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca -2 points 3 months ago

They could have got college program students in construction trades to build for experience credit, but who gets rich off that.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Building code is part of it, would be my guess. Your kids' playhouse wasn't intended as a permanent residence, so it didn't have to follow nitpicky little rules about drainage and such.

[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago

all this tells me is that bureaucracy is over bloating the cost then. 100k for a box with heating, i could probubly make something better for cheaper to code but the gov wouldn't let me. thats my issue.

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

well considering that in 2017 there was a study that revealed it cost on average $56k per year per homeless individual: https://ontario.cmha.ca/news/new-study-highlights-cost-of-homelessness/ and that's just medical, and shelter use. homelesshub.ca reported that in 2013 it was more, 75k a year per homeless individual, and again that's without providing housing.

so 115k in the long run will potentially save money. A person who has private and reliable shelter is more likely to start to contribute to society again, get a job, pay taxes, etc.

The solution has always been a homes first initiative with needs based assistance.

[–] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I'm not saying isn't worth the investment. I'm all for it. I'm just surprised that they couldn't get more houses for that money. If the government is only willing to shell out $7 million, I'd like to see the number of individuals housed maximized.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Much larger units are available at Home Depot for $40K.

[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

"live in a box, peasant!"

if its free its something i guess