The editorial board operates independently from the U-T newsroom but holds itself to similar ethical standards. We base our editorials and endorsements on reporting, interviews and rigorous debate, and strive for accuracy, fairness and civility in our section. What do you think">Let us know.
The emergence of sturdy, energy-efficient prefabricated housing as a cheaper alternative to standard housing in Japan, Great Britain and has long sparked questions about why California can’t rely heavily on such homes to address an extreme housing shortage. Two huge potential game-changers are dormitory-style housing with shared bathrooms and kitchens and so-called “tiny homes” — small units with plumbing, kitchens and other features of standard homes that can be built for tens of thousands of dollars. Clearing regulatory obstacles means that even with land and other costs factored in — even in the Golden State — a lot of reasonably priced housing could be quickly available. Think these aren’t “real homes” or worry that no one would want to live in them? They beat living in a car or on the street, and also offer a sense of community.
Yet in San Diego, people are told progress on the housing crisis looks like this: a 40-unit residential site in El Cerrito made of modified shipping containers, each unit constructed at a cost of $568,000.
The state’s housing crisis stems in part from the well-intentioned but restrictive California Environmental Quality Act, which needs to be loosened to facilitate more housing. It’s also a result of powerful interests — including construction trade unions, wealthy homebuilders and Not In My Back Yard activists whose efforts keep the cost of housing high. Until this is widely understood — and affordable housing lives up to its name — progress will be slow.
