Abstract
This paper presents an assessment of recent cost containment and modest design requirements for the Section 202 direct loan program. Findings are based on case study analysis of Section 202 projects in five HUD field offices. Analysis suggests that cost savings are being achieved but that changes in project design and amenities may be undermining the rationale for maintaining Section 202 as a housing production program. An alternative approach to improving the cost effectiveness of Section 202 is advanced.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: