Smaller in Stature, Bigger in Impact: Housing Options for those in need

image: original Dignity Village encampment in NE Portland, which is now a village of tiny houses for those without permanent housing.

Homelessness is a multi-faceted problem that requires different approaches tailored to the various circumstances, causes, and specific needs of individuals and families. One solution that is attracting increasing attention is tiny homes, which are versatile but raise questions about their appropriateness, scalability, and long-term impact.

The encampment and the city’s response

In the summer of 2020, around 150 people set up a tent camp on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia. After several months of negotiations, the city agreed to transfer 50 plots of land to a foundation managed by the camp’s residents. To explore new housing models, in October 2020 the city issued a Request For Information for a tiny home village on city-owned land, based on the model of the Low-Income Housing Institute in Seattle.

Ultimately, Sanctuary Village and Mosaic Development Partners were selected to develop the project. However, after three years and at the expense of significant public and private funds, Mayor Parker’s administration decided to abandon the tiny home village. The planned site, which was to be used for housing for women aged 55 and over, has now been turned into a treatment center. While there is no clear reason why the plan was abandoned, there were some concerns about the feasibility of the initial concept.

The debate over tiny homes also raises a fundamental question: are tiny homes suitable for Philadelphia’s needs?

Understanding Tiny Homes

According to the International Residential Code (IRC) Appendix AQ, tiny homes are defined as dwellings that are less than 400 square feet, excluding lofts. These homes have attracted attention because they are a flexible and cost-effective solution to homelessness and are rapidly deployable and scalable. However, their effectiveness depends on how and for whom they are used.

Locally when discussed with developers and community groups, tiny homes have only been considered as temporary structures, usually without power or plumbing, and often those implementations may be inadequate. However, some believe that they can be adequate, even if only under specific circumstances.

The Housing First model 

Tiny homes are often seen as a way to quickly implement the Housing First model, which emphasizes immediate and low-barrier access to housing. The Housing First approach has proven to be very successful in reducing homelessness by providing stable housing as a first step, followed by access to support services. Tiny homes fit this model as they offer privacy, independence, and quicker access to housing than traditional housing.

Because tiny homes can be built and furnished quickly, they are able to meet urgent needs in a crisis. They also provide a personal, private space that is critical to the Housing First philosophy. Rapid deployment of these homes can be a lifeline for people in urgent need of housing.

Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH)

Tiny homes can also play a role in Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) by integrating essential support services into the community. These homes can be designed as permanent structures with on-site services and provide stability for people experiencing chronic homelessness.

The flexibility of tiny homes allows for customization for specific populations, such as youth aging out of foster care or people with disabilities. As long-term housing solutions, tiny home communities can provide residents with the stability they need to get their lives back on track.

The challenges of tiny homes

Despite their potential, tiny homes are not without their challenges. Staci Scott, Managing Director of Sanctuary Village, remains a strong proponent of tiny homes, but also emphasizes the need for thoughtful implementation.

“I’m a big fan of tiny homes and have been for many years,” Scott told Generocity. “We’re looking at all options — from shipping containers to collapsible houses and A-frame cabins — but if we’re going to provide a place for someone to live, it has to be a house with basic things like bathrooms and running water.”

While Seattle’s model has worked in other cities, Scott believes it may not be right for Philadelphia.

“We need to consider not only the housing itself, but where residents go after their time in transitional housing ends,” she said. “Research shows that people who are housed alone in transitional housing often return to homelessness because they lose the sense of community and safety they had.”

Community concerns and changing the narrative

As well as logistical considerations, the discussion around tiny homes is also about wider community concerns. Emma Hertz, executive director of the HealthSpark Foundation, pointed out the resistance that can arise when introducing new housing models in existing neighborhoods.

“When we are talking about building density or building more housing, community members don’t want the look and feel of the community to change.” Hertz explained. “There are no tiny home communities that match the esthetics of traditional neighborhoods, so these conversations often start off on the wrong foot.”

Hertz emphasizes that the challenge lies not only in building affordable housing, but also in balancing the need for new solutions with community identity. “In the 1950s, the average home was around 1,300 square feet. Today, it’s more like 3,600 square feet,” she says. “We don’t necessarily need to implement tiny homes, but we do need to look at smaller homes for denser housing options to meet need.” Another challenge she often faces when speaking with community members is their want for community ownership and permanency, as nimbyism leads to community members feeling that those new members that are temporary or transitory won’t take care of the community and may, in fact, harm it.

A community-oriented approach

At last month’s Clinton Global Initiative, Generocity spoke with Delana Finlayson, Managing Director of Urban Think Tank Empowered (UTTE), a nonprofit developer that takes a community-centered approach. UTTE’s mixed-finance model allows community members to participate in housing projects based on an affordability index, creating a pathway from renting to ownership.

“Communities often don’t have a say in the development process,” Finlayson said. “We’re doing it differently by letting the people we build for design the communities they want to live in. They know what they need and we just support them in making it happen.” Finlayson emphasized that the chances of success are significantly higher when residents are fully involved in the process. “It’s about more than just creating housing. We want long-term community cohesion, with spaces like community centers and safe public areas. The goal is sustainability, and for that to happen, the community needs to be involved.”

UTTE’s modular units are slightly larger than the 400 square feet of tiny homes, but still offer a more compact solution than conventional houses. Finlayson believes that this model could work at a local level if communities are open to change.

The way forward

Tiny homes offer a flexible, cost-effective approach to tackling homelessness, but they are not a panacea. As Hertz emphasized, the challenge is to align new housing solutions with community expectations and identity. “We need more permanent and affordable solutions,” she said, echoing the sentiments of many housing advocates.

Scott agrees with this sentiment. “We need to think beyond transitional housing,” she said. “People experiencing chronic homelessness need stability, and that means we need to provide long-term solutions that foster a sense of community and belonging.”

As the Philadelphia Region continues to struggle with homelessness, the future of tiny homes is uncertain. While the cancellation of Philadelphia’s tiny home village may be seen as a setback, it also presents an opportunity to rethink the way housing solutions are designed and implemented. The key to success lies in creating homes — not just shelters — where people can rebuild their lives and thrive.