Cohousing-L Mailing List: cohousing ideas in housing for homeless

[David Mandel (dlmandel]

        I'd like to share an experience I had yesterday.
        I paid a visit to the recently opened first cluster of tiny new
houses built by Sacramento Cottage Housing, a project initiated by
low-income housing activists here with grant and some local government
funding. The cottages are meant to be transitional housing for heretofore
homeless individuals and (small) families, for a maximum of two years,
during which the residents receive other services such as job training,
counseling, etc., with the hope that they'll move out prepared to survive
on their own.
        The initial cluster comprises 60 cottages, 32 of them already
occupied, in an industrial area north of downtown several blocks from
Loaves and Fishes, a major center of more short-term services for homeless
people that feeds 1,000 or so people a day and also runs a school and
playground, a library, overnight shelter for some, a health clinic, a safe
place to relax in a park, showers and some job services. The cottages
project is intended to be a prototype for more such complexes around the
city and county -- which are of course already running into rampant NIMBY
responses when advocates propose building them in more "respectable"
neighborhoods.
        It remains to be seen how well the experiment works, but I was
struck by some of the ideas that stood clearly behind the architectural an
social design. At the entrance of the fenced complex is a sort of gate
house with offices staffed by project managers and social work types.
People walking in and out (pedestrian entrance only) pass by and likely
stop to see posted messages and check mailboxes, which are all there. On
the other side of the entrance is a common house of sorts with a small
sitting room, small dining room (capacity perhaps 25, squeezed) and laundry
room. Every Thursday they have a common dinner, prepared by residents on a
rotating basis, followed by a community meeting.
        Straight back from the entrance, at the geographical center, is the
skeleton of what will someday be a large building, once funding is
obtained. It is scheduled to get a roof soon, which will provide protection
from sun and rain, kind of a 1,500 or so square foot gazebo, with the roof
at least 30 feet off the ground. Someday it will have walls. I didn't get a
detailed description of the eventual plan, but there will definitely be a
large room that would be able to accommodate all residents at a meal or
other event.
        The houses themselves, one bedroom and no more than 300 square feet
each, are all entirely detached, a curious feature perhaps aimed at
instilling a sense of quasi-ownership. They are scattered around the site,
placed in clusters of five or so each, arranged in circles, with front
porches facing the approach walkway. The landscaping is totally bare now,
but there are plans to plant several hundred trees in the next month (I
will be mobilizing volunteers for a work day) and -- again, eventually,
when funding allows -- to place play equipment, picnic tables, benches and
a barbecue in the center of each cluster's circle.
        This development is not cohousing -- never been called that and no
direct connection to the movement. However, the activists working on this
project are acqaintances and have visited our cohousing community. So have
many architects and planners in town, and the rest have surely seen some of
all the publicity we and other cohousing in the region have received over
the last seven years. I can't help but guess that at least subconsciously,
and perhaps overtly, some design ideas were adopted from us because they
made sense.
        I don't think it's too far-fetched, therefore, to raise this
project as an example of what I mean when I say in my advocacy for
emphasizing affordability in the cohousing movement that one of the
realistic goals is to improve the livability of low-income (in this case,
extremely low) housing development by showing that some of the ideas of
cohousing can be applied in their architectural and social design. (The
other goal, of course, is to make "real" cohousing communities more
affordable for lower income people.)
        I'll be observing the progress of the Sacramento cottages project
and working with local advocates for additional such experiments, both for
their own sake because poor people need roofs over their heads and also in
order to see where some timely suggestions might help create healther
communities in the process.
        Comments/suggestions welcome.

David Mandel, Southside Park Cohousing, Sacramento