Pittsburgh City Council members Deb Gross and Anthony Coghill unveiled a prototype shelter Thursday, a building they say could be used in government-managed homeless communities. The two want to see the city and county build encampments of shed-like structures that would have a shared community space for showers, toilets and food.
“It’s housing that you can do faster, cheaper, quicker,” said Gross. “It may not be large, it may not be luxurious, but it is actually indoors. And it can get you to a point where you can get your life back.”
At a building along Broadway Street in Beechview, Gross and Coghill showed reporters the prototype shelter, which stands 9 feet high, 8 feet wide, and 10 feet long. It includes a shingled roof and vinyl siding, a locked door, a window, insulated walls and, notably, a mailbox. (Often, people without a permanent address struggle to get necessary documents for work and other needs.) Coghill and Gross said the real thing would also include electricity.
Coghill, who owns a roofing business, built the prototype himself, though Gross helped to install the siding.
The shelter is the latest idea from the pair, who have proposed nearly a half-dozen concepts over the last year to shelter more people who live on the street. But it remains to be seen whether this idea escapes the bureaucratic purgatory that has stalled their other proposals. Gross and Coghill said they’re optimistic about their latest idea.
The proposal is based on tiny home villages that have cropped up in cities across the country as the rate of homelessness surges nationwide. Advocates see the approach as an upgrade from camping tents in the elements, and some villages include shared kitchen, laundry and hygiene facilities.
“We see these happening in other cities,” said Gross. “We've talked to the other cities that have done them, particularly like Denver.”
Similar villages in Seattle even have access to Wi-Fi thanks to donated hotspots from local libraries.
The idea hasn’t been tested in Pittsburgh yet, though last year it was floated alongside a package of other shelter ideas presented by Gross and Coghill. Their ideas have also included: a massive new shelter Downtown, retrofitting unused office space into dorm-style units and providing fishing tents with space heaters on designated properties.
None of those proposals went anywhere: Sources in the mayor’s office tell WESA there aren’t the funds to support them.
The structure presented to reporters Thursday resembled a large shed, rather than the tiny homes that have captured the imagination of some city dwellers. But Coghill and Gross said that’s by design. Many DIY tiny home kits can cost between $20,000 and $60,000, while Coghill said the structure he built would cost between $1,800 and $2,000 per unit.
And while a traditional wooden tiny home can take weeks to build, Coghill said the pallet shelters could go up in less than a week. He built the prototype over the course of a few days.
“One of the biggest advantages of this is the immediacy of it,” Coghill said. “[After] we locate the proper site… within three weeks we could have these finished.”
The unanswered question is: Now that they've built it, will Mayor Ed Gainey and other local officials come to the table?
'Significant challenges'
Questions remain about who would build the structure, and whether the city would have to put such a project out to bid. Coghill claimed he could volunteer to help build them himself with the help of city and county carpenters.
Gross and Coghill want the city to pilot a 10-unit village before using the approach elsewhere. But the proposal would need Gainey's approval and funding from Allegheny County’s Department of Human Services. Both were absent from Thursday’s unveiling.
The village also hinges on the city’s planning commission approving a zoning change tied to Gross and Coghill’s earlier proposal for designated tent sites. Gross and Coghill called the tiny home village an upgrade from tents. But the change requires a review by the city’s planning commission before council can move forward, and it’s been two months since the proposal was first sent over. After several meetings without the matter on the agenda, it’s not clear when the commission will weigh in.
The City Planning Commission did not respond to WESA’s request for comment Thursday about the status of their review.
Gainey’s office did not comment directly on Coghill's structure Thursday, but officials did say there were concerns about the proposal to establish zones for city-supported villages.
“After consulting with our Solicitor, zoning experts and outreach staff, we have identified significant problems with the legislation," said spokesperson Maria Montaño. While she declined to provide specific concerns, she said some were "technical," while others were "more about the unintended and harmful consequences of zoning for homelessness.”
Gross and Coghill said they’re optimistic that Allegheny County’s Department of Human Services will support the proposal. They said the department pledged to explore the matter further after a meeting to present the village concept last week.
Allegheny County’s Department of Human Services could not be reached for comment Thursday.
'I would have loved a place like this'
Gross and Coghill were joined by a handful of supporters at Thursday’s unveiling. Sam Schmidt, a housing justice activist, said her first impression was that the unit would be “a serious upgrade for the safety and shelter” of a lot of people living on the street.
“I would have loved a place like this to stay when I was unhoused,” she said.
Schmidt argued that while earlier proposals hadn't been adopted, that shouldn’t keep city leaders from putting forward new ideas.
“They've been shut down five times and here they are again, back at it,” she said. “And to demonstrate it in such a cost-effective way is very impressive, and I think really promising for the outcome.”
Rachel Nunes, executive director of the Thomas Merton Center, stressed that the village concept would provide people a place to belong and to keep their things. Though a shed isn’t an ideal living situation, Nunes said the city should pursue more stopgap measures while developing more traditional affordable housing.
“We need … this emergency housing like yesterday,” Nunes said. “A lot of [the people we help] would love to have something that feels more stable, more secure” than a tent.
Schmidt and Nunes expressed disappointment in the lack of support for council’s ideas from the mayor’s office.
“It seems like some of our electeds are taking it seriously,” Nunes said. “It would be great to see the rest of them do their part.”
Gainey’s office said while the mayor doesn’t agree with the zoning change proposal, the mayor is seeking better housing options for the city’s most vulnerable.
“Just like the council members, we are working hard every day to create solutions for our unhoused neighbors,” said Montaño. “While we may find ourselves at odds about this particular tactic, we look forward to working together with council on strategies we do agree on.”
