Hopeful and Disappointing at the Same Time

We first observed the "tiny home" phenomenon eight years ago. Although the original rationale was to live more simply while helping the environment, tiny homes were quickly seen as one of the solutions to homelessness.

Dignity Moves' 70 tiny homes on Gough St. (Chron)

The San Francisco non-profit Dignity Moves successfully completed 70 tiny homes last year at an out-of-pocket cost of $34,000 each, which doesn't include donated labor and materials. Hoping to replicate Dignity Moves' example, the City of San Francisco has been trying to get a similarly sized project started at a cost of $113,000 per home.

It’s been a year since 33 Gough St. opened, and San Francisco has still not been able to replicate its success.

City officials have spent years talking about opening a similar tiny home village in the Mission on a vacant lot near 16th and Mission streets. But that project is not expected to open until 2024. The per-cabin cost is about $104,000, but when you factor in amenities such as offices and a community room at the project, it rises to a whopping $113,000 per cabin.

The City's reasons for the cost differential are that the rules must be followed: [bold added]

Supervisor Hillary Ronen told the Chronicle that while costs are high, city rules ensure that workers are paid a fair wage and that the work is done according to its regulations. She also criticized Dignity Moves for its framing of the situation.

“I’m frustrated with their position because here you’ve got a losing bidder who did not come with the best bid now complaining about it and criticizing the rules we have in place to protect workers as the reason for that,” Ronen said. “It doesn’t give them much credibility.”

Ronen added that these rules “are in place for a reason,” and that making exceptions during a crisis — such as during the pandemic — is worthwhile, but “when we have the time to follow all of the rules, I think that we should.”

Ronen also said Dignity Moves is using “union-busting rhetoric” by suggesting the city use union labor along with volunteer labor.

The 33 Gough Street project gives hope because it shows what can be possible, but the Mission-Street project throws cold water on those hopes as the City bureaucracy reasserts its power.