Tiny Homes – A ‘Fundamental Shift is Occurring’
A recently purchased, rundown, 1 acre mobile home park is redesigned by a tiny house manufacturer into a site for tiny homes. Dan Dobrowolski of “Escape” has been building tiny houses and giving them a place to go for a while.
Now during the Corona epidemic Dan Dobrowolski has opened a new development and naming it Escape Tampa Bay Village. It is a real demonstration of how tiny houses have come of age and utilize a smaller footprint than what is found in subdivisions today. The one acre former trailer park is home to ten tiny homes. Rather than asphalt pavement occupying much of the park, shrubbery and trees add to the landscaping creating a natural area. Occupancy is limited to the tiny homes manufactured by Escape.
With the advent of the Corona virus epidemic, Everything changed overnight. The people who would never consider living in a Park Model mobile home in a trailer park suddenly are seeing a tiny home in a community of like-minded people to be an attractive proposition.
Dan: The trend is so strong now for 1) escaping crowded housing and 2) just escaping major metro areas like NYC, LA & SFO, it is almost overwhelming. This is a major shift . . . we’re seeing this all over the US with buyers.
If this sounds like a commercial, it really is a commercial, a commercial for smaller homes which can be moved from place to place when needed or if desired. I believe this is the mode which may better suit up and coming younger generations who do not have the funds to acquire a traditional home like their parents did in suburbia. It is also gives them an option of not living in crowded cities and away from today’s virus. So, what doe the floor plan look like?
Their are floor plans on site.
“A ‘Fundamental Shift is Occurring’ as People Flock to Tiny Homes,” Treehugger, Lloyd Alter, August 5, 2020
These days Tiktok is full of videos of people converting school buses, commercial vans, and prefab sheds into homes.
There is definitely a group who want to just flip the bird at the consumer culture built by and for other generations.
These are nice alternatives, not so cheap, and can be within a budget of less than $100,000. As compared to my home of ~$400,000 (2700 sq. feet). A home for two or 2 children maybe?
If you don’t own the land under your depreciating building, then you are doomed to financial failure.
$500 monthly payment to own one and ~$500 to own the land, both per month. To own my property and house is ~S2500/month including property tax. Spend $1000 on ownership and land rental and invest the rest in middle of the road growth funds and you will come out ahead.
Levittown was all about 1000 sf houses. 269 sf is a fair bit smaller, but if the price is right. House size is a function of house price which is a function of land cost. Suburban zoning sets a minimum lot size, so that sets a minimum house size. This gets around the usual zoning by using trailer park rules, so it can create affordable housing. 269 sf is actually pretty generous for an SRO, and SROs were the standard for low end urban housing into the 1980s.
That was in the article. If they can save money on the side, they may be able to or not want to buy that quarter acre lot and 1800 square foot home somewhere and place the trailer on a piece of land to vacation. Just a thought . . .
This isn’t really new. Trailer parks have been cheap housing since before I was born. Gussying up the facade doesn’t change the fact that they are travel trailers parked on slabs with utility hookups and some landscaping. There are always new groups discovering a refreshed version of cheap housing, because there is still a crying need for it. The design of this development may pass muster where a typical trailer park with rows of slabs lined up wouldn’t, and the design of the homes will appeal to a wider range of buyers, perhaps, but I question the “fundamental shift”.
It is my experience that these “trailer parks” do not allow people to buy the land they are on.
Is that true here?