[deleted]

April Dunn is probably the best for what youre looking for. She knows everyone

Also, a "50 minute commute" from Concord is basically all of southern NH

Like everyone living in any sort of apartment building, or multi-unit home is already dealing with.

This area is full well into the maw of Late Stage Capitalism.

Home buying within 75 miles of the Seacoast is now an exercise in futility if you're making a working poor/lower middle class income.

I've been looking for years and have expanded my search to the upper midwest.

Can find homes there a plenty and as husband and I are within a decade of being turfed from our jobs for being too old, it looks like where we will be headed once we no longer are employable.

There is a lot of nuance and context missing from your comments.

First, these aren't trailers. The Randolphs are building small homes. They are stick built to the same code/standards as any other stick built home. They're just small. This conversation about trailers is irrelevant to this thread.

Second, manufactured housing parks can be predatory. There is a lot of great coverage on that issue. That doesn't mean all "trailers" are predatory. For example, resident owned communities (ROCs) are not predatory, nor is a single manufactured homes placed on the owner's property.

Per NH statute, manufactured housing in NH is treated as real estate. The appreciate, just like real estate does, and since the 1970s, they have been built to HUD standards. Manufactured housing is a very real path toward affordable homeownership for a lot of people in NH.

But you are right that investors buying up manufactured housing parks in NH is a huge problem and it is predatory. Per NH statute, tenants must be given the opportunity to buy their park and that's pretty freaking awesome.

yeah that seems kinda shit

I can't speak to that and agree it's important, every person is only temporarily able after all, but just because it wasn't explicitly mentioned doesn't mean it's not accounted for either.

If not then hopefully this is successful enough that they can account for it in the next project. It is good feedback.

Designing for accessibility only increases marketability.

Diversity in our housing stock is good! They probably could have fit more units on the lot if they built an apartment building, but they specifically wanted to build cottages, which are really desirable for a host of reasons. We don't want all our housing to be the same.

Yeah I did. You didn’t specify the land/lease agreement parameters in the post I responded to, so narrowing the argument to only include scenarios where the land is owned by an individual feels slightly disingenuous.

Recent or not, its happening now and that removes support from the argument that trailer parks are a source of affordable house (you can toss your asterisk here and say YMMV and the like)

They've been talking about that project forever. Can't believe it's actually getting done.

Financial feasibility is a real challenge to building affordable housing (or any housing that isn't market rate or "luxury"). They would love to support homeownership if it were possible, but it's not - the math doesn't work.

Edit: I get the downvotes, Reddit hates developers and landlords, but it is clear that y'all don't understand financially feasibility. Developers can't take a loss on project or they would go out of business.

I moved to Dover specifically because it's city-like. Why did you move here? Oh yeah, you didn't. 👍 There are plenty of suburbs I could have moved to, so really not sure what your point is.

I don't mean deforestation in terms of cutting trees, I mean replacing forest with suburbs. There's nothing unreasonable about living in a smaller home, especially for young adults who are transitioning into adulthood who don't have a ton of shit.

These aren't for downsizing, they're a rung on the upsizing ladder.

If only helping them was actually as profitable.

Asset management firms care about maintain a certain level of guaranteed revenue over a sustained period of time..

You don’t get that by selling homes, but you sure as hell do by renting them!

The entire system is breaking down into a new form of feudalism. Need to change the system so housing doesn’t get totally nuked by asset management firms.

Very apropos given CAVE is a fun acronym for NIMBYs - Citizens Against Virtually Everything.

Some of your points are factually incorrect, but I am going to start with the nuance that is missing from this conversation.

"Tiny houses" is often used when referring to tiny houses on wheels. These aren't that. What the Randolphs are building in Dover are just very small homes. No wheels. There is no reason they will deteriorate faster than any other home because they're built with the same materials and to the same code. They're just smaller.

Tiny houses on wheels may deteriorate faster. There is less regulation when we're talking about THOWs (inspection standards, building code, etc.). THOWs are personal property, not real estate. Note that is also substantially different than manufactured housing, which is considered real estate in NH, does not depreciate, and since the 70s, has been built to HUD standards.

Manufactured homes, especially those in Resident Owned Communities (ROCs), are hands-down the most affordable path to homeownership and are often less expensive than median rents in any given area.

There is a lot of classism in your comment for someone criticizing classism.

Are you talking just a yearly inspection sticker? You'll find in NH that places are allowed to charge different amounts. I've gotten stickers for as low as $25 and paid as much as $50. It's a racket. I typically go to Mieneke or Midas. They usually try to tell me I need something and I just decline. I tale my car elsewhere for actual servicing. I just like the cheaper prices for inspection stickers.

I have to wonder the point if it's still rental based. You're basically just making a large number of studio apartments, except less efficient because they all need their own systems and hookups.

I guess the point is to be entirely separate, but that's not really going to solve the housing problem. In the footprint they fit 44 individual tiny homes, you could probably have fit well over 100 apartment units and probably for cheaper too.

I think (hope?) this will be a big part of the near future of housing construction, smaller houses clustered village style and it’s exactly what we need. It’ll allow families to build equity and own something without needing to put down $80,000 right out of the gate.

Totally get the purpose…especially watching the video. But one of the single most (often forgotten) underserved communities is the disabled - both young and old. This includes our veterans. There is no mention of even creating one handicap accessible home of the 44 units in the video or article. That’s shameful, honestly.

Edit: Interesting the person defending the builders deleted their posts lol

"Tiny homes are progressive, right? That will be really 'lit' with the youth?"

"Yeah, they'll 'yeet' with joy!"

"Great! They can afford a couple thousand buck a month, right?"

"Of course! I gave my kid ten thousand dollars when he turned 18. Doesn't every parent?"

*Toasts with an imported whiskey from 1897*

You know that’s pointless semantics when I’m talking about highly suburbanized areas which residents move to often specially because they’re not city-like. Not every “city” needs to have high density housing.

The deforestation comment is just odd. Do you know lumber is a renewable resource? Any global issues with deforestation have nothing to do with squeezing Dover NH into a rental unit that are twice as small. There’s reasonable sustainability and then there’s being a martyr. It’s stupid and unrealistic to expect people to downsize for perpetuity and for small communities to upzone into mid-rise monstrosities.

I work within real estate and housing prices are stabilizing in most areas. Anything under $500K is still moving pretty quickly. There are still some sellers that are expecting to get multiple over asking offers, but those days are pretty much gone. Yes, interest rates seem high compared to 1.5-2 years ago, but they're not unreasonable. I think we're also getting back to more seasonal sales, which we also haven't seen in a couple years. I think we'll start to see more inventory come on the market closer to spring time and hopefully more reasonable pricing with it.

These are not intended to be long term housing for families or home owners. They are also not meant to be to be owned as the homeowners could turn around and rent out the tiny home for more than the mortgage and therefore generating profit and not keeping them affordable. This would have a compound effect if they were to be controlled by multiple real estate firms looking to continually drive up the cost of rent rather than one firm dictating the same price for all. At the same time, an HOA would have to be established to dictate the rules and regulations of the community and was not the design for this project! If this was about making the most money quickly and not keeping housing affordable in Dover, they would be for sale rather than rent. As stated in my original post, future plans to allow tiny home ownership in neighboring towns has been discussed for people who may want to be able to invest long term into this type of housing!

The A is Zillow stands for accuracy.

I lived in a space this size with a spouse and cats for several years. It's entirely manageable. I was even paying more than this in rent and it was a far older shittier home. These would have been a fantastic option.