Posted on 04/03/2016 10:33:46 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The tiny house movement has taken America by storm, in part because our economy is in the toilet. People are striving to reduce their expenses by embracing minimalism. They’re breaking free from the corporate grind because, as I’ve always advised, they are learning to live with less and radically reducing their expenses.
But, these days in America, you are sharply admonished when you try to live your life outside of the strictures of the 9-5 world. Is it any surprise that the government is now taking steps to limit our ability to drastically reduce our expenses? They always seem to make illegal anything we try to do to be more independent and moving into a tiny house appears to be the next on their list.
HUD has proposed the following law:
This proposed rule would modify the current exemption for recreational vehicles in the Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations. Under the current exemption, questions have arisen regarding whether park model recreational vehicles are regulated by HUD’s manufactured home program. These park models are being produced with patio roofs, screened in porches, and other extensions that exceed the 400 square foot maximum exemption in the current regulations. Additionally, some of these models are being marketed as suitable for year round living. HUD’s proposed rule would permit recreational vehicle manufactures to certify that a unit is exempted from HUD’s regulations. Specifically, HUD’s proposed rule would define a recreational vehicle as a factory build vehicular structure, not certified as a manufactured home, designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy, and built and certified in accordance with either the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1192-2015, Standard for Recreational Vehicles, or the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A119.5-15, Recreational Park Trailer Standard. In addition, to provide consumers notice regarding the manufacturing standards used to construct the unit, HUD’s rule would require that units claiming the exemption display a notice that identifies the standards used to construct the unit and states that the unit is designed only for recreational use, and not as a primary residence or permanent dwelling.
That’s right – if this law is passed, these structures will be classified as “not suitable for a primary residence or permanent dwelling” in April of this year.
While currently they’re only talking about a label, how long will it be before the long arm of the law reaches out to punish those living full time in homes that are deemed “not suitable for a primary residence or permanent dwelling”? My bet is, not long at all. This may be the first step toward making it illegal to live in a tiny home or an RV.
CLICK IMAGE TO GO TO YOUTUBE VIDEO
Solution.....ELIMINATE HUD
“Yep. And the ONLY reason the rate is as low as it is in this country is because the gubmint is paying people to keep out of trouble. Cut entitlements and the crime rate EXPLODES!”
Who was it who said that any country is three meals away from a revolution?
“Soon to follow, HUD outlaws homelessness.”
Yes, and then they will determine that those with more bedrooms in their homes than needed will share with the homeless. Eventually all homes will be taken away from the selfish owners. All housing will be controlled by the government, and socialism will rule supreme.
We will find ourselves in a socialist paradise not unlike what Soviet citizens experienced under Communism.
HUD can go to HADES!
“no property taxes”
That my friend will and is freaking out the $$ redistributors.
They need yours & my $$ to give back to the Section 8’er’s
Some states actually charge property taxes on movable vehicles. Some states charge taxes on food, too.
Small dwellings are helpful and useful for the short term, but unless you own you own property, they’re not good for the long term. Everybody acquires ‘stuff’ over time, and not all stuff is disposable. Eventuall, there’s no place to put it all.
If you’re the ‘prepper’ type, you can forget about storing a week’s worth of food in a tiny house unless you have storage space some place, in which case, its better to have your emergency provisions with you! Some of these tiny places would be over crowded if you add so much as a photo album, or a cook book. Forget about owning a jewelry box, or a nice collection of spices!
Where are you going to store your shovel, rake and hoe? Canning? Good luck! Canning supplies need storage space as does the final product of canning.
I live in a small space and have for the last 4 years, it’s frustrating after a while. Someone gave me a bunch of apples that I wanted to turn into a small batch of wine, but where do I put the bucket to ferment them in?
A family member of mine had a really nice 32ft trailer home. Parking it became a problem because you can’t park them just any place. You have to contend with water/sewerage needs, facilities for that aren’t always easy to come by.
Rental lots can cost every bit as much as a decent sized apartment. It’s not as easy as you think if you’re looking to save a buck. And not all are well winterized which also means they won’t do well in severe heat/moisture, either.
If you have your own property, it’s doable, if you have lots of money it’s doable, but not if you’re having to be mobile and money is tight. That’s the reality.
Sometimes a person is forced by circumstances to have to make some harsh decisions and being in a trailer beats being in the rain for a few nights but it’s not a permanent solution.
Neither is outlawing solutions to desperate situations.
Uh oh. People are proving that one can live in very little space with few conveniences. These houses make HUD projects look fancy. Can’t have that now, can we?
Humphrey Pennyworth better get his pal Joe Palooka to take a meeting with HUD.
/obscure comic reference
Cool. Thanks.
Exactly!
There are entire communities living this way near Amazon’s distribution centers.
Not to mention, being able to relocate when the undesirables move into the neighborhood!
Garden shed.
Root cellar.
Places I don't have to heat or dust.
The government is not just trying to expand Section 8, but many municipalities are trying to pass ordinances against “income discrimination” to force landlords to accept it.
Fortunately, saying you can’t refuse to count Section 8 vouchers or welfare or SSDI as income as of yet CANNOT be used to force landlords to sign up for the program.
In short, they can pass ordinances that state you can’t refuse Section 8 vouchers, but they cannot as of yet force you to sign up and jump through hoops as a program member to get approved.
Sure it doesn't change that. But it does create a stricter definition of RV, so people who have any kind of modification to expand their living space or porch would fall more clearly under HUD control.
This is all about control. HUD wants control but they are willing to give up some control to the RV industry as long as that industry adds various standards (which make it more expensive). The industry likes the fact that they can more easily exclude competition.
These would pretty much be relegated to campgrounds in order to have electrical, water and sewer hookups, wouldn’t they? I don’t know of too many undesirables who camp.
My brother has a 35 ft rv. I could live in it. We have a 40 ft sailboat. I could live on it.
Tiny houses? Not so much. They just don’t look comfy to me.
People don’t want to spend their lives paying off a big home.
HGTV’s Tiny Home on Monday nights is popular for good reason.
A well-designed tiny home or RV allows you to do more for less.
And live wherever you want.
___________________________________________
I’ll wager this news is going to pi$$ off some Millennials.
Sounds like molehill=mountain, according to this writer.
There’s no Agenda 21 conspiracy here. Nobody’s threatening to make RVs or tiny houses illegal. Anyone who wants an RV or a tiny house can buy their own.
HUD is merely tightening up regulations on what the agency will, or will not, disburse taxpayer funds for. They’re just saying HUD won’t use taxpayer funds to buy RVs for aging hippies (HUD needs to be able to monitor their properties—RVs are moveable) or trendy tiny houses which are too small for **families** and vastly overpriced per square foot anyway.
NOT wasting tax dollars on trailers and tool-shed sized “houses” is a good thing.
Having said that, I’ll also say everything HUD does is wasteful, IMO.
HUD has recently built several 1000 sq ft homes for low income and elderly in my town. Those are small, with almost no cabinets or closets, and of course no garages. The inhabitants compensate by simply tossing their stuff and their junk car parts in their yards. These houses were built with cheap, contractor-grade materials. They’ll be falling apart within 5 years, and the utility bills are sky high due to minimal insulation. But then, the taxpayers are subsidizing the utilities, too, so no prob!
HUD is the agency that needs to be shut down first, IMO, but unlikely since it’s a huge source of corporate welfare for well-connected contractors and poverty pimps in general.
Or is it HUD can't have control ( ah dysfunctional control issues again from DC ! ) or is it you can do it with cash and don't have to get a Mortgage from a Too Big to Fail Bank who will only service your Mortgage and then sell it to Fannie and Freddie.
My guess is they can't have any of that..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.