Hacker News Reader

Comment by kiba | Hacker News Reader

OK, maybe shipping containers aren't exactly the modular cheap things we can transform into living spaces...but to imagine it creating a dystopia?

View on HN

There's a video series of a guy who tried to do this in California in the middle of a desert and his cost went north of $100k. (Paperwork alone was $25k IIRC).

Watching that series reminds you of what a huge bureaucratic nightmare looks like.

Search for "Modern home project" on YouTube.

I almost started a tiny home business. However, during market research, I discovered the biggest problem with tiny homes is zoning laws. That really threw a monkey wrench into my plans.

Have been considering what it would take to get zoning laws preventing tiny homes changed in less popular locales.

> Have been considering what it would take to get zoning laws preventing tiny homes changed in less popular locales.

Statewide legislation is probably the way to go. Doing it city by city is a huge slog, and I don't think anything's likely to happen nationwide for a while (but who knows).

Network with like-minded people:

* YIMBY groups in your area

* Strong Towns: https://www.strongtowns.org/

+ Example of such a statewide legislation:

https://www.curbed.com/2019/7/1/20677502/oregon-yimby-single...

I pushed hard for that one... we turned up 5 YIMBYs in our not-so-big town on a Friday morning to talk with our state representative, and had a lot of people put in calls to our state senator - both Republicans who ended up voting in favor.

You'd probably have better luck subverting existing regulatory infrastructure that closely matches your use-case.

Instead of tiny homes, try thinking within the regulatory box of "classifies as an RV or towed camper". That might allow you to bypass some of the other limitations you were facing.

Reminds me of the Tesla tent assembly line.

Around here, you would try and classify your tiny dwelling as "transportable".

This means having it sitting on, rather than attached to, the ground, and having some "skids" on the piles.

Exactly. There was a Kirsten Dirksen video showing some cabins built on a piece of property that was zoned (I think) for mobile homes. Voila', they welded some big wheels on the bottom of the structures.

They still seemed poorly laid out with crummy bathrooms (in this case, no piped water and a terlet that was basically an indoor plastic porta-potty) but I did admire the law-skirting.

There can also be avoidance of property taxes in some states I believe.

There are definitely places where this works, which is what I think in part lead to the building of most tiny homes on a wheeled, towable chassis. Of course, that limits you though into building that class of tiny home, and I personally feel that smaller but more permanent tiny homes with a foundation/slab are still a very economical, usable and viable solution.

You're right though, I think the key to making this work without trying to get laws changed is finding the right combination of laws and solution/use case that remains within the regulations. This is definitely doable in certain locales and not in others. If I'm really going to make what I wanted to do work, I will have to find the right balance of factors.

I was so surprised when I started reading zoning rules for plots of land that I was looking at to build a tiny house - some had minimum home size requirements, others had explicitly outlawed the use of any such wheeled dwelling precisely to prevent people from doing what you said. Some of the larger plots of land that were quite inexpensive required a 2,000sqft and up dwelling to be built if they were purchased and used for residential purposes!

Around here remodeling projects have less regulation than building a new home. You'll often see a house torn down except for one wall, then a new house is built incorporating that wall. That way it is classified as a "remodel".

I love edge cases like these. I wonder if there's a collection of them somewhere.

You might try Oregon[1].

[1] https://www.npr.org/2019/07/01/737798440/oregon-legislature-...

I do like Oregon! Thanks for sharing this link, this is good to know.

If it's the house I was watching, the amount of house infrastructure within the house cracked me up. A house in a house, full slab, plus the inevitable California fire suppression system. It wasn't even that cool looking.

But...I really liked the idea of the above ground septic drain field.

I guess it must be because houses are so expensive so people go "what's another $25k?" and costs are allowed to drift upwards? Really crazy that it's that bad.

For those wondering, here's the first part of the series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA5fh29rhLs

Yeah, when you look at how slums are usually built, it's hard not seeing containers making things any worse.

Drop a bunch of old containers into a tent city and all of a sudden it's much harder for the authorities to bulldoze.

To be clear: you're suggesting this is an improvement -- bulldozer-proof slums afford utility to the residents?

(I'd tend to agree.)

Oh yes, certainly, thought that was clear.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com