Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays
Your point about tiny houses is partially true. Yes some costs are static per unit. Same with micro apartments if they have bathrooms etc. Your house will cost more per square foot if smaller. But a 200 square foot house will still cost a fraction of a 2,000 square foot house.
|
I simply don't see anywhere in the country where tiny homes could be feasible as a main component of new-construction housing stock. If you're talking about a high-cost metro, the land could be much more effectively used to build apartment buildings than tiny homes. If you're talking about a low-cost metro, there's often tons of dated "small, but not tiny" homes available for affordable prices.
The only real effective place for them would be on subdivided residential properties - basically like what Vancouver is doing with "laneway houses." - though those homes are more typically about 550 square feet, thus don't qualify as tiny homes. It's hard to see why anyone, if allowed to build such a house, would purposefully choose a very small one rather than just a kinda small one, given larger=more rental income.
Threaded Mode