When I saw the thread title, my first thought was the resurgence of “shotgun shacks” in Raleigh. They’re gigantic compared to what the OP had in mind! Most of the tiny houses are cute – enough so that it almost motivates me to declutter.
Though I would love to hear the shrieking from the neighbors when the new person shows up with one of these…
The commercial highlights one serious disadvantage of the tiny house thing… you’ll NEVER get laid in one!
I would love to have the option of being able to live in a tiny house where I currently live. I would not want to live out in the middle of nowhere like the guy who built his own in the documentary.
Like the shotgun shack, I’d like to see a resurgence of the granny flat. Secondary suite - Wikipedia
It would be great for older family members who may not be able to live completely on their own anymore, college students, single people just getting started. Also, the home owner could use the land for extra income.
If I was a big-shot developer, I’d take some of the big wasteland lots here in the city and turn them into tiny home villages, geared towards child-free individuals and couples who want the benefits of home ownership and urban living, but don’t want more than a few hundred sq-ft. The neighborhoods could be designed to be semi-self contained to promote foot and bike traffic. And I’d set aside some land for a community garden and a park.
I don’t want to live out in the nowhere either. I’m fine with being out in nature, but the reason tiny homes appeal to me is because they promote simplicity. Having to do an hour commute to work every morning and having to drive every time I want to go to the grocery store is the opposite of “simple”.
I’ve been toying with the idea trying to do this and making it my life’s work. There are so many obstacles to overcome in making this a successful venture. I think the biggest hurdle would be matching people with the appropriate mindset for the living conditions. Most people I find into these things tend to be young, flaky or emotionally somewhat unstable or unbalanced or some combination of these things. Mostly I would like to help provide more options for average people that provide a better quality of life.
I’m an American, and I have nothing against consumerism, but I think a lot of people would benefit if more living options were available; especially average people. Life is great for people here if you are a high functioning person, if you are a very low functioning person at least aid is available. I think medium to medium low functioning people or people who are not naturally competitive can have a very difficult time though and I think the ability to have these options would benefit them greatly and allow them to live a more fulfilling and healthy life.
Well to be fair, most reasonable people are too busy to make tiny homes the focus of their lives. They simply make do with what the market has, whether that be a 700 sq-ft bungalow or a condomonium, and they leave the philosophizing to other people. But if the market offered them a tiny house village, with all the hipster amenities, then it would suddenly be an option for them. It would no longer be a “fringy” thing.
I agree 100%. I think someone or multiple someones will bridge that gap - and do quite well for themselves. If I were to guess, I would say the final iteration of the trend into the relative mainstream will be a bit of a hybridized version of new and old things. But, couldn’t even begin to guess how long the whole process will take. 10 yrs.? 20 yrs? maybe more.
Maybe not that long. Microapartments have taken off in major cities.
The current housing market is intimidating/unwelcoming to a lot of people who’d normally be buying right now. Maybe what real estate needs is a gimmick like tiny houses to get people excited again. Especially since gas prices and employment insecurity are pushing people into cities, rather than away.
There’s also the Airbnb phenomena. People would snatch up those homes just so they can turn them into short-term rental places. A tiny house is perfect for that. This fact might bring out the hotel industry against an intown tiny house village. But seems like you could do something to keep this from happening (like requiring all homeowners to live on the premises).
I just read that Jack London was a strong supporter of Prohibition because he figured it would legislate him out of being a drunk.
That experiment failed, too.
But in my case it worked.
In which case you have my admiration (professional and individual). However, tiny living quarters would not reduce most peoples’ consumer spending. It’s only in small part about “filling vast spaces with something.” People would just buy two beers at a time… nonstop.
I don’t agree. I think the environment has a powerful influence over our behavior. The science of addiction supports this.
Sure, a hoarder will still hoard whether they are in a tiny house or a mansion. But it can take months or years before a mansion-dweller hoarder recognizes they have a problem. And by that time, it can be a serious toxic dump that no one wants to deal with. But it is much easier to recognize mess for what it is in a tiny house. You can’t just push your junk into another room and forget about it. You are forced to pick it up and do something with it, because otherwise you won’t be able to move.
A true hoarder would find living in a tiny house a nightmare and wouldn’t even consider it anyway. But a chronoically disorganized person is not a hoarder. They are unable to recognize mess for what it is due to weaknesses in executive functioning. But having an environment that forces organization can really help them.
I am not a hoarder. I’m just chronically disorganized. When I lived in more spacious dwellings, it was like I couldn’t even see the puddle of junk mail under the mail slot or the stacks of dishes on the kitchen counter because there was always plenty of “white” space to give the appearance of tidiness. I don’t have (as much of) this problem. And it’s not because of any conscious effort on my part. I’m just in a better environment.
But no HOA please! I used to live in Craddock, and it was holy hell - we couldn’t change the color of the house to just anything, there were a limited number of choices, we couldn’t tear down the microscopic made for a model t single car garage or add to it, we couldn’t just put up any random type of fence, it had to be off a specific list of styles …
Lumping together - I could see it work, especially if you offered small ‘victory garden’ plots as well so they could do a little hipster urban gardening. A small community pool and the main office could also have a space for entertaining that residents could rent or borrow if they had the need to have a party [mainly because hosting more than one or 2 other people in a tiny house gets sardine can-y.]
If you look at historic Craddock, it had a ‘town square’ park around a small cluster of businesses with a bandstand and sort of picnic park. You could orient the clusters of tiny houses around a central park and business center with perhaps the community pool. Add stuff like solar power, a recycling center, the victory garden plots it could really appeal to ‘green urbanites’