After reading an article praising the potential of "Tiny Homes" in the June 3 edition of the North Bay's Bohemian, Seth D., an aspiring farmer took to task the lesser known barriers to building tiny homes, in particular how they relate to new farmers just getting started, those for whom the potential of tiny homes could mean the difference between success and failure in an industry that's hard to break let alone thrive within, the incubation of a new generation of local food producers or the gradual outsourcing of agriculture:
"After reading "Small but Mighty" (June 3) I felt compelled to dispel the hype. It seems every other weekend I meet Bay Area transplants, artists, vagabonds and, sadly, young entrepreneurial farmers under the illusion that tiny homes and mobile, modular housing are a viable option.
Sonoma County has extremely narrow stipulations on how these dwellings may be occupied, which utterly excludes those of limited means. Under current conditions, these units will only be additions to pre-existing homes as backyard guest rooms, office spaces or, worse yet, Airbnb rentals.
Many people who grew up in this county and imagined staying dream that they may find a bit of land to live simply on. But a leftover bit of legislation meant to quell the growth of communes in the 1970s prevents those who choose to live small to do so. I feel that it is dishonest to hype this movement as a legitimate solution to housing, to environmental concerns, to simpler lives, and most importantly, as a means for young farmers to occupy and work land.
Many of these issues were not addressed in the article and remain under-addressed whenever the tiny-house movement is written about.
Although the concept is great and the designs exciting, it is the legal constraints that prevent it from actually becoming a reality for those who could truly benefit from the movement."
—Seth D.
Occidental
Sonoma County has extremely narrow stipulations on how these dwellings may be occupied, which utterly excludes those of limited means. Under current conditions, these units will only be additions to pre-existing homes as backyard guest rooms, office spaces or, worse yet, Airbnb rentals.
Many people who grew up in this county and imagined staying dream that they may find a bit of land to live simply on. But a leftover bit of legislation meant to quell the growth of communes in the 1970s prevents those who choose to live small to do so. I feel that it is dishonest to hype this movement as a legitimate solution to housing, to environmental concerns, to simpler lives, and most importantly, as a means for young farmers to occupy and work land.
Many of these issues were not addressed in the article and remain under-addressed whenever the tiny-house movement is written about.
Although the concept is great and the designs exciting, it is the legal constraints that prevent it from actually becoming a reality for those who could truly benefit from the movement."
—Seth D.
Occidental
RSS Feed
