this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
1039 points (99.3% liked)
Good News Everyone
1729 readers
1 users here now
A place to post good news and prevent doom scrolling!
Rules for now:
- posts must link from a reliable news source
- no reposts
- paywalled articles must be made available
- avoid politics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How are they planning to sustain this long-term?
Surely, someone is paying for the difference. Unless I totally missed it from the article 🫣
These places are tiny at 240 square feet. There's not going to be much $$ tied up in them for material and utility costs can't possibly be that hught because the homes are so compact.
If each home cost $40k, which is probably generous, over 30 years that's $111/mo. Internet is probably a commercial line to the site and then a local network type setup. The real question is how much the land cost.
Rent might not cover everything 100%, but it would be close. It wouldn't surprise me if some money from the locality was involved since people living on the streets isn't free and simply providing housing can be a massive first step to getting people reintegrated back into society.
"Lowest cost for a Canadian tiny home: $80,000 to $150,000" (SOURCE)
Yes, probably less if they are building them all themselves, but $80,000 seems to be the norm for temporary tiny homes. Uxbridge priced tiny homes made from trailer containers at $80,000, too.
I think they could be sustainable as far as electricity (solar) and even water and heating (propane), so that's not a bad thing.
But how is the land being paid for? Taxes? etc.
Every tiny home project I've heard about has these barriers that get in the way. What needs to change so we can build more of these, instead of single, detached homes with massive yards??
We need more of these!
Canada doesn't have the single family zoning problem that is prevalent in the US. Lots of Canadians live in high rise apartments.
This is proby a smaller community though.
I contribute to the OpenStreetMap project, and there are a lot of detached homes here. Some areas have like 20 homes in a space that could house thousands of people. It's pretty disgusting, actually.
We should be building up, and not contribute to sprawl.
But tiny homes are a great solution for keeping land space confined, while still offering functional homes in very little time.
Single family homes and their land should be smaller. How does two people in 2000+ square feet of house make any sense? I can tell you right now, in my ~1400 sq foot house with 2 kids and 2 adults we have two rooms that are largely unused, so I cant imagine the amount of waste in a larger house.
And the lawns! Ever since I measured some standard 1970s era suburbs and saw just how huge those expanses of grass that exist just for grass's sake I can't stop thinking about how rediculous many lot sizes are. 50 feet by 100 feet of grass. No flowers, no gardens. Just pure grass. There's no reason for that much land to be wasted on fucking grass. And then you measure from front door to front door across the street and it's over 150 feet! Because the road and sidewalks are about 60 feet wide for a road with 20 houses on it!