|
?:reviewBody
|
-
In early April 2016 a number of blogs and recreational vehicle enthusiast sites began reporting that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was moving to make popular tiny houses and recreational vehicle (RV) living illegal under a sweeping new law. Due to the popularity of tiny homes, the rumor caused a bit of consternation on social media sites among a number of the dwellings' fans. One of the most shared versions of this rumor was published by a web site called Activist Post on 31 March 2016: After quoting the purported HUD law in question, the post concluded by stating that if this law is passed, living in a tiny house or an RV may become illegal in April [2016]. A similar blog entry posted by Don't Comply held that the purported tiny house ban was one of the latest attempts by the government to interrupt citizens' abilities to become more self-sufficient or take up residence off-grid: Often, the circulating blog posts used malleable language such as we believe in warning readers that tiny houses were about to be regulated out of existence: Although many panicked pieces quoted the HUD policy in question, few explained what it was or how it might affect owners or future builders of tiny houses. These items referenced a pending law or claimed tiny houses would soon be outlawed, leading many readers to infer that whatever HUD was up to, it would result in an actual law rendering both existing and in-development tiny homes illegal (and leaving their residents homeless). However, links to the HUD web site led to remarkably benign language regarding the proposed rule: The HUD summary went on to explain what changes to existing rules were being proposed by that agency, describing what appeared to be a need created by the increasing number of dwellings that fall outside the existing recreational vehicle (RV), manufactured home, and standard house classifications: The wording of that passage suggested the proposal targeted structures that were atypical for permanent dwellings (such as tiny houses) to ensure they were built to general housing standards governing dwellings used for year-round living. Units bearing modifications considered atypical for RVs and other recreational use units would be specifically marked as not suitable for primary residence and subject to HUD's RV standards (or reclassified). We contacted a local Chief Building inspector to parse the proposed regulation and determine whether the rule as stated would result in any sort of ban. He indicated that the proposal appeared to pertain solely to the classification of structures (even tiny ones) marketed as year-round residences, to ensure that those dwellings complied with building codes and the structures didn't present a safety hazard to occupants. He added that a different set of rules applies to RVs, but that those temporary and mobile dwellings are similarly regulated for safety. The web site Tiny House Build espoused an unperturbed viewpoint in an article about the pending rule change, holding that the intent of the tiny house movement included acceptance of such dwellings as code-compliant permanent residences: The writer of the article (presumably a tiny house enthusiast) surmised that [t]he reality is ... we are discussing the wrong topic: recreational vehicles (RVs), adding that tiny housers should not be concerned because our goal is to live in our tiny houses permanently, not to certify them as RVs [which is] what HUD's recent proposal aims to clarify. He also posited that it was counterproductive to refer to [tiny] homes as 'tiny house RVs' because that implies temporary housing, not a permanent residence, opining that tiny homeowners would be better off work[ing] within an existing residential code ... to gain code approvals and legal, PERMANENT residential status. Similarly unbothered by the proposal was the Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA), which issued a joint statement alongside other industry groups on 11 February 2016. Like the tiny house expert, the RV trade groups welcomed the proposal as both beneficial to and long-desired by the RV industry. Stating that this proposed rule provides a critical solution to the regulatory uncertainty that has plagued RV manufacturers, dealers and campgrounds for decades, RVIA maintained that [w]ithout it, the entire RV lifestyle could be regulated out of existence: Yet another skeptical perspective came from former lawyer and accountant Howard Payne of RVDreams. Payne stated that portions of the law causing concern had existed for more than 30 years: In short, while a number of confused commenters flooded HUD's proposal page based on inaccurate rumors, the proposed rules were seen as a net positive by tiny home experts, RV enthusiasts, RV trade groups, and anyone deeply involved with full-time RVing or tiny house living. A handful of blogs broadly misinterpreted the proposed rule changes as HUD outlawing tiny homes, despite the fact HUD doesn't possess the authority to pass such laws. The proposed rule rumored to be a tiny house ban was in fact simply a clarification of classifications for RVs and similar dwellings and in no way banned or criminalized tiny home ownership or building.
(en)
|
![[This page as RDF]](http://data.gesis.org/claimskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}