I believe that this lot maybe part of the Leaseway property, this lot is across the street from the old main building. It seems like a couple of businesses have moved into the larger building on the right side of St. Joe. The lot that is where work had begun is on the left.
The guy who developed the tiny house down in REO Town on Elm wants to expand that idea by replacing a small, abandoned trailer park in Eaton Rapids with small homes.
But Brent Forsberg thinks the property itself, situated inside the city and flanked on either side by single-family homes, is the perfect spot for the development of a "pocket neighborhood."
His company, Okemos-based TA Forsberg Inc., was the winning bidder for the property at the county's second foreclosure auction earlier this month, purchasing it for $6,000.
What's planned for the property is expected to cost under $1 million — six to eight small, compact one and two-bedroom homes that offer just 600 to 800-square-feet of space at a sale price of under $100,000.
The price-points are still too high for me. I think this could be a great alternative to actual trailer parks if they are able to get the pricing down to something more reasonable. Either way, I'm interested to see how this concept turns out.
Infill is good but I must say that when I look at these homes I see the types of homes that the rail roads were building and they look like shacks I would expect in a ghost town out west. Maybe it's just the artwork though.
Photos of the house in REO Town were posted back in one of the threads, either the one on REO Town or the general Lansing development thread. Still, a sore sight better than a trailer park or any other kind of ran-down housing, that much I know.
My only real issue is the price. In my mind, the whole point of tiny housing is either that you're paying for location where an average-sized dwelling is too expensive for all put the upper classes, or you're paying to a downscaled lifestyle outside an urban area. It's crazy to me that in many cases they are trying to sell a few hundred square feet of space for the same price they'd try to sell and average-size dwelling for.
I get paying $100,000 for a condo in the middle of downtown area. I don't get paying $100,000 for few hundred square feet in a small town.
Yeah I remember the photos from the other thread. I think the artist here could have done a better job that's all.
The "tiny home" market isn't just for low income. There's a trend now where people want to live a very minimalist lifestyle. I think the price point might work for them. For these to be cheaper the density will need to increase (building vertically).
There is a similar development in Detroit that is doing these really affordable for Wayne State students and other people with special qualifications. That would be a great model to use here for LCC.
I get that it's not just for the low income. My opinion was that it only makes sense to me for low income people. You shouldn't have to pay as much for half a house as you do a full one unless the land values are high. Someone has got to show me where the value is in getting less for more, particularly when there is no other factor to increase value (i.e. higher-end appliances, expensive materials, etc...). I don't see how you have to pay more for minimalist living. Poor people live this existence all the time, so this concept seems like a way to make money off of suckers to me.
I figure that the prices are artificially high because no place has really given them the ability to mass produce these things like they have regular subdivisions, and that if they did, the prices would be more in line with the actual worth of these homes.
BTW, very familiar with the Detroit homes. I grew up not far from where they were built.
Comments
I believe that this lot maybe part of the Leaseway property, this lot is across the street from the old main building. It seems like a couple of businesses have moved into the larger building on the right side of St. Joe. The lot that is where work had begun is on the left.
I believe the development on the south side of St Joe is going to be a warehouse for Ferguson Inc. They currently have a location near REO Town.
That will be good to see a building there.
The guy who developed the tiny house down in REO Town on Elm wants to expand that idea by replacing a small, abandoned trailer park in Eaton Rapids with small homes.
The price-points are still too high for me. I think this could be a great alternative to actual trailer parks if they are able to get the pricing down to something more reasonable. Either way, I'm interested to see how this concept turns out.
Photos of the house in REO Town were posted back in one of the threads, either the one on REO Town or the general Lansing development thread. Still, a sore sight better than a trailer park or any other kind of ran-down housing, that much I know.
My only real issue is the price. In my mind, the whole point of tiny housing is either that you're paying for location where an average-sized dwelling is too expensive for all put the upper classes, or you're paying to a downscaled lifestyle outside an urban area. It's crazy to me that in many cases they are trying to sell a few hundred square feet of space for the same price they'd try to sell and average-size dwelling for.
I get paying $100,000 for a condo in the middle of downtown area. I don't get paying $100,000 for few hundred square feet in a small town.
The "tiny home" market isn't just for low income. There's a trend now where people want to live a very minimalist lifestyle. I think the price point might work for them. For these to be cheaper the density will need to increase (building vertically).
I get that it's not just for the low income. My opinion was that it only makes sense to me for low income people. You shouldn't have to pay as much for half a house as you do a full one unless the land values are high. Someone has got to show me where the value is in getting less for more, particularly when there is no other factor to increase value (i.e. higher-end appliances, expensive materials, etc...). I don't see how you have to pay more for minimalist living. Poor people live this existence all the time, so this concept seems like a way to make money off of suckers to me.
I figure that the prices are artificially high because no place has really given them the ability to mass produce these things like they have regular subdivisions, and that if they did, the prices would be more in line with the actual worth of these homes.
BTW, very familiar with the Detroit homes. I grew up not far from where they were built.