|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Colchester is a haven for manufactured housing in pricey Chittenden County
By Rachel Amster, for the Community News Service
COLCHESTER — Houses in Chittenden County are expensive, but one town is a little more affordable: Colchester. The average house costs about $32,000 less here, $477,000, according to Zillow.
One reason why? Colchester has, by far, the most mobile homes in the county.
Colchester had 764 manufactured homes last year, followed by Milton with 421, according to a recent analysis by Steadman Hill Consulting. South Burlington only had 2.
In Vermont, mobile homes are significantly cheaper than other single family homes, according to the Vermont Housing Finance Agency. The median Vermont mobile home with land sold for $130,000 in 2023, compared to $325,000 for the median detached single family home.
Over the last decade, the price of a mobile home with land has risen far less than the price of a single family home.
“Were it not for the large number of manufactured homes in Colchester, it would not be among the more affordable towns in Chittenden County,” according to Steadman Hill Consulting.
A history of welcoming mobile homes
Cathyann LaRose, Colchester Planning and Zoning Director, said the town has historically protected manufactured homes through town regulations.
“I like to think that we do everything we can to retain them, because it is much easier to retain affordable housing stock than it is to build it,” LaRose said.
Colchester has specific zoning for a Mobile Home Park District. This rule regulates the establishment and development of mobile home parks within residential areas.
The district has special regulations that apply to mobile home parks, but the regulations are more flexible than you may have in a standard sub-division, LaRose said. The district recognizes that mobile homes are often on shared lots and are smaller units. The district also allows for smaller setbacks between manufactured units, according to LaRose.
“The zoning and regulations that apply to mobile homes in Colchester is to give a greater recognition of the needs of manufactured homes and the historic patterns of them,” LaRose said.
Another reason Colchester has so many mobile home parks is because most were built before Act 250, said Josh Hanford, Director of Intergovernmental Relations at Vermont League of Cities and Towns.
Act 250 is Vermont’s land use and development law, which regulates land development to conserve natural and scenic resources. Act 250 reviews are triggered by the size of housing projects, creating barriers for getting affordable housing projects permitted, like mobile home parks.
The Vermont Legislature passed Act 250 in 1970. Most of the mobile home parks in Colchester were established between 1962 and 1972, Hanford said.
“We’re very proud of it”
Several of those parks are now owned by residents, through a Vermont law that is a national model.
Vermont has the highest manufactured homeownership rate in the nation: 71%. That number rises to almost 99% in Vermont’s nonprofit and resident-owned cooperative parks, according to the Vermont Housing Needs Assessment.
The nonprofit Cooperative Development Institute (CDI) has helped convert 16 mobile home parks statewide into resident-owned cooperatives.
After residents have purchased the park, CDI works closely with the board of directors to teach them how to run the mobile home park as a democratic team, said Julia Curry, Co-Director of CDI’s New England Resident-Owned Communities (NEROC) Program.
“Part of the history Vermont has in being a leader is figuring out affordable housing,” Curry said. Cooperative Housing Specialist at CDI. “The steps we are taking are really good. A lot of other states do not have this law.”
Vermont’s approach has drawn national attention, Hanford said.
“The laws that govern Vermont’s mobile home park communities have been copied by a number of states, because it is viewed as one of the better models to provide some level of protection for folks that are fairly vulnerable because they don’t own the land that their homes sit on,” Hanford said.
In the midst of a housing crisis, Curry said interest in manufactured homes is growing.
“The housing crisis we are in is causing people to think about what could work for them, what their priorities are,” Curry said.
And for those people considering manufactured homes, LaRose says Colchester will continue to welcome them.
“We’re very proud of it because housing affordability has always been important through the decades. Now more than ever, access to affordable housing or access to any housing is pretty critical,” LaRose said.
Via Community News Service, a University of Vermont journalism internship
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Housing
Not only are mobile homes a viable solution, they are ‘mobile’. When property taxes get too high, just move elsewhere.
Of course, if mobile homes begin to be an accepted solution, the State will likely regulate them further to maintain its continued property tax revenue stream.
Wasn’t this Madeline Kunin’s idea for housing for Vermonters years ago? Don’t forget to put these in low lying areas.
Mobile homes tend to depreciate in value unlike traditionally constructed houses or modulars – more like vehicles. They are also very inefficient to heat. And the upkeep of the common property in the parks along with utilities that provide potable water, and proper sewage has often been problematic particularly in this state where parks were owned and run by notorious slumlords.
Or…. you can spend a half million dollars to buy a lot and build your own home, so you can pay ten gran a year in property tax. Or you can pay $20,000 a year or more to rent a one bedroom effciency and not own anything.
Everything depreciates in value, except gold and silver. But you can’t eat gold nor live in a bar of silver. Mobile homes can be weatherized and heated along with any structure. Property upkeep, utilitiy access, water and sewer are common to any residence.
And being a notorious slumlord is not restricted to people in trailer parks. After all, arguable, Vermont is a notorious slumlord.
Being a ‘nay sayer’ about everything never achieves anything of value.
you need to get up to speed on what is going on in this housing segment…..
I’ve said this in another comment about solving the housing problem and gave examples in the hurricane destruction in FL & Al Where is everyone? Or someone read my comment and decided it makes sense. I’ve been in these states and know the results. I believe comments are just a waste of finger skin on the keyboard.
OR – comments are helpful in providing pros and cons to decision makers – public and legislators.
Yes, I think mobile homes are an essential piece of the housing problems of Vermont.
I also advocate for small units like mother-in-law apartments that will help provide income to some stretched trying to cover taxes that would allow them to stay in their homesteads and provide some small efficiency units for aging community members, people needing assistance and a bit of oversight.
Act 250 for 40 years had the ruling if two or more mobile homes are on one parcel of land it triggers act 250, this was purposely done to prevent anyone from owning a mobile home. Farmers did this frequently for family members. Attorneys who were directly involved with ACT 250 confirmed this at one of my closings. It was NOT an accident.
If you look at any zoning, in any town, you will find it near impossible to recreate modest homes of this type.
We could have affordable homes in 2 years with no tax payer money, just allow them. Make it zoning friendly.
Is it as good as other real estate, perhaps not from an equity stand point.
It does give owner ship of land.
It does give opportunity to live rent free.
It does give privacy.
They are built way better than many condominiums from the 70′, 80’s and even later.
They are way better than any rent program the state has.
They can build a community.
If you look at Dave Soulia’s article, you’ll find out who is making the money on “affordable housing” aka state subsidized renters and landlord programs.
Our state is bankrupt because of this activity.
H. Jay – Ever taken a cruise through some the thirteen or so mobile home complexes in Pownal by any chance? Bottled water had to be brough in by the state (paid for by guess who?) on numerous occasions because theirs wasn’t potable – and the street drug trade and violent criminal activity was so prevalent – that when an ambulance was called for a medical emergency, the crews were all instructed, no matter what, not to enter the grounds whatsoever until the state police got on site. This is and was Vermont, even 25 years or more ago.
Mobile homes do depreciate, cannot withstand severe storms, and are energy inefficient. They aren’t a long-term solution, IMO nor in the opinion of many G.C.’s.
The decline of societal mores including work ethics and massive drug/alcohol addictions & associated mental health illnesses due, in part, to both of those things are a good part of the problem.
Homes have always been “expensive”. My parents bought a home in 1965 on L.I. for $11,000. They needed and took out a 30-year mortgage and eventually paid it off……….at the end of the 30 years.
Please don’t blame the decline of social values on trailers or trailer parks. Sure, some people, in trailer parks (and in gated communities), are corrupt or otherwise lost souls. But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. A mobile or modular home has its place, especially for those who can’t afford anything else. And having a mobile home doesn’t mean the resident will be corrupt or an otherwise lost soul.
If there is an environment that contributes to corruption and the decline of other social mores, look no further than government subsidized housing, no matter what the type. If there is a correlation indicating a cause, it’s the breakdown in free market principles.
Thank you guys for standing up to the housing snobbery so prevalent in Vermont. People have a stigma against modest homes and incomes, which is quite sad. If you look across some communities and live in a variety of homes across a life span, yes a single family home is the most desirable and perhaps financially astute.
Not everybody can afford them!!!!!! Just because somebody arcane doesn’t t mean everybody can, please!
Ever live in a condominium? Run a condominium associations? It’s rough.
Having experienced, sold lived in, run, if there were an owned park near by I’d be in, in a second.
They are better built than all the condos and properties, commercial included that I have owned and profited from. People would rather have us live in tiny homes that have no value or space???????
Florida has many great communities with wonderful people, living in manufactured “mobile homes”. They don’t stand up to hurricane force gale winds , true, but guess what neither do the the other houses, but the other homes cost more to repair and replace, all of which is done on the tax payer subsidized insurance!!!! If they had to pay their own insurance bill,NOBODY would build expensive homes where they do.
Mobile home are not the problem!!!!!!!!
A mobile home might afford a family to live and thrive on one income, think of how just this one facet would change Vermont families and society.
People need to get up to speed. They are a great solution
Paying off a eleven thousand dollar loan and taking thirty years, how much interest was paid on that loan???? The new manufactured homes are of much better quality. Until you decide that you own the house and land, you will never be free.
VIP 1, The housing debate aside – I’m very sorry to hear of your being a widower.
It seems you are content now, if not happy. I’m happy for you.
Losing a spouse is the deepest loss to go through.
Merry Christmas & a happy, healthy new year. And God bless.
There are many companies building prefab homes now that are affordable (by today’s standards), built with quality materials, and easy to construct on site. “Mobile” homes are a thing of the past.