Does California have a mobile home shortage?


California has 517,173 mobile homes, just 3.7 percent of the state’s housing supply. (File photo)

By JONATHAN LANSNER | Southern California News Group Columnist
PUBLISHED: June 11, 2018 at 7:48 am | UPDATED: June 11, 2018 at 7:48 am


Bet you didn’t know California has 517,173 mobile homes.

While I was reviewing Census Bureau data on housing, a curious data point popped up: Only three states had more mobile homes than California. But as the nation’s most populous state, it’s another affordable-housing metric where California trails the pack: pre-fabricated homes are a tiny share of our residential-living supply — 3.7 percent vs. 6.6 percent in the rest of the nation.

Look, I know mobile homes are not for everybody and have a nasty stigma that is sometimes deserved. But when the state’s having a serious rethinking of its housing policies — actions to come eventually, hopefully — shouldn’t everything be on the table?

You may be ready to tell me every reason why mobile homes wouldn’t work in California — where even luxury-home projects run into resistance. But please acknowledge how much these homes help prune the cost of living elsewhere.


Start with construction costs: The typical new “manufactured home” sold in the U.S. between 2007 and 2015 was 1,500 square feet and went for $64,000.

Building the average new, single-family home — minus the land price — cost $230,598 for 2,556 square feet.
Mobile homes, with their eye-catching price tags, serve as budget-friendly competition for both lower-price ownership options as well as apartments.

I learned from my trusty spreadsheet, filled with 2012-2016 census data, about the costing-cutting magic of manufactured housing. Just look at economic competitors for California, the three states with more mobile homes.

Florida is the U.S. leader with 830,351 mobile homes.

That’s 9.1 percent of its housing supply and the 16th highest share nationally. It’s a good bet mobile homes help put Florida’s monthly housing costs 32 percent below California, according to Census data.

Wonder why the median home value of a Florida home is $166,800 vs. California’s is $409,300? (That’s the value of all homes, not those that sold.) Or why 65 percent of Floridians are homeowners vs. 54 percent in California?

No. 2 is Texas with 762,848 mobile homes or 7.3 percent of its housing supply — No. 23 nationally. It’s got housing costs 35 percent below California; a typical home valued at $142,700; and 62 percent ownership.

Then there’s North Carolina with 590,302 mobile homes. That’s 13.3 percent of its housing supply — No. 7 nationally; housing costs 42 percent below California; a typical home worth $157,100; and 65 percent ownership.

If that’s not enough proof of how mobile homes cut housing costs in a region, look at what I found when I looked at all the states ranked from highest monthly housing costs to lowest.

In the 17 most-affordable states, mobile homes were 10.6 percent of housing supply — more than triple the 3.1 percent in the 17 priciest states (that includes California, ranked third-most costly).

In those low-cost states, monthly housing costs were an average 48 percent lower than California — yes, half. And ownership in these housing bargains run at 67.5 percent vs. 59.7 percent in the priciest states.

Yes, California would need 400,000 more mobile homes just to have an average share of these affordable options. That seems an impractical goal.But nobody brags about any state’s share of mobile homes. In fact, it seems to be a little dirty secret when you look at the nation’s most “affordable” places to live.

Still, if California is serious about driving housing costs down — and ownership opportunities up — tough choices must be made. Novel thinking about far smaller homes in various formats should be on the table.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/...home-shortage/