Tiny Houses Aren't the Solution

Dylan Matthews argues the case against tiny houses by debunking their primary appeal: that tiny houses are affordable. That "premise is a fantasy," according to Matthews, who himself lives in a 300-square-foot apartment.

The premise is a fantasy, according to Matthews, because  

It ignores the real reason that housing is unaffordable — at least in the coastal urban centers where fantasies of tiny housing are most potent. The problem, simply put, is that 1) land in cities where you'd want to live is expensive and 2) many cities don't let developers use that land efficiently.

Given those two constraints, tiny houses have yet to become a viable presence in the housing market, argues Matthews. The flip side of Matthew's argument also has implications for the rest of the existing housing market in desirable cities like San Francisco, New York, and Washington, D.C.:

You're not paying for your overlarge apartments. No one in these cities is overwhelmed by how gigantic all their housing options are.

Construction is the cheap part. Land is the expensive part.

The article includes a detailed survey of articles from additional sources to inform the article.