Cities have long been skeptical of manufactured housing communities. The reasons are usually the same:
1. Aesthetics: They’re not viewed as “attractive” compared to newly built housing.
2. Tax revenue: They generate far less property tax than dense multifamily or commercial development.
3. Age and complexity: Many communities predate modern zoning codes, making enforcement — especially around density — difficult for city staff.
But here’s what that means for the rest of us:
1. Manufactured home communities may not be flashy, but they provide stable, long-term housing for thousands of low-income families who have few alternatives.
2. Lower tax revenue often reflects a deeper truth: these communities prioritize affordability over revenue extraction, which is exactly what our housing system needs more of.
3. Because many parks operate under older (and sometimes more flexible) zoning frameworks, responsible operators can improve, expand, and preserve these communities in ways that simply aren’t possible with other housing types.
Manufactured housing remains one of the most effective — and overlooked — tools for creating durable, unsubsidized affordable housing.
Rather than dismissing these communities because they don’t maximize tax revenue, we should focus on protecting and strengthening them for the families who depend on them. Cities do not need more revenue as much as they need more homes people can actually afford.