Davie attempts to save threatened mobile home parks

its the owners land, if they want to sell then let them sell

Mobile home parks are a hybrid, the mobile home owner owns the home and the park owner owns the land. When your apartment lease is up you have a bad day moving the couch, but you can take everything you own with you.

When you buy into a mobile home park you are required to improve the park owner's land with landscaping, driveway, patio, carport, florida room, etc. Most older homes cannot be moved without being upgraded to the current building code at the new location which is virtually impossible. The end result is a major loss of housing investment for the mobile home owner when a park closes.

Under current law (s723) mobile home owners are paid a minimun of ...

$1,375. to abandon a single wide.
$2,750. to abandon a double wide.
$3,000. toward moving a single wide.
$6,000. toward moving a double wide.

Park owners and developers often add $3,000. to $4,000. to these amounts to get people moving, breaking up organized resistance and attempts to buy the park. Once enough people are gone it becomes moot to sue to save the park.

The simple solution is to make the law for closing mobile home parks the same as the eminent domain law for closing mobile home parks which is to require the payment of fair market value for the homes and improvements. Not only would this be fair, it would eliminate the fraud of park owners selling homes right down to the day they announce the park is closing like Aztec MHP (Uniprop) in Margate.

Resources for people in closing parks at corallakemhp dot com

Oh, please. The only reason people are now trying to "save" mobile home parks is because the real estate market has gone belly-up. If people were still making money on real estate, these people would be completely out of luck.

It is a sad day in your life when a Mobile Home Park closes. You may not be TRAILER TRASH, but you are a real person, who is living on a small salary and/or a fixed income or like living in a mobile home. People in mobile homes are working class people, who deal with a society who must not be able to understand how it affects your life when they close a mobile home park and you've lost your investment and are faced with homelessness, since there is not any affordable housing left in the tri-county area. If you could for one minute, put yourself in their shoes and feel their dispair and hopelessness, you could feel the pain that a single mom or dad, or a family with a low income, or someone like my mother, or my sister or my grandmother, or my daughter and her family or my son, or my grandchildren are effected. Not everyone in South Florida can afford a CBS home, taxes and insurance costs today. But we don't have anything bad to say about all the very poor people who are getting foreclosed on today, either. They are feeling exactly some of the same feeling as mobile home residents. Land owners of the mobile home parks, could get the value of the property if they sold the lots, and held the mortgage to the residents, who reside there and it would be a win/win answer for all. They would make the dollar value for the land plus alot of interest, too. Developers and more denisty will bring more people to a community, who will use up our resources such as more kids in our schools, more people on our roads, and using up the drinking water. I could go on for hours, but please be understanding and caring to anyone who losses their home or place to live for any reason it happens.

Robert Perkis wrote:

Mobile home parks are a hybrid, the mobile home owner owns the home and the park owner owns the land. When your apartment lease is up you have a bad day moving the couch, but you can take everything you own with you.
When you buy into a mobile home park you are required to improve the park owner's land with landscaping, driveway, patio, carport, florida room, etc. Most older homes cannot be moved without being upgraded to the current building code at the new location which is virtually impossible. The end result is a major loss of housing investment for the mobile home owner when a park closes.
Under current law (s723) mobile home owners are paid a minimun of ...
$1,375. to abandon a single wide.
$2,750. to abandon a double wide.
$3,000. toward moving a single wide.
$6,000. toward moving a double wide.
Park owners and developers often add $3,000. to $4,000. to these amounts to get people moving, breaking up organized resistance and attempts to buy the park. Once enough people are gone it becomes moot to sue to save the park.
The simple solution is to make the law for closing mobile home parks the same as the eminent domain law for closing mobile home parks which is to require the payment of fair market value for the homes and improvements. Not only would this be fair, it would eliminate the fraud of park owners selling homes right down to the day they announce the park is closing like Aztec MHP (Uniprop) in Margate.
Resources for people in closing parks at corallakemhp dot com

You didn't quite touch all the bases.
The park I bought into is a co-op, incorporated under CH. 617FAC, and operating under both 719FAC & 723FAC; WE own the park. The home owners got together and purchased the land in order to provide stability.

PC goes just so far. While i too have compasion for those who will have difficulty moving on, I would imagine a new home or business, contributing more to the local economy, tax base would be more intereseting for the town and majority of residents, no? Is it really so nice to be known as the trailer park capital?

Poor people will just have to do what poor people have always done. Time to move on. The only other alternative is to find several roommates; the cost of rents are going down. Personally, I would not be sad to see trailers disappear in South Florida. They are not safe in a hurricane.

Felix wrote:

Will that mean the end of trailer trash?

???WHY??? Do you live in a trailer??

all mobile homes should be removed..they give no protection during storms and cost a fortune to air condition during the summer

right now new homes are a burden.people are and will abandon them and get foreclosed.there is no need for new housing now.the houses will deterioate and the grass will grow into weeds,just like here in cape coral.stop the greed developers from getting there way and sqeezing as many houses they can.have you seen new houses today?small rooms and no storage.just enough room to leagally turn around and do a wash in your breakfest room.

PC here we go wrote:

PC goes just so far. While i too have compasion for those who will have difficulty moving on, I would imagine a new home or business, contributing more to the local economy, tax base would be more intereseting for the town and majority of residents, no? Is it really so nice to be known as the trailer park capital?

This does not come out of the blue. Mobile home parks have been an endangered species for decades.
We started our marriage from a 12x40 in 1970. Even then we knew then that it was silly to own a depreciating asset set on land where rents are forever escalating.
No municipality wants a mobile home park when better housing brings more revenue -- and frankly a more affluent class of people.
Get real, and realize that mobile homes aren't suitable for Florida unless they are truly mobil and can move when developers descend.

I don't know what someone expects for "fair market value" on a home they admit is too old to try and even relocate. A mobile home is a depreciating asset just like a car, at some point you have to admit your 15 year old car is nothing but a $500 junker.

That said though, I really don't understand the idea of a moratorium. It just seems like a little ploy to appear to feel sorry for mobile home residents all the while counting increased revenue when the park disappears.

What is the point of zoning laws, if they can constantly be changed without a justifiable reason? Can't the council just as easily say "we will not change zoning on the current mobile home parks we have"?

Look at the problem Davie gave Walmart on a piece of land that was correctly zoned for Walmart.

I have been in this situation. I owned a mobile home in one of the parks that closed in Dania. Two parks were right next to each other, owned by the same company - when they sold the land, they evicted over 1000 people.One of the people was a 101 yr old blind woman who had lived there for 45 yrs - where was she to go?? Another was a woman who had, 7 mos earlier, bought a trailer - she was 8 mos pregnant at the time of eviction. These people, and 98% of the rest were good people. It was like a small diverse community that all got along. Some of those trailers were nicer than many of the CBS homes I have seen.
Lets get to the real meat and bones though. Many of these people are lower income - due to disability, single parent, etc.. Where is it that you think they will go? Out on the street and into the shelters is where. Nobody, especially people with low income can afford to purchase a home these days. If they are evicted, they will become more of a drain on this community.
These are these peoples homes - do you know that if you are in a mobile home that is financed, when a park is closed, and the home cannot, due to age or whatever, be moved, you have to hand over a clear title to the new owners of the land - this means that you would have 6 mos from the time of the notice of eviction to pay the note in full - just so you can then turn it over to the developers.
Normally the city will look at nothing but the inhanced revenue that they will get as a result of development, and don't care about the people they displace. That is sooo sad, because those people are the ones that built the community in the first place. Do you think that people want to move to Dania, or Davie because it is overdeveloped??? NO - they want to move there because it is underdeveloped in relation to the whole world around it. It is a simpler place that reminds people of a simpler time. Look around at all of the other cities in the area - are those places where you want to live and raise your children?
Another problem I have with the whole concept is, how is it affordable housing that will be built, when nobody can afford to live there? They build these condos or townhouses and charge $350-400K for each of them and call that affordable. Why do you think so many people are beginning to move out? Because they can't afford to live here the way it is anymore.
Open your eyes and shut your mouth and maybe you will see that if all the people who can't afford anything but their mobile home leave, there will be nobody left to serve you, or to keep the community going. They ARE the concrete this state is built on.

Felix wrote:

Will that mean the end of trailer trash?

Not at all. They will be moving to my apartments.

Been there wrote:

I have been in this situation. I owned a mobile home in one of the parks that closed in Dania. Two parks were right next to each other, owned by the same company - when they sold the land, they evicted over 1000 people.One of the people was a 101 yr old blind woman who had lived there for 45 yrs - where was she to go?? Another was a woman who had, 7 mos earlier, bought a trailer - she was 8 mos pregnant at the time of eviction. These people, and 98% of the rest were good people. It was like a small diverse community that all got along. Some of those trailers were nicer than many of the CBS homes I have seen.
Lets get to the real meat and bones though. Many of these people are lower income - due to disability, single parent, etc.. Where is it that you think they will go? Out on the street and into the shelters is where. Nobody, especially people with low income can afford to purchase a home these days. If they are evicted, they will become more of a drain on this community.
These are these peoples homes - do you know that if you are in a mobile home that is financed, when a park is closed, and the home cannot, due to age or whatever, be moved, you have to hand over a clear title to the new owners of the land - this means that you would have 6 mos from the time of the notice of eviction to pay the note in full - just so you can then turn it over to the developers.
Normally the city will look at nothing but the inhanced revenue that they will get as a result of development, and don't care about the people they displace. That is sooo sad, because those people are the ones that built the community in the first place. Do you think that people want to move to Dania, or Davie because it is overdeveloped??? NO - they want to move there because it is underdeveloped in relation to the whole world around it. It is a simpler place that reminds people of a simpler time. Look around at all of the other cities in the area - are those places where you want to live and raise your children?
Another problem I have with the whole concept is, how is it affordable housing that will be built, when nobody can afford to live there? They build these condos or townhouses and charge $350-400K for each of them and call that affordable. Why do you think so many people are beginning to move out? Because they can't afford to live here the way it is anymore.
Open your eyes and shut your mouth and maybe you will see that if all the people who can't afford anything but their mobile home leave, there will be nobody left to serve you, or to keep the community going. They ARE the concrete this state is built on.

Do you need a 1 or 2 bedroom in Hollywood or Ft. Lauderdale?

Robert Perkis wrote:

Mobile home parks are a hybrid, the mobile home owner owns the home and the park owner owns the land. When your apartment lease is up you have a bad day moving the couch, but you can take everything you own with you.
When you buy into a mobile home park you are required to improve the park owner's land with landscaping, driveway, patio, carport, florida room, etc. Most older homes cannot be moved without being upgraded to the current building code at the new location which is virtually impossible. The end result is a major loss of housing investment for the mobile home owner when a park closes.
Under current law (s723) mobile home owners are paid a minimun of ...
$1,375. to abandon a single wide.
$2,750. to abandon a double wide.
$3,000. toward moving a single wide.
$6,000. toward moving a double wide.
Park owners and developers often add $3,000. to $4,000. to these amounts to get people moving, breaking up organized resistance and attempts to buy the park. Once enough people are gone it becomes moot to sue to save the park.
The simple solution is to make the law for closing mobile home parks the same as the eminent domain law for closing mobile home parks which is to require the payment of fair market value for the homes and improvements. Not only would this be fair, it would eliminate the fraud of park owners selling homes right down to the day they announce the park is closing like Aztec MHP (Uniprop) in Margate.
Resources for people in closing parks at corallakemhp dot com

Trailer park residents used their free will to choose to live in a trailer and rent the land. The fact that trailer owners sink a lot of money into an obviously poor investment should not force the taxpayers or the owners of the parks to pay them off for their poor choices. Wake up and figure out that cheap living in "Paradise", ended long ago.

frank wrote:

all mobile homes should be removed..they give no protection during storms and cost a fortune to air condition during the summer

The newer models have a much higher "R" factor rating and are also rated for 150mph winds.

eventually closing all the trailer parks is going to be devestating to jerry springer.
where will he get all the people appearing on his show if the parks r closed? what a tragedy for american tv.

SERIOUSLY--its a shame that another piece of "americana" is going away. i'm not a big fan of trailer parks but it is home to people--no matter their income,or lack there-of.
its home for people who, generally speaking, cant afford the high prices of housing-these days. its also a community for people living their.
whether the conditions and the people living in some trailer
parks r trash or ok--its still wrong for cities to let the sell off of the land these parks r on. let the trailer park people and their trailers live on in their onclaves--but make city ordinances that require these parks to be cleaned up and kept clean.
the developers r building on every piece of land they can get their GRUBBY HANDS on and ruining our cities all over america. leave some GREENERY w/ trees and grass in this country--not a mini-manhattan in every city all over america.

Felix wrote:

Will that mean the end of trailer trash?

I previously rented an apt. for $1200+ per mo. and now pay only $600 per mo. and have more space.
With four sources of income, I now bank 2.5 of those sources. That means that I probably bank more in a week than you earn in that same week. You look like low income trash to me.

just because, somebody who owns the land got into the re development game later...does not mean the city..has a right to tread on the federal governments bill of rights!..I guess the davie clown council does not know they do not have god like powers! unless they want to do something harmful to the environment why should the owners be held hostage by the poltics of liberals??? maybe the council members can have on or two trailers relocated onto their property<squeezed in between their house and neighbors house> to clear the land of these worthless rusted out meth labs so the OWNER of the land could do what is her right to do and sale it! new buildings would increase property taxes which all the bloated city and county governments are whining about everyday and on a whole will bring up the quality of the people living there! yes, it my not be politically correct but it is so so true!