The Manufactured Housing Forums

Does anyone have any information on Building Codes for California? I have looked at the library to no avail. My husband and I are in California and would like to purchase a manufactured home to put on our land. But I keep seeing these International Residential Code (IRC), Uniforma Building Code (UBC) and HUD code. What is the difference? One website that sells modular homes stated that they use IRC and UBC codes and that they were better than manufactured homes because they did not go by the HUD code and that the other codes were a higher standard. Then one website that sells both Modulars and MH states that no one code is better than the other.

Where can I find more information on the actual codes? Anyone with any experience? We have 3 small children and are tired of renting, buying a MH seems to be the most economical choice, however I would like to know if they are built to certain standards.

Thank you in advance for any and all information you can give us!!!

Kris

You can find the proper code requirements in the local governments building office.

For great information on factory built homes search these forums and visit the book store here and invest in one of the fine books on the industry...They will define the terms for you and give you good idea about the info you will want to know to be sure some salesperson is being honest with you....

The HUD code is an extensive building code administered by HUD through contractors to on site inspection of home and to handle code violation complaints..Most often this is done by a state agency of government....In CA this function is handled by this department..

http://www.hcd.ca.gov/codes/ol/ombpg-menu.html

Modular Homes are built to the same codes as local builders have to live with...This is usually also administered by a state agency of government...Every state has different sets of rules....Construction inspections are handled by that agency and the local building inspector....Most states do not have a separate enforcement agency to help with consumer problems as the HUD code requires..This can make for far stickier problem solving after the home is built..

Never do you want a minimum code home....Above code HUD code homes can be far better than mode local code home and usually at lower cost per sq foot..More House for your money..

The books in the book store here will emphasize all your satisfaction will be related to the individual builder or dealer and these books will help you chose one to trust with your money....

You have the right idea..right now all you are doing is building the retirement of your landlord...I am sure he/she appreciate your gift every month...Good Luck..

Try this websitie http://www.huduser.org/rbc/search/rbcde ... ?DocId=869 for impartial comparisons of codes. HUD codes are not proscriptive meaning that builders are free to come up with engineering solutions that produce the required effect as long as they can prove through destructive testing and/or engineering analysis that it works. Other building codes are proscriptive meaning that they proscribe exactly what materials and what thickness is required to build something, a very inefficient method. If you read some of the studies archived at HUDUSER.ORG you will find that whichever code is used has virtually no effect on the homeowner other than cost. Also, HUD codes have to demonstrate a cost value effect to the home owner whereas other codes do not. In my opinion, this is important to the public as far as cost of housing. For instance, if every new single family dwelling were required to have fire sprinklers installed is this what the public wants or should spend money on. Say there were 2,000,000 site built homes permitted last year and 190,000 HUD code homes for a total of 2,190,000 homes that conservatively cost 5,000 dollars to fire sprinkler (not include site improvements required to provide required storage,fire flow and pressure) for a total cost of $10,949,999,986 nation wide. Last year there were about 3,100 deaths caused by fire. This means that if we required fire sprinklers in every new home it would have cost $3,532,258.06 per death. Is this the most cost effective way to improve safety in the home? Were these deaths totally preventable by fire sprinklers? (Fire sprinklers only go off at high heat, someone falling asleep smoking I imagine would be overcome by fumes before the sprinklers went off) HUD has done some preliminary research on this but more needs to be done. If you just look at the time required to complete a construction project, it has increased from 4.4 months in the mid seventies to nearly 8 months or more according to the US Census Bureau.

WOW great answer Ray..This report should be required reading for every local elected official and all planners....I have bookmarked this web site for future reference...

Please stop by here often...

Don't get me started. I have been building for 30 years and switched to using manufactured homes about 9 years ago to help lessen the cost, time and interference from local planning departments. It makes me sick to see engineering for engineering's sake, and regulation for every conceivable issue without a check for common sense. Why do you think we have so many building codes??? Vested interests other than the consumer is why. And this goes on at every level.

You seem to be a very good businessman...You jumped into the manufactured home business at the start of the worse industry depression in its history...The fact that you have been in the business these last nine years speaks loud....Extensive building codes and regulations seem to be a power trip for the local government...Another way to justify high fees....Of course we all have to be saved from being dumb and unaware....Uncle building inspector will look out for us...

Thank you all for your responses. I had visited the Planning Department here in our county and the fees are outrageious for a site built home! I was told that it could be almost 50k just to subdivide our land. Now I don't know if this is true but if it is , we don't have it. Then in order to get a site built home the permits were higher than the manufactured home fees.

But I still don't know why, it was more extensive for site built homes for some reason.
Ray (or anyone out there with experience) in your honest opinion and with all your years of experience, which code seems to work the best?

As Ray said so well....Manufactured homes have much less local regulation...So much so he gave up what must have been a 3 decade old successful business to take advantage of the less costly permits and local regulations..in the manufactured home business.

Permit fees for manufactured homes should be less since most of the inspection process is done at the plant by a federal contract inspector...This cost is built into the price of the home..The local inspector only looks at the foundation and utility hook ups...Far less work should be far less fees........Subdivision costs are high everywhere....This is a local planning department set of rules that make it costly..It probably has nothing to do with what kind of home you put on the property..

Every thing seems to be stupid high in CA...This is your cost of living in paradise..

Permit fees are higher for site built homes because there is more review and inspections required. Most CA counties have a set fee for manufactured home plan reviews. Also, they have a set sq.ft. price that they allot for site built or manufactured homes that they base their fees on and the cost basis of the manufactured home is less. Also, property taxes will be based on the invoice of the home purchase rather than a subjective appraisal by the county assessor so your taxes will be less. As far as subdividing, it can be a costly and time consuming process- especially if you are doing more than 4 parcels. You might consider a joint venture with a developer/ builder where your investment is the land and the developer will pay the costs to subdivide and develop. This way you can realize the best return. It is very costly for developers to carry the cost of the land while pouring money into the subdivision process. I have done this before and it worked out well. Caveat- You must know and trust the developer/ builder and have a good contract that protects both parties.

One scenario is to go ahead and put one home on the property, designed and placed in such a way that it works into the future subdivision plan, then live on the property while subdividing. Depending on your equity, you may be able to build, then refinance taking out enough equity to pay for the subdivision yourself. Usually, there is a land use attorney familiar with your county that can give you some advice and realistic expectations of what to expect as far as time and expense to subdivide. Good luck.