[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
FAIRBANK. RTH OROUGH B0 "76 s, A 99707 IMPACT INFORMATION CENTER - SPECIAL REPORT NO. 4 September 1976 MOBILE HOME LIVING IN FAIRBANKS by - Sue Fison Table of Contents Introduction Page I Who Lives in Mobile Homes in Fairbanks and Why did They Choose Mobile Home Living? Page 4 What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of Mobile Home Living in Fairbanks? Page 8 Choosing a Mobile Home Location Page 14 Mobile Home Parks Page 22 The Cost of Mobile Home Living Page 29 Mcbile Homes as Company Provided Housing Page 33 Design, Construction and Safety of Mobile Homes Page 38 The Future of Mobile Home Living in Fairbanks Page 45 Appendix and Acknowledgements Page 49 BOROUGH MAYOR * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NEW PHONE & LOCATION Mailing Address: John A. Carlson 520 Fifth Avenue (formerly* Box 1267 IMPACT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Fairbanks Medical and Fairbanks, Alaska Surgical Clinic) Larry Carpenter NOTE: The Impact Advisory David Crockett 452-4761 Committee meets regularly Sue Gamache * * * * * * * * * * on the third Wednesday of Leslye Korvola IMPACT INFORMATION CENTER every month at 7:30 p.m. Charles Parr in the basement conference James C. Thomas Sue Fison, Information room of the Borough's new Jeanne Wilson Officer office. Peorge Wise, Chairperson Cindy Quisenberry, !,A7@9 9 7 9ail Younker Information Asst. The public is invited to attend and participate. The Impact Information Center Report is published on the third Wednesday each month by the Fairbanks North Star Borough, P.O. BoK 1267, Fairbanks,Alaska 99707. Application to mail at controlled circulation rates is pending at Fairbanks, Alaska. INTRODUCTION In April 1974, just prior to the advent of pipeline construction there were 2,237 mobile homes in the Fairbanks North Star Borough comprising about 18% of the area's housing units. Since that time Borough tax records indicate that 1,245 additional mobile homes have been brought into the Fairbanks area, an increase of 56% in a little more than two years. At present, mobile homes account for 23% of the estimated 15,200 housing units in the Borough. About half of the housing units which have been added to the Fairbanks area during the pipeline period have been mobile homes. The Impact Center's survey found that mobile homes in Fairbanks average 3.2 persons per household. On the basis of this statistic, the Impact Center estimated that there are 11,142 mobile home residents in Fairbanks. The purpose of this special report is to examine the role that mobile homes have played in meeting the community's housing needs during the pipeline boom. Why did people choose mobile homes over other types of housing in increasing numbers? Are mobile home residents primarily newcomers and pipeline workers? What do mobile home residents see as the advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living? The primary source of informa'tion for this report was a nu;-stionnaire mailed to more than 90% of the Borough's 3,482 mobile home households. The mailing list for this survey was derived from the Borough's tax rolls. Approximately 21% of those-who received the questionnairc returned it to the Impact Information Center. See the Appendix for a copy of the cover letter, questionnaire and a summary of the methodology used to determine the response rate. Mail back questionnaires are commonly subject to bias because there may be factors which will cause some segments of the population being surveyed to return the questionnaires more frequently than others. In a survey of landlords and tenants who were involved in cases with the Emergency Rent Review.Board, for example, the Impact Center found that those who won cases responded more frequently-than those who lost. Although the overall return rate for themobIle home survey was 21%, the response rates.from different segments of the mobile home population varied widely. The rate of return (percentage of question- naires answered of those mailed out and deliverable as addressed) was 26% for mobile home park reside@nts_, 16% for mobile home residents, on their own land, and 10% for mobile home residents on land owned by another person, but not in a park. It may be that mobile home residents situated on their owr land view themselves more as homeowners than mobile home residents. There were also different response rates from some of the parks. Response rates tended to be higher from those parks which have been expanded or established during the pipeline ,period. In analysis of the survey, the report will attempt to make the reader aware of the effect of such biases on the results. Mobi le Homes & Other Housing Fairbanks 1974-1976 Apt. Units, Total Condominiums % of Mobile % of Housing Year & Houses Total Units Homesi Total Units Units 1974 10,398 82% 2,237. 18% 12,635 2 1975 11,004 79% 2,896 21% 13,9002 1976 11,718 77% 3,482 23% New Fairbanks Housing Units Size of Mobile Home-Households 1974-1976 of People % of In Mobile Home Household Mobile Homes 1 8% (1,245 new units) 2 30% 49% 3 21% 4 22% 5 13% New Apt. Units, ResidenceJ 6 4% 7 or more 2% and Condominiums (1,320 new units) 531 households in sample 51% Average Number of Persons Per Household 3 All Fairbanks Households 2.9 persons/ Estimated Number of Fairbanks household Mobile Homes 3.2 persons/household Residents in Mobile Homes 3,482 mobile homes X 3.2 persons/ household 11,142 persons Estimates-made by Fairbanks North Star Borough, Assessing Office. 2The @975 est imate was made by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development in Housing and Urban Development Report, Fairbanks, Alaska as of_April 1, 1975. The 1974 estimate: 13,900 606 new residences 659 mobile homes 12,635. 3John Kruse,.U of A, July 1976. S ,its) 2 The mobile home residents who responded to the questionnaire were asked, but not required, to include their name and address so that they could be mailed a copy of the report. Nearly two-thirds of those who returned questionnaires included this informatiQn. ..In addition to the mobile home resident survey, the Impact Center staff surveyed mobile home park owners and managers, mobile home dealers, banks, and credit unions. Government officials, appraisers, fire protection personnel and other resource persons were consulted on various aspects of mobile home living. Persons with comments, suggestions, or corrections regarding this report are encouraged to contact the Impact Information Center. WHO LIVES IN MOBILE HOMES IN FAIRBANKS AND WHY DID THEY CHOOSE MOBILE HOME LIVING? In response to the question, "Why did you decide to live in a mobile home in Fairbanks?", 58% of those surveyed by the Impact Center said because "other housing was too expensive." Two explained: "We got caught in the housing crunch just after we were compteting schoot and starting a fconiZy. We chose a trailer rather than building a house so we could leave in a year or two if conditions don't iuTrove.11 "We were forced into mobile home living when we arrived in the middle of the pipeline ripoff housing squee;_,e, and did not work for the pipeline.- Mobile home living is not desirable for anyone who can afford a reaZ house." Fifteen percent said they chose mobile home living because "no other housing was available." Eight percent said they chose mobile home living because it was company provided. A more detailed discussion of company provided housing appears later in this report (see page 33). The table below sommarizes the major reasons respondents chose mobile home living in Fairbanks: "Why Did You Decide to Live in a Mobile Home in Fairbanks?" Pre-Pipeline Mobile Home Newcomers Residents Mobile Residents All (3 yrs. (4 yrs. or Home Park on own Responses or less) more) Residents Land "I prefer mobile home living" 4% 9% 5% 12% "No other housing was available" 14% 18% 11% 16% 11% 110ther housing was too expensive" 54% 48% 58% 57% 54% "No other housing was available & other housing was too expensive" 12% 21% 6% 12% 4% Other 13% 9% 16% 10% 19% Number of Responses 530 223 303 322 162 Based on a sample of 530 mobile home households. 4 The Impact Center's survey found that.the increase in Fairbanks' Imobile home population was not due exclusively to newcomers. About 58% of the mobile home residents who responded indicated that they had lived in the community four or more years. Although 42% said they had been in their mobile home less than a year, 25% said they had been in their home for at least four years. "How Many Years Have "How Many Years Have You Lived in This Mobile Home?" You Lived in Fairbanks?" 1-3 Years 2 Years I Year 42% 23% 42% :`1 10 or More 3 Years Years 4-9 Years 27% 31% \,_11@4-9 Years 20% % ore than 10 Years Sample siz e 529 Sample size: 527 "Type of Mobile Home?" Single- Double- Sample wi wide Size All Households Surveyed 93% 7% 514 New Mobile Homes 1970-73 91% 9% 44 New Mobile Homes 1974-76 87% 13% 142 "Wanigan Attached to Mobile Home?" Number of Bedrooms Yes 59% One 7% No 41% Two 46% Three 44% Sample size: 474 Four or more 3% Sample size: 531 1-34 _\7. 5 Ninety percent of the mobile homes surveyed contained two or three bedrooms. By comparison, the Impact Center's survey of the major Fairbanks apartment complexes (see Impact Information Center Report No. 21, May 1976) found that only about a third of the apartments in these facilities had two or three bedrooms. Large apartments were not only less common, but typically have had very high rents. The Impact Center's January to June 1976 summary of advertised apartment rents showed that the average rent asked for a two bedroom apartment was about $550/month and a three bedroom apartment was $650-725/month. Although only 7% of the mobile homes surveyed were doublewide models, data on new units purchased in the past few years indicated that the percentage of doublewides has increased. In spite of the cost advantages of mobile homes, 87% of those surveyed said that owning a conventional home was their first housing choice. About half of those who responded to the survey had never lived in a mobile home before and half those who had lived ina mobile home before had previously lived in one in Alaska. It appears that the housing shortage and substantial rent increases during the pipeline boom caused many to choose mobile home living. The Impact Center found that 15% of the households surveyed were pre-pipeline residents who had never lived in almobile home before, but had purchased one during the past three years. Mobile home residents are usually assumed to be a transient segment of a community's population and Impact Center staff anticipated that mobile homes would house a higher percentage of.pipeline workers than other types of housing. The survey found that 26% of the mobile home households had a member working on the pipeline, but that figure was biased by the fact that the response rate from Collegiate Park, a mobile home park exclusively for Alyeska. employees, was a rather high 40%. When Collegiate Park households were excluded, the percentage of households with a member working on the pipeline dropped to 22%. A survey of the Fairbanks area done by University of Alaska researcher Dr. John Kruse in July 1976 found that in 20.5% of all Fairbanks households either the head of the household or the household's spouse was working on the pipeline. Thus the figure for mobile homes is very close to that for the entire community. Newcomer households had members working on the pipeline more frequently than those who lived in Fairbanks prior to the pipeline. Therewerealso age differences in percentage of households with a member working on the pipeline. In households headed by persons 20-29 years of age, for example, about 27% had a member working on the pipeline, but the figure was only 13% for households headed by a person 30-39 years old. The table on the next page summarizes the information on pipeline workers in the mobile home households surveyed: 6 "Have You Ever Lived in a Mobile Home Before?" NO 52% 'YES in Alaska 3% & another state YES in YES in Alaska another 23% state "What is Your First Housing Choice?" 22% Own House 87% Rent House or 6% Apartment 5% Mobile Home 2 Own Condominium Based on responses by 453 households. "Pipeline Worker in Household?" Sample Yes No Size All Fairbanks households 20% 80% 408 All mobile home households 26% 74% 534 .Mobile home households, excluding Collegiate Park Total 22% 78% 506 Newcomer households (3 years or 1@ss) 26% 74% 194 Pre-pipeline resident households (4 years or more) 18% 82% 303 Mobile home park households 25% 75% 291 Mobile home households on own land 17% 83% 174 Households with heads - 20-29 years old 27% 73% 139 11 - 30-39 13% 87% 143 to - 40-49 17% 83% 103 of - 50-59 28% 72% 57 - 60 & up 33% 67% 30 3 @e 62/. ( @5% _um 7 @ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MOBILE HOME LIVING The Impact Information Center's questionnaire which was mailed to mobile home residents asked, "What are the advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living in Fairbanks'?" ICC staff anticipated that it would be difficult to list the wide range of potential replies, and there was concern that suggesting answers to the qnestion might.bias the results. Therefore the question was left "open-ended," that is, followed by blanks to allow the respondents to express their perceptions of advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living in-their own words. Analysis of the answers to the advantages vs. disadvantages question revealed that most answers could be grouped into several key categories. Advantages Given that more than half the respondents to the Impact Center's survey indicated that they chosemobile homes because "other housing was too expensive," it should not be surprising that cost-related factors were the most frequently mentioned advantages of mobile home living. At least one cost related advantage was listed by 56% of those surveyed. Some expressed cost related advantages in general terms: "cheap'o "Less expensive" "About the only housing that an average working family can afford at today's prices." r However, most mentioned more specific cost related advantages such as: "down payment was not as much" .11easier to qualify for loans" "lower initial cost." Some liked the idea of having the home paid for in 7 years, rather than the 25 to 30 years it takes to finance a conventional mortgage. Some respondejits compared mobile home cost advantages to rental housing: "Rent is too high and if you buy a trailer you'll have something to show besides rent receipts." Others related mobilc home cost advantages to buying or building a conventional home: "Mobile homes are the only way to,go in Fairbanks considering 8 the price of a home with the financing. They are paid off in a. coupZe of years, can be converted and built on to and be as nice as any house." Other co st related advantages included lower operating and maintenance costs, good investment, tax advantages and good resale value. About 34% of the respondents mentioned a convenience related factor as an advantage of mobile home living in Fairbanks. One of these was that a completely furnished mobile home could be quickly and easily set up and ready for immediate occupancy either in a park or on private land. The most frequently mentioned convenience features of mobile homes were that they required less maintenance and were easier to clean. Although moveability has traditionally been regarded as one of the major conveniences of mobile home living, it was mentioned by only 7% of those surveyed. Some of the mobile home park residents indicated that they eventually planned to purchase land and move their home to the new site. Others who were located on their own land said they planned to live in their mobile home until they built a conventional home and would later sell the mobile home and move it from the property. Some said the only advantage of mobile home living was that it was somewhere to live: "It was housing when needed." "No advantage other than a Y@oof over.your head." "Better than a tent.ff Otheys indicated that they likedmobile home living, but still had reservations: , "Nice and warm if you pay enough and buy a good one. I have no complaints, but I would prefer not to live in one." However, others said they felt mobile home living was comparable, if not better than other housing: "Our mobile home is so big - it's Zike living in a home since we built a big family room and double car garage." "This is a beautiful, well constructed home. We placed it on a concrete basement for permanent living. DoZZar for doZZar we could not have made a better buy, nor built as economically. To Zook at it, you cannot tell it from a well constructed wood frame home. The ranking of advantages of mobile home living (on the next page) 9 illustrates some of the differences between the attitudes of mobile home park residents and persons living in mobile homes on their own property. The top ranked advantage mentioned by mobile home park residents was that mobile homes were less expensive or better than renting. By comparison, that advantage was last on the list of residents who had mobile homes on their own land., Ranking of Advantages of Mobile Home Living In Fairbanks Residents with Mobile Homes Mobile Home Park Residents on Own Land 1. Less expensive and/or 1. Quick housing - immediately better than renting (16%) available (20%) 2. Little maintenance, easy. 2.@ Little maintenance, easy cleaning, compact and cleaning, compact and .convenient (13%) convenient (13%) 3. Privacy and Independence* 3. Easier to qualify for a loan, (10%) easier financing, shorter length of payments (13%) 4. Easier to qualify for loan, easier financing, shorter 4. Lower operating and main- length of payments (9%) tenance costs (11%) 5. Lower operating,and main- Better than buyiag or tenance costs (8%) building (9%) 6. Less expensive and/or 6. 'Can be moved (9%) better than buying or building (7%) Better than renting (8%) 7. Good investment and/or, tax 7- advantages (7%) 8. Quick housing - immediately available (6%) 9. Can be moved to another location (5%) Disadvantages More than a fourth of the respondents to the Impact Center survey mentioned problems with heating as a disadvantage of mobile home living. Some representative comments were: "poor construction for arctic Uving" 10 lisingle-strength window panes heat loss through roof and waUs" "hard to heat after -50"' "windows don't close snow grows on waZZs" "frozen pipes." Some persons, particularly those living in older models, said they had sprayed foam insulation on their mobile homes. The most common measure taken to reduce heat loss was attaching an arctic entry to the home, but some persons said more extreme measures were required : "to save on heating we have to block off aZ@ windows with insulation in winter." A more detailed discussion of the problems and costs involved in heating mobile homes appears later in this report in the section on "Design, Construction and Safety of Mobile Homes" (see page 38). More than 20% of the respondents indicated that mobile homes were too small: "the rooms are too small" "too closed in di,,Lring long winters" "too small for famiZu living. Mobile home owners frequently get around the problem of inadequate space by attaching a wanigan to the structure. In some mobile homes wanigans are little more than small porches, but others have spacious wanigans which are major additons to the living area. Fifty-nine percent of the respondencs to the Impact Center survey said a wanigan was attached to their mobile home. The third-ranking disadvantage mentioned by mobile home residents was problems with maintenance and quality of construction. Some-comments were: constant maintenance" "life span is too short, they deteriorate fast" "mobiZe homes are grosbZy overpriced for the quality of construction" "the best quality is still cheap and flimsy harder to make repairs or improvements and change styling" "poor quality construction when compared to ahouse." Depreciation and difficulties in selling mobile homes were mentioned by 12% of the households on their own land compared to 3% of those in parks, the reason for this ditference is not clear. Some comments were: "depreciates fcster than homes" "market is becoming crowded, forcing vaZues down" "after the pipeZine, traiZers won't be worth much." Residents also listed greater fire hazards as one of the disadvantages of mobile home living. Potential fire danger in mobile homes is discussed in another section of this report (see page 40)- The table below compares the attitudes of mobile home park residents and persons residing on their own land regarding the disadvantages of mAile home living. It appears that these two groups hold similar views. Ranking of Disadvantage of Mobile Home Living in Fairbanks Residents with Mobile Homes Mobile Home Park Residents on Own Land 1. Heatinr, problems, inad- 1. Heating problems, inad- equate insulation (25%) equate insulation (27%) 2. Mobile homes too small ' - 2. Mobile homes too small, not enough storage (24%) not enough storage (22%) 3. Maintenance problems, poor 3-.Maintenance problems, poor quality of construction quality of construction (15%) (13%) 4. High operating costs (9%) 4. Depreciation, difficult to ---sell (12%) 5. Burn more easily, fire trap (8%) 5.''High operating costs (5%) 6. Depreciation, difficult 6. Burn more' easily, fire to sell (3%) trap (3%) Based on responses to the question "What are the advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living in Fairbanks?" made by 323 mobile home park residents and 174 persons in mobile homes on their own land. 12 Comparison of After all of the responses on particular advantages and disadvantages mobile home living had been tallied for each questionnaire, Impact Center staff attempted to evaluate the overall response, i.e.: did the respondent list more advantages or disadvantages? Under advantages a number of respondents had written "none" and given long lists of disadvafitages. Conversely, others had given many advantages and written statements such as "none for us" in the disadvantages column. For some there were more disadvantages or more advantages, but others listed fairly equal advantages and disadvantages. A summary comparison of advantages vs. disadvantages which follows illustrates that mobile home residents on their own land generally see more advantages of mobile home living than those persons living in parks. Advantages vs. Disadvantages of Mobile Home Living in Fairbanks Mobile home park residents 50%- Residents with 7 mobile homes 40% on own land 30% 20%- 10 % No disadvan- More advan- Fairly equal More disad- No advantages tages but tages than advantages & vantages but some or some or all disadvan- disadvantages than all disadvan- advantages tages advantages tages Based on analysis of responses to "What are the advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living in Fairbanks?" made by 284 mobile home park residents and 139 persons with mobile homes on their own land. 13 CHOOSING A MOBILE HOME LOCATION Persons who purchase mobile h omes can locate them in mobile home parks, set them up on tht@ir own land, or arrange with a landowner to locate them on private property. Regardless of the option chosen, mobile home owners have to observe the Borough's zoning regulations that restrict areas allowing mobile homes. The pipeline boom created a shortage of mobile home spaces which further restricted location choices. Discussion of these restrictions on choice is followed by an examination of why respondents to the Impact Center's survey chose their present mobile home location, and what they view as its advantages and disadvantages. Zoning Regulations Mobile homes are not permitted in many areas of the Fairbanks North Star Borough where single family residences are allowed. The table on the next page compares the zones which allow single and multi- Jamily residential structures with those which allow mobile homes and mobile home parks. Conventional single family residences are permitted in 12 zones, while mobile homes are allowed in five. Mobile homes are permitted conditionally in two other residential zones. Phil Berrian, director of the Borough's Planning and Zoning Department said that conditonal use of mobile homes in these zones requires that a plan for their use be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said that in areas where conventional structures predominate, mobile homes are generally allowed temporarily while the owner is building a home. However, Berrian noted that if there are already a number of mobile homes in the area, the commission will sometimes allow the owner to locate a mobile home on the property permanently. Multi-family residential structures are permitted within ten areas in the Borough, but mobile home Parks are allowed in only two zones. As a result of these zoning restrictions many mobile homes are located in zones which have "unrestricted use." Many are in low- lying areas which have soil underlain with permafrost and where land values are lower. Berrian explained that one of the advantages of mobile homes is that they can more easily be located in permafrost areas than conventional housing. Exclusion of mobile homes from certain areas of a community where other types of residences are allowed is common throughout the United States. However, a recent article in the National Observer revealed ..that such laws are being challenged as discriminatory. The article noted that at least 3ne state has moved to end such discrimination: . . . the Vermont Legislature has decreed that no town or municipaZity . . . can discriminate against mobile homes. A 14 Fairbanks North Star Borough Comparison of Residential and Mobile Home Zoning July 1976 Residential Residential Structure Structure Containing Containing Mobile Home One More than 2 Mobile Park and/or Zoning Dwelling Dwelling Units Home Subdivision Outdoor Recreation N N N N General Agricultural P P P N Rural Estate P P C N Rural Estate I P P P N Rural Residential P P C N Rural Residential I P P P N Restricted Residential I P N N N Restricted Residential II P N N N General Residential P P N N Multiple Residential I P P N N Multiple Residential II P P P P Residential - Office P P N N Neighborhood Shopping N N N N Business I N N N N Business II N N N N Business III N N N N Air Industrial Park N N N* N Light Industrial I N N N* N Light Industrial II N N N* N Heavy Industrial N N N* N Unrestricted Use P P P P P = Permitted Outright C Permitted Conditionally N Not Permitted *Permitted as assessory use to permitted principle uses. Source: Fairbanks North Star Borough, Planning and Zoning Department. state law that went into effect last month contains a controversial new zoning doctrine on low-income housing, a doctrine that some zoning experts say say soon influence courts' and local govern- ments' zoning decisions from coast to coast. "The police powers of local government., the new Vermont law says, cannot be used to exclude mobile homes or any other form of prefabricated housing. Such low-income homes, the new law says, must be treated on an equal basis with other types of housing" (National Observer, August 14, 1976, p. 7). Norman Williams, Jr., a professor at Vermont Law School who specializes 15 in planning law, said it's more likely that the courts rather than the legislatures will spread the "antiexclusionary doctrine" in zoning. He pointed out that courts in more than a dozen states had in various ways already "declared themselves against exclusionary zoning" (Ibid.). A number of the respondents to the Impact Center's survey mentioned dissatisfaction with the Borough's zoning regulations. One mobile home park resident who would like to relocate his mobile home said: "I am Zooking for a piece of good view property on Farmer's Loop or McGrath Road, but the choice is severeZy restricted by zoning. There is discrimination against mobiZe home owners and a fear that mobiZe homes wi1Z 'ruin' the neighborhood." Another felt that such restrictions force mobile home owners to locate in parks: "Zoning ordinances restrict choice of property for mobiZe homes. They are Zooked upon by many as tin shacks occupied by transients. This enabZes mobile home parks to charge ridicuZous rents and stiZ1 remain fiNed to - pacit-Y,. I -a Berrian told the Impact Center that although mobile homes are excluded from some residential areas, he felt that mobile home owners still have a wide choice of locations. lie estimated that 50'% of the subdivisions approved by the Planning Commission within the last year have permitted the use of mobile homes either outright or conditionally. Reservation of Mobile Home Park Spaces by Dealers The housing shortage which created an unprecedented demand for mobile homes in Fairbanks created a corresponding demand for mobile home park spaces. Nowever, nearly all of the mobile home park owner/managers contacted by the Impact Center said their spaces had been filled to capacity prior to the pipeline. Most of the mobile home park spaces which were built during the past two and one half years were reserved by dealers prior to completion so that they could have them available for those who purchased their mobile homes. Three of the five mobile home dealerships currently operating in Fairbanks said they did not reserve spaces in 1975 and experienced difficulty getting them for their customers. One termed it his "biggest problem," another commented, "We'definitely had a problem. Spaces were in short supply and we missed sales because we didn't have a place to locate them." Two other dealers said they had reserved spaces in parks during 1975. Many of the mobile home residents who responded to the Impact Center's survey mentioned that the tie-in between dealers and park owners had limited their choice of location. One explained that he did not purchase 16 the mobile home which was h@_'s first choice, because the dealer had re- served spaces in a park which he found undesirable. Instead the respondent said he purchased a mobile home which was his second choice from another dealer who had reserved spaces in the park he preferred. Jamie Love, director the Alaska Public Interest Research Group, said that tie-ins between mobile home parks and dealers have two effects on consumers: "First, said Love, it has reduced the competition among dcalers for sales. A few large dealers domirate the sales market, since they control most of the vacant spaces. The smaller independent vendors who failed to buy up vacant spaces cannot compete for salles, even if they sell iheir trailers for less, since they don't have spaces to put them on. "L'ove says this is only half of the problem. [Men the dealers controZ the spaces they can determine the type o 'P units which are sold, and that usuaZZu means thc, delux modc7,s which cost the most. "Love said there is a demand for the smaller, less expensive trailers, but that the dealers are using their control oi)er the availability of spaces to move the luxury models, loaded wi-11-72 It expenjive extras wthich mean higher mark-ups and bigqer PrOfz"@s (Fairbanks Daily Ne-@:s-lliner, April 15, 1976). Jim Blyth of Columbia Mobile Homes Sales, said the tie-in between dealers and parks was needed to insure the development of new mobile home parks spaces. He e\plained that his firm is currently involved in construction of a $4.5 million park in the North Pole area which will have 515 spaces. Blyth said the rate of return on a mobile home park is low compared to the high capital outlay required to develop it. As a result, he said there is little economic incentive for persons not involved in mobile home sales to invest in such developments. Blyth said that financing of the new park in North Pole would not have been possible without committments from dealers to reserve spaces. During the 1976 session the Alaska State Legislature was unsuccess- ful in an attempt to make tie-ins between dealers and parks a violation of the State's Unfair Trade Pra 'ctices Acts. However, the legislature amended the Alaska Landlord-Tenant Act to include the following: "A vendor of mobile homes maz require as a condition of y not I sale that a purchaser locate the mobile hor7e in a pcrticuZar mobile home park or in one of a particular group of mobile home parks" (SCS CSHB 829 am S). 17 Choice of Locqtion Responses to "Why did you choose this location?" by mobile home park residents revealed the effect of the shortage of spaces during the pipeline construction period. Sixty-two percent of those in parks said they had no choice in their location. Although nearly half said they had no choice because the mobile home was purchased used and already located on the site, 27% said they located in a particular park because it was the only space available. A number in this latter group commented that the dealer had a tie-in arrangement with the mobile home park owner. Of the 38% who indicated that they had chosen the park, satisfaction with the area and the convenience of the location ranked highest in their reasons for choosing the park. In contrast to the lack of choice among the park owners, 94 percent of those on their own land said they had chosen their location. They gave satisfaction with the area, freedom, privacy and land ownership as the major reasons for choosing their locations. The following tables compare the choice of location responses of mobile home park residents with those located on their own land. "Why Did You Choose This Location?" Mobile Home Park Residents Had No Choice because: 1. Mobile home already here (29%) Had No Choice 2. Only space available (27%) 62% 3. Company provided housing (10%) Chose It because: 1. Nice environment, like the area (17%) 2. Convenient (15%) Chose It 3. Good price (6%) 38% 4. Freedom & privacy (4%) .5. Availability of utilities & services (3%) .Based on responses from 303 mobile home park residents and 152 mobile home owners situated on their own land. Note: Some respondents gave more than one reason for why the location was not a choice or why they chose it. 18 @_hoice "Why Did You Choose This Location?" Mobile Home Residents On Own Land Had No Choice because: 1. Already here (5%) Chose It 2. Only space available (1%) 94% Chose It because: 1. Nice environment, like the area (28% No Choice----' 2. Freedom & privacy (25"/.) 6% 3. Owned land (23%) 4. Good Price (16%) 5. Convenient (15%) 6. Availability of utilities & services (4%) Based on responses from 303 mobile home park residents and 152 mobile home owners situated on their own land. Note: Some respondents gave more than one reason for why the location was not a choice or why they chose it. Locatior Advantages & Disadvantages Mobile home residents surveyed by the Impact Center were asked "What do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this location?" The question was followed by blanks to allow respondents the opportunity to express their own reasons (for a discussion of such "open-ended" questions see page 8 of this report) . A comparison of the ranking of location advantages by mobile home park residents and those on their own land is shown in the table on the next page. Park residents placed convenience at the top of their list while those located on their own land mentioned freedom and privacy. Ranking of the disadvantages of the location showed that mobile home park residents listed more disadvantages and listed them more frequently than landowners. The major overcrowding complaint in parks was insufficient space between the mobile homes. The major overcrowding factor noted by those on their own land was increased traffic. Poor quality of roads and road maintenance were mentioned by 26% of the mobile home park residents and 1'@% of those on their own land. Both groups mentioned utilities problems, but for park residents they were generally related to the poor quality of services while those on their own land related primarily to the unavailability of services. Both 19 (N 0 6% Ranking of Location Advantages Residents with Mobile Homes Mobile Home Park Residents on Own Land 1. Convenient (37%) 1. Freedom & privacy (55%) 2. Nice environment, like the area (25%) 2. Nice environment, like the area (22%) 3. Freedom & privacy (21%) 3. Convenient (21%) 4. Availability of utilities & 4. Availability of utilities & services (12%) services (9%) 5. Good mobile home park (12%) 5. Inexpensive (8%) 6. Inexpensive (8%) Based on responses to the question "IThat do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this location?" made bv 323 mobile home park residents and 174 persons in mobile homes on their own land. Ranking of Location Disadvantages Residents with Mobile Homes Mobile Home Park Residents on Own Land 1. Poor mobile home park management & 1. Inconvenient (18%) services (32%) 2. Water, sewer & other utility 2. Overcrowding (28%) problems - primarily unavailability a. not enough space (9%) of services (15%) b. problems with neighbors (8%) 3. Overcrowding (14%) c. noise (5%) a. traffic (6%) d. traffic (4%) b. problems with neighbors (4%) 3. Poor quaility of roads and/or road c. noise (3%) maintenance (26%) 4. Poor quality of roads and/or road 4. Water, sewer and other utility maintenance (12%) problems - primarily poor quality 5. Lack of fire protection and/or of services (20%) high fire insurance rates (11%) 5. Inconvenient (12%) 6. Too cold (7%) 6. Unattractive area (9%) 7. Unattractive area (2%) 7. Lack of fire protection and/or high fire insurance rates (7%) 8. Too cold (3%) Based on responses to the question "What do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this location made by 323 mobile home park residents and 174 persons in mobile homes on their own land. 20 groups mentioned the lack of fire protection and high fire insurance rates. These are discussed later in the report beginning on page 40. The table which follows gives the overall advantages and disadvantages of the location as seen by mobile home residents (methodology used to evaluate the responses is explained on page 13). Park residents mentioned disadvantages much more frequently and saw fewer advantages to the location than persons on their own land. Advantages vs. Disadvantages of Location Mobile home park residentsL 50% - Residents with' 40% - mobile homes on own land 30% - 20% - 10% - No disadvan- More advan- Fairly equal More disad- No advanLal:- tages but tages than advantages & vantages but some oi some or all disadvan- disadvantages than all disadv advantages tages advantages tages Based on analysis of responses to the question, "What do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this location?" made by 284 mobile home park residents and 139 persons with mobile homes on their own land. VA 21 MOBILE HOME PARKS Since pipeline construction began the number of spaces in mobile home parks has increased 106% from 859 in April 1974 to 1,767 in July 1976. Of the new mobile homes which came into the Fairbanks area during the pipeline boom, 73% were placed in mobile home parks. At present, about half the mobile homes in the Borough are located in parks. This is in contrast to the situation in 197/4 when 38% of the mobile homes were in parks and the remainder were on private land. Location of Mobile Homes % of Private % of Parks Total Land Total Total 1974 859 38% 1,378 62% 2,237 1975 1,366 47% 1,526 53% 2,896 1976 1,767 51% 1,715 49% 3,482 Source: Fairbanks North Star Borough Assessing Office. Prior to the pipeline only 3 mobile home parks in Fairbanks, had more than 50 mobile home spaces. By fall 1976 there will be 11 parks with 50 or more spaces. To meet the demand for mobile home spaces a number of the existing parks expanded and some new parks were established. It is likely that the high capital outlay required to acquire land, provide for water and sewerage treatment, roads, and other design requirements will continue the development trend to large mobile home parks. Fairbanks Mobile Home Courts by Size Fall 1976 Total Courts % Spaces % Less than 10 spaces 19 35% 101 5% 10-19 spaces 11 207. 141 87. 20-49 spaces 12 23% 399 22% 50-99 spaces 7 13% 451 24% 100 or more 4 7% 759 41% Total 53 1,851 Table includes spaces under construction which are scheduled for occupanc@ by fall 1976. It does not include the 515 unit Columbia Park since the completion schedule is still tentative. 22 Borough Regulations The Fairbanks North Star Borough defines a mobile home park as "a land parcel in one ownership which is managed for occupancy by more than two mobile homes." All mobile home parks are required to obtain mobile home park permits annually and pay a permit fee of $3 for each i-obile home space. Regulations with which mobile home parks must comply to meet Borough approval include: 1. Spacing: A minimum of 3,000 square feet of land area must be provided for each mobile home. No mobile home or its additions are to be placed closer than 15 feet from any other mobile home or its additions. 2. Power: All spaces must be served by 215/230 volt power feed wiring. 3. Streets: Streets must be surfaced with all-weather material such as gravel, cinders, asphalt or concrete; grades exceeding 6% are not permitted. 4. Water and sewerage: All mobile homes must be connected to water and sewerage systems approved by the Fairbanks North Star Borough and/or the State. 5.' Garbage: Adequate arrangements must be made for the removal of garbage and refuse. (Fairbanks North Star Borough Ordinances, Chapter 17.32 "Mobile Home Parks") Mobile home park spaces established prior to August 28, 1969 are exempted from the spacing and layout requirements but are required to provide water, sewerage and garbage disposal services. New State Reaulations In 1976 the Alaska State Legislature passed a bill (SCS CSHB 829 am S) which ammended the Alaska Landlord Tenant Act to include provisions which covered mobile home parks. Provisions of the legislation which went into effect September 6, 1976 include: ScIling Mobile Homes Withi-n Parks 1. Mobile home parks may not deny a tenant the right to sell his/ her mobile home within the park or require the removal of the mobile Lome from the park solely because the home has been sold. 2. Within 30 days of being notified that a tenant plans to sell the mobile home to a specified buyer, the mobile home park 23 I I may refuse to allow a sale for one or more of the following reasons: -The mobile home is in violation of laws or ordinances relating to health, safety of welfare. -The proposed buyer refuses to assume the same terms as are in the existing rental agreement. -The proposed buyer does not have sufficient financial responsibility. 3. Mobile home parks may not require persons selling or buying mobile homes already in their parks to pay a transfer fee. Park Requirements for Improvements 1. Mobile home park operators must disclose fully in writing all capital improvements to be made by the tenant including, but not limited to skirting or utility hook-ups, before entering into a rental agreement. 2. Mobile home park operators may determine by rule or regulation the style or quality of the equipment, including but not limited to underskirting and tie-do@-ms, but may not require thall- the equipment be purchased from the operator. Evictions Mobile home park operators may evict tenants only for one of the following reasons: 1. The mobile home dweller or tenant has defaulted in the pay- ment of rent owed. 2. The mobile home dweller or tenant has been convicted of violating a federal or state law or local ordinance, and that violation is continuing and is detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of other dwellers or tenants in the mobile home park. 3. The mobile home dweller or tenant has violated a reasonable rule or regulation properly established by the operator. 4. A change in the use of the land comprising the mobile home park, or the portion of it on which the mobile home to be evicted is located; however, all dwellers or tenants so affected shall be given at least 90 days notice, or longer if provided for in a valid lease. 24 Survey of__Mobile Home Park Owners The Impact Information Center conducted a telephone survey of the owners and/or managers of the mobile home parks in the Borough which had 20 or more spaces. Impact Center staff were able to contact 17 of the 21 major parks, which accounted for 76% of the mobile home park spaces in the area. The owners were asked if they bad vacancies during the pipeline period and the answer was a nearly unanimous "no." They said most of the turnover which occurred in their parks was due to residents who sold their mobile homes, but the new owners usually did not move them after the purchase. Most of the parks indicated that they had been full prior to the pipeline. They said that the few vacancies that occurred during the past two and one-half years were filled immediately. Prior to the pipeline period, average space rents in Fairbanks were $80 to $90 per month. The Impact Center's survey found that they now average about $100-109 per month. Park owners attributed the increase in space rents to increased taxes, utility costs, maintenance costs, and inflation. Some comments were: "Financially it hasn't, been worth our while, but if we ask for another rent increase they'll go to the Emergency Rent Review Board and we'll have to furnish financial statements and open them to the tenants - it isn't any of their business. We even considered closing the court because its more of nuisance. We need to raise our rent to $95 or $100 a month like other courts." "Under ground oil and water mains take a lot of time to fix and repair. With the increase in taxes it has been rough. Nobody could live on what they make in a trailer park unless it's huge. We have been reluctant to raise rent becaus I think while most tenants feel we're good landlords, there has to be something visible to them that's an improvement. The kinds of things we do are not visible benefits. We dug up the gas line and it cost $2,000, had to put more gravelon the road, etc. Eventually we will have to raise, but I am reluctant--- these are all nice people." Many of the parks contacted by the Impact Center said they had problems with extra persons living in mobile homes during the pipeline period. This is further confirmation that many persons have coped with the housing shortage in Fairbanks by "doubling-up". The Impact Center first noticed this in its monthly survey of housing advertised for rent in which the number of Wanted to Share ads increased during months of peak demand for housing. An Impact Center survey in April 1976 (see Impact Information Center Report No. 27) also found that doubling up was the number one problem for apartment owners and managers. Most mobile home parks indicated that they had a rule which limited occupancy to one family per mobile home, but some said they had put the 25 rule in writing during the pipeline period. Most also prohibit their tenants from sub-leasing mobile homes. Some indicated that they knew these rules were beling violated. but managers of the larger parks, in particular, said it was very difficult to keep track of who the tenants were. One manager said that after a couple in her park were divorced, the husband left to work on the pipeline and rented the mobile home to eight men. The mobile home was subsequently evicted from the park. Managers said extra persons in mobile homes increased water and sewer use, created noise, increased traffic and created parking problems. Two of the larger parks mentioned problems with truck driver tenants who brought their trucks home and parked them adjacent to their mobile homes. In extremely cold temperatures the drivers left the vehicles running all night, which created noise and pollution problems for other tenants. Ten of the 17 parks surveyed allowed pets. This is in contrast to the Impact Center's apartment (@omplex survey which showed that very few apartments allowed pets: Pets Allowed? Small Yes Only No Apartments (based on survey of 29 apts. @ 1500 units) 3% 8% 89% Mobile Home Parks (based on 1341 units in 17 parks contacted) 15% 25% 60% Although mobile home parks allow pets much more frequently than apartments, parks have been tightening up their regulations concerning pets. Several owners indicated a no pet rule had been adopted recently They usually allowed tenants to keep existing pets but would not admit any new pets into the park. Those which allowed dogs usually required that they be kept in the mobile home or tied up. One of the parks now under construction will allow pets, but will require the owners of dogs and cats to fence their yards. Additionally, residents must agree to remove pets from the park if they disturb neighbors. Some mobile home park residents complained that rules against pets were unwarranted. One noted that it seemed ridiculous to pay $30,000 for 11your own home" only to be told that you would have to get rid of a family pet. Most of the parks contacted by the Impact Center said they had no plans to expand, primarily because they had already developed all their available land. A p-irk in the McGrath Road area and another in the College area have added spaces during summer 1976. A 515 unit mobile home park is currently under construction near North Pole and is expected to begin accepting units in the fall of 1976. 26 Some park owners, particularly from the smaller parks. said they had few residents who were working on the pipeline and doubted if they could be affected much by the termination of pipeline construction: People wiZZ be leaving I don't think we'll be affected, L, cfter the pipeline, but I don't think they will have trouble seZling, "Mobile home Ziving is getting to be a waY of Zife - taxes and lard have gone up so much people can't afford a ho-,ise. " III don It think it Will affe.-t us, but it will affect the larger par,'<s. Other mobile home park owners felt that the post-pipeline period might adversely affect their operations: "I can't help but feel it's going to affect the whole rental situation. Three people that did have pipeline jobs have been laid off." "We have the feeling that the pipeline is going to affect our park. People will be moving on and trying to @@,-ZZ. We have already noticed some homes beirj- repossessed by banks and dealers. People are going to the Lower '48. Dealers are noticing the effect too., it'S not. like last year. Still, our park is full it's cZosc- to town." "Things are going down hill. The party's over. They have built too m-any houses and apart-,ents and peopZe are going -to scram. We go from one ext-reoie to another here in Alaska. I will be gZaLl' wher. tize pipeZ-&ne is over. I'm exhausted and I've got nothing to show for it. I have had it and I am fed up. Tour of Fairbanks Area Mobile Home Parks Frank Hunt, property appraiser for the Fairbanks North Star Borough gave the Impact Center a tour of 21 of the area's mobile home parks. Staff had analyzed hundreds of questionnaires from park residents, talked with park owners and mobile home dealers, but seeing the parks first- hand helped to put the information in perspective- Most of the very small mobile home parks in the area were built prior to the Borough's mobile home park regulations. Mobile homes in these parks are older models which are often only eight to ten feet wide. In some cases the layout, roads and the spacing in these parks would not meet the Borough's current design and construction requirements. In contrast to the uniformity seen in newer parks, mobile homes in these older parks are a variety of brands and models. Many of the mobile homes are sprayed with foam insulation evidence that they were not 27 I designed to withstand Fairbanks' winters. Despite the high demand for mobile home spaces during the pipeline period, a number of the smaller parks have closed within the past three years. Many of the small older parks are in very poor condition and their spaces are not large enough to accommodate the 14-foot models sold today. Additionally high operating and maintenance costs make it difficult for park owners with a small number of mobile home spaces to make a profit on their investment. Several mobile home parks, which were established in Fairbanks in the late 1960's and early 1970's put more emphasis on attractive mobile home park layouts and landscaping. Most are situated in wooded areas and have wider spacing and better roads than the older courts. Many residents have added elaborate wanigans, arctic entries, porches or garages to their homes. During the pipeline boom the high demand for mobile home spaces put priority on the immediate establishment of a large number of spaces as soon as possible, but this was often at the expense of making the parks physically attractive. One of these parks, for example, offered wide roads, underground utilities and a convenient location, but was situated on a dusty treeless stretch of gravel. Most of the parks established during the pipeline period were characterized by uniformity. Nearly all the homes were 14-feet wide and those in the same park were generally the same brand and model and had idential foundations and skirting. Three parks currently under construction in the area are attempting to put more emphasis on the mobile home environment. Instead of lining up mobile homes in long monotonous rows, they are using cul-de-sac street arrangements. These parks have underground utilities and two will have paved streets and street lights. Much care is being taken to leave natural vegetation and trees. Many of the newer parks are requiring that their tenants landscape and maintain their own spaces in an attractive manner. 28 THE COSTS OF MOBILE HOME LIVING Mobile Home Financing More than 80% of the mobile home owners who responded to the Impact Center's survey indicated that they financed purchase of their homes through a bank or credit union. Banks financed 69% of the new mobile homes, but only half of the used mobile home purchases. Credit unions financed one out of five mobile home purchases of both new and used mobile homes. Four percent of those who purchased new mobile homes indicated that they had paid the full amount in cash, however, 15% of the used mobile homes were purchased with cash. About 13% of the used mobile homes were financed with the previous owner. Only 3% of the mobile homes were financed directly by dealers. The following table summarizes the methods of mobile home financing: Mobile Home Financing Credit Previous Banks Unions Cash Owner Dealer Other Purchased New 69% 21% 4% - 3% 3% Purchased Used 50% 20% 15% 13% 1% 1% Total (new & used) 60% 21% 9% 6% 2% 2% Based on 432 responses of which 222 were purchased new (51%) and 210 were purchased used (49%). The Impact Information Center discussed mobile home financing with seven Fairbanks banking institutions and seven credit unions. On a new mobile home,banks typically required 25% down and credit unions required 20%. Most credit unions and banks required a larger doxmpayment of about one-third to finance the purchase of a used mobile home. The length of financing for new single-wide mobile homes ranged from 5 to 10 years, but most said they tried to limit the financing to 7 years. Used mobile home loans were usually limited to 5 years or less. On the other hand, new double-wide mobile homes were often financed for 10 years. A number of the banks and credit unions said they would not finance mobile homes that were more than 10 years old and some would only finance those 5 years old or less. Annual interest rates were 12% for most credit unions and 9!,@% for most banks. Most lenders indicated that they had financed a record number of mobile homes in 1975, but noted that the demand for mobile home loans 29 had slackened considerably in 1976. None said they had experienced a large number of defaults on mobile home loans, but those who did take repossessions said they had no problem reselling them and did not lose money. Banks and credit unions generally felt their interests were fairly well protected in mobile home loans because of the large downpayments required. In contrast to the 20 to 25% down required on a new mobile home, mortgage loans on conventional houses require only 10% down. Although they did not anticipate major problems with existing loans, most lenders indicated that they were shying away from making new ones. Some have tightened up their loan policies by increasing the percentage of doumpayment or shortening the length of the loan. Others indicated that they planned to make no mobile home loans in the near future because they were apprehensive that declining demand for mobile homes in the post-pipeline period may cause values to depreciate. The Impact Center's survey of inobile home residents illustrates how sharply average mobile home purchase prices have increased in recent years. The rising cost of new mobile homes combined with the high demand for housing have caused mobile 'homes to appreciate in value rather than deprecLate as is common with mobile homes. The average selling price of a mobile home increased from $10,000-14,999 in 1972 to $20-24,999 in 1975. Between 1971 and 1973 the average used mobile home was under $10,000, compared to an average of $15,000-19,999 in 1976. The table below summarizes the clianges in mobile home prices: Average Purchase Price of Mobile Homes Year Purchased New Used 1971 $10,000-14,999 $ 5,000-9,999 1972 10,000-14,999 5,000-9,999 1973 15,000-19,999 5,000-9,999 1974 15,000-19,999 10,000-14,999 1975 20,000-24,999 10,000-14,999 1976 20,000-24,999 15,000-19,999 Median price based on a sample of 149 new and 148 used mobile homes purchased in Fairbanks 1971-1976. Average Monthly Costs of Mobile Home Livi The Impact Center's survey found that the average monthly living costs for those who purchased mobile homes in 1973 are $400-449/month compared to $550-599/month for those who purchased mobile homes in 1975. However, the table of "Average Monthly Housing Costs Comparison" on the next page shows that the only major difference between the housing costs for homes purchased in 1973 and 1975 is the loan payment. Between 1973 and 1975, the average loan payment increased from $150-199/month to an average of $300-349/month. 30 Average Monthly Housing Cost Comparisons for Mobile Homes Which are Being Financed Average Total Year Purchased Purchased Purchased -Monthly Costs Sample 1973 1974 1975 New Used Loan Payment $266 $150-199 $200-249 $300-349 $250-299 $200-249 Mobile Home Park Space Rent 103 90-99 100-109 100-109 100-109 100-109 Electricity 81 50-74 50-74 50-74 50-74 50-74 Heating Fuel 63 50-74 50-74 50-74 50-74 50-74 Propane* 29 25-49 25-49 25-49 25-49 25-49 Taxes 12 10-19 10-19 10-19 10-19 less than $10 Insurance 28 20-29 20-29 30-39, 30-39 20-29 Total $540 $400-449 $450-499 $550-599 $500-549 $400-449 Approximate Sample Size 326 28 74 154 190 146 *Propane is used by only about one-third of the households. As noted in the previous section on mobile home financing, the average cost for a new single-wide mobile home purchased in 1975 was $20-24,999. A 'summary of average monthly costs for homes in that price range is shown in the table below. The table indicates that the average monthly costs for such a home would-be $625/month with 52% of that amount going toward repayment of the loan, 17% for space rent, 23% for utilities, and the remaining 8% for taxes and insitrance. Average Monthly Costs for Singlewide Mobile Home Purchased New Year: 1975 Price Range: $20-24,999 Location: Mobile Home Park Monthly Costs Average % of Total Loan Payment $326 52% Space Rent 106 17% Utilities 145 23% Electricity 77 Fuel 58 Propane 29 Taxes 15 3% Insurance 33 5% Total $625 Based on a sample of 39 mobile homes; propane was only used in 13 of these. 79w- M,@' Taxation of Mobile Homes In many areas of.the United States a major advantage of mobile homes is that owners do not have to pay property tax if they are located in a mobile home park, However, in the Fairbanks North Star Borough, mobile homes are assessed as real property whether they are located on the owner's land or in a mobile home park. During the pipeline boom the housing shortage and a high inflation rate created a demand for both new and used mobile homes.. As a result sales records compiled by the Borough's Assessing Office show that used mobile homes have actually increased in-value rather than depreciating during the pipeline construction period. The Borough assesses mobile homes for tax purposes by using information on mobile home sales within the Borough. The data for each manufactured year are compile d separately, and are used to compute an average sales price per square foot. The following table compares the Borough schedule for assessing the value of mobile homes for 1973 and 1976: Fairbanks North Star Borough Schedule for Assessing Mobile Homes for Tax Purposes 1976 1976 1973 1976 1973 Year of $ Value $ Value Year of $ Value $ Value Manu- Per Sq. Per Sq. Manu- Per Sq. Per Sq. facture Foot Foot facture Foot Foot 1976 Purchase $ 1964 $15 $7.00 1975 Purchase $ 1963 $14 $6.66 1974 $23 1962 $13 $6.33 1973 $22 Purchase $ 1961 $12 $6.00 1972 $20 Purchase $ 1960 $11 $5.66 1971, $20 Purchase $ 1959 $10 $5.33 1970 $20 $9.00 1958 $ 9 $5.00 1969 $20 $8.66 19 57 $ 8 $4.66 1968 $19 $8.33 1956 $ 7 $4.33 1967 $18 $8.00 1955 $ 6 $4.00 1966 $17 $7.66 1954 $ 5 $3.66 1965 $16 $7.33 Source: Fairbanks North Star Borough, Assessing Department. 32 MOBILE HOMES AS COMPANY PROVIDED HOUSING High housing costs and a shortage of available housing during the pipeline boom made it difficult for many businesses and government agencies to retain existing staff and/or recruit new employees. A number of them overcame this problem by purchasing mobile homes and making them available for rent to their employees. Collegiate Park Alyeska Pipeline Service Company had 202 units of company provided housing for its employees in the Fairbanks area. Seventy-five of these, or 37%, were mobile homes which were set up in Collegiate Park in the University West subdivision. Most homes in this area are valued at $75,000 or more and some University West residents protested the establish- ment of a mobile home park in the subdivision. The park was approved with the provision that after 5 years the mobile homes would be removed and the land would be converted to a conventional subdivision. Twenty-eight of the 70 mobile homes occupied at Collegiate Park, or 40%, responded to the Impact Center's questionnaire. Nearly all of Collegiate Park's residents moved to Fairbanks during the pipeline boom, all were employed by Aiyeska and all lived at least 10 miles,from work. Their mobile homes were of the same year and model, except some that had 2-bedrooms and that others had 3-bedrooms. Most of the,residents bad never lived in a mobile home before and most said they planned to leave Fairbanks when pipeline construction was.over. In listing the advantages of mobile home living in Fairbanks, 54% of Collegiate Park's residents mentioned that it was less expensive than other housing. They related their housing costs to other rentals rather than to buying or building a home. The second ranking advantage was little maintenance, which was mentioned by 29% of the respondents. Fourteen percent of the respondents said that mobile home living offered more privacy and independence than an apartment. Although 14% of the respondents mentioned that.mobile homes were warm and easy to heat, this was outweighed by the 43% who listed heating problems and inadequate insulation as a disadvantage of mobile home living in Fairbanks. By comparison about one-fourth of all the respondents to the Impact Center's'survey mentioned problems with heating mobile homes. It is possible that Collegiate Park residents mentioned heating problems more frequently because they were not accustomed to Alaskan winters. Problems with plumbing and frozen pipes were noted by 39% of the respondents. Some indicated that their freezing pipes resulted from power outages. Complaints about the lack of space, poor quality of construction and fire hazards were not greatly different from responses of residents in other 33 mobile home parks. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages is given below: Ranking of Advantages and Disadvantages of Mobile Home Living in Fairbanks By Collegiate Park Residents Advantages Disadvantages 1. Less expensive than other I.. Heating problems, inadequate housing (54%) insulation (43%) 2. Little maintenance, easy 2. Plumbing problems and frozen cleaning, compact, and pipes (39%) convenient (29%) 3. Mobile homes too small, not 3. Privacy and independence enough storage (32%) (18%) 4. Poor quality construction (18%) 4. Lower operating and main- tenance costs (14%) 5. Burn more easily, fire trap (7%) 5. Warm, easy to heat (14%) Based on a sample of 28 Collegiate Park households In answer to the question "Why did you choose this location?". most Collegiate Park respondents answered "company provided". Some other responses were: "dictated by AZyeska" "company made it available to us" "there was no other place" "no other housing available for pipeZiners with pets." In ranking the advantages of the location, 46% said they liked Collegiate Park because it was out of town: frquiet and country feeling" "its a7,w2zj from noise and ice fog" The closeness of the park to schools and/or the University of Alaska was mentioned by 29% of the respondents as an advantage of the location. One gave "other people in the park are living under the same circumstances" as an advantage. A summary of responses to the advantages and disadvantages 34 of the location is shown below: Ranking of Advantages and Disadvantages of Location by Collegiate Park Residents Advantages Disadvant ages 1. Out of town, country atmos- 1. Inconvenient, too far from work phere (46%) (21%) 2. Convenient, close to schools, 2. Poor quality of roads and/or close to university (29%) maintenance (18%) 3. Allow pets (7%) 3. Lack of fire protection (7%) 4. Permafrost (7%) 5. Overcrowding (7%) Based on a sample of 28 Collegiate Park households. Twenty-one percent of the residents mentioned that the location was inconvenient because it was too far from work, but many of these also listed being out of town as an advantage. It appears that the distance traveled to work was outweighed by the advantage of being away from town and close to schools and tj@e Uni 'vers.ity. Poor roads and road maintenance problems were the second ranking disadvantage and were mentioned by 18% of the respondents. Rent for all the mobile homes was $350. Residents paid their own utilities. Costs were comparable to or a bit lower than costs for persons in other parks who -purchased new mobile homes, but as renters Collegiate Park residents were not required to pay taxes or carry homeowner's insurance. A summary of the average monthly costs of those who responded to the Impact Center's survey is shown below: Average Monthly Housing Costs. Alyeska Mobile Homes Collegiate Park Average Two Three Two & Three Monthly Costs Bedrooms Bedrooms Bedrooms Rent $350 $350 $350 Electricity 81 113 98 Heating Fuel 60 65 63 Total $493 $521 $505 Based on a sample of 13 two-bedroom units and 14 three-bedroom units. 35 An evaluation of the overall response of Collegiate Park residents (see page 13for methodology used to evaluate overall response) showed that they liked mobile home living slightly better than other mobile home park residents. However, 32% of Collegiate Park's residents found more advantages than disadvantages to the location compared to 18% of the mobile home residents in other par!s, An evaluation of the responses to both the mobile home living and -'@Iie location questions showed that 19% of Collegiate Park's residents found more disadvantages, compared to 38% for those in other mobile home parks. Comparison of Overall Advantages and D isadvantages of Mobile Home Living and Location Collegiate Mobile Home Park Park Residents (not including Residents Collegiate Park) Mobile Home Livin& More advantages 18% 16% More disadvantages 25% 30% Fairly equal advantages & disadvantages 57% .54% Location of Mobile Home More adva.itages 32% 18% More disadvantages 23% 32% Fairly equal advantages & disadvantages 45% 50% Combination of Mobile Home Living and Location More advantages 19% 21% More disadvantages 19% 38% Fairly equal advantages & disadvantages 62% 41% Based on a sample of 28 Collegiate Park households and 260 households in other mobile home parks. Debbie Moss of the Alyeska housing office said that Collegiate Park bad been one of the company's best housing facilities. She said there had been some problems during the winter with freezing pipes and settling permafrost, but in general they had been very satisfied. Moss said the mobile homes offered employees more room than most of Alyeska's apartments and cost less than their condominiums. She said there is still a waiting list of employees who want to move into Collegiate Park. Alyeska's plans for disposal of the mobile homes when the pipeline project is over are still indefinite. 36 other Company Provided Mobile Homes The Bureau of Indian Affairs purchased 21 mobile homes for their employees in 1975. Frank Sipes, of the Fairbanks BIA office said the housing shortage was "getting rough for employees - especially the lower paid ones." He said the agency also found that it could not recruit new staff without housing.. Sipes termed the housing a 11mixed blessing," but said it had worked out fairly well except for some minor maintenance problems. Five of the-17 occupied BIA mobile home households responded to the Impact Center survey. Three of the five mentioned problems heating their mobile homes. Other complaints related to the fact that the park was not,yet completed and streets were still unpaved. Rents charged by BIA included utilities. All of those who responded lived in 3 bedroom mobile homes, but their monthly rents ranged from $220 to $485 depending on the employee's salary. George Puziak of Arctic Constructors said his firm purchased a small mobile home park in 1974 which contained several older mobile homes. The company renovated the existing homes and purchased some new ones for a total of 13 mobile homes. The units were used to house new employees coming to Alaska from the Lower '48. Puziak said the park bad worked very well, particularly since the homes were adjacent to the company's headquarters which made it convenient for staff to get to work. The Bureau of Land Management purchased 10 mobile home units to house incoming personnel temporarily until they could find other housing. Richard Le Dosquet, of BLM said they tried to limit employees to a six-raonth stay in the homes, but some had stayed longer. He said the agency had been pleased with the mobile homes, but had been very dissptisfied with the mobile home park in which the homes were located. Le Dosquet said that there had been problems with water, sewers, perma- frost, frozen pipes, and fires, and that BLM planned to move the units to another location. 37 17 nr DESIGN CONSTRUCTION & SAFETY OF MOBILE HOMES Heating & Insulation For a number of years the Alaska Department of Commerce has required that all mobile homes transported to the state meet a construction code which mandated a greater amount of insulation than is commonly found in mobile homes sold in the "Lower '48." The regulations established different insulation requirements for three areas within the state: Southeastern Alaska (Zone 1), Anchorage (Zone 2), and Fairbanks (Zone 3). The regulations were administered by the Department's Weights and Measures Section. In spite of these requirements,respondents to the Impact Center's survey ranked heating as the major problem with mobile home living in Fairbanks (see previous section on disadvantages, p.10). Leo Howe of the Department's Weights and Measures Section in Fairbanks explained that manufacturers who wished to sell mobile homes in Alaska were required to obtain prior approval of their designs and post a bond to guarantee that all units sold in Alaska were manufactured according to the specifications. Between 1970 and 1975 the state approved designs from about 18 manufacturers for 40 to 50 d if ferent brands and up to 400 different models of mobile homes. Transportation carriers were not allowed to bring units into @'_laska which did not carry a state approved tag. Arrangements with the U.S. Customs station at Tok also prevented individuals from bringing mobile homes into the state which did not meet the code. As of June 15, 1976 the Alaska code was replaced by a national code for mobile home construction established by the U.S. Department of HouFing and Urban Development. The code is designed to give consumers assurance that mobile homes meet minimum design and construction standards. The insulating properties of HUD mobile homes approved for Alaska must be sufficient to maintain a temperature of 70 degrees inside the home when the outside temperature is -50 degrees. The former Alaskan code required that homes maintain a temperature of 70 degrees inside when the outside temperature was -60 degrees. The state has supplied HUD with data which demonstrates the need for higher insulation requirements for Fairbanks, but as yet they have not been changed. The Impact Information Center discussed heating and insulation problems with Axel Carlson, Extension Engineer, with the University of Alaska's Cooperative Extension Service. Carlson attributed the major problem with heating both mobile homes and conventional houses in Fairbanks to cold floors. He said that the thermostat may read 75 degrees, but a cold floor will likely create temperature stratifi- cations with temperatures much lower near the floor and much higher near the ceiling. Carlson said his research had indicated that insulating and heating the crawl space under a mobile home would 38 increase the heating efficiency and prevent such temperature stratifi- cations. Carlson suggested that mobile homes "hould have wooden double- pane windows rather than metal ones and that mobile homes have attached arctic entries. The Impact Information Center's tour of mobile home parks revealed that arctic entries were one of the most common modifica- tions made to mobile homes, but at present are not part of the requirements. In spite of su ch modifications, however, Carlson explained that the elongated shape of singlewide mobile homes is more expensive to heat than a standard home which is more symmetrical in shape. He said, that a 10' X 76.8' mobile home and a 24' X 32' conventional home both contain 768 square feet, but the mobile home has 1,243 square feet of outside wall surface exposed t 'o the cold, where as-the conventional home has only 749 square feet of outside wall area. As a result, mobile homes which are identical to conventional homes except for their elongated shape,.wi3l cost more to heat. Carlson estimated that the annual oil heating fuel costs for the 10' X 76.8' mobile home would be $687.compared to S572 for the 24' X 32' conventional house, a difference of 20%. Carlson also calculated that further savings dould be attained by heating the crawl space. The "Comparison of Heating Costs" table below gives Carlson's estimates of heating cost differences for mobile homes and con--,Tentional houses of the same floor space for five different types of heating fuel's. Comparison of Heating Costs For Mobile Homes & Conventional Houses Mobile Home A = 10 x 76.8,with closed crawl space Mobile Home B = 12 x 64,with closed crawl space Home A = 24 x 32, one story post and beam house with closed crawl space Home B = 24 x 32, one story post and beam house with heated crawl space Calculations are based on annual mean temperature for Fairbanks which is 25.60F. All units have the following characteristics: Size: 768 sq. feet Insulation: 6" floor, 3" walls, 9" roof Doors: Insulated .Windows: Double pane glass Total Annual H@ating Costs Type of Cost Per Mobile- Mobile Home Home Heating Fuel Unit Home A Home B A B Bituminous Coal $31.45/ton $ 262 $ 246 $ 218 $2.00 Electricity $.0355/KWH 1,238, 1$163 1,031 .945 Fuel Oil $.54/gallon 687 645 572 524 Propane $.69/gallon 1,278 1,201 1,064 975 Spruce Wood $28/cord 409 384 340 312 Source: Axel R. Carlson, Extension Engineer, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Ak. 99701. 39 Fire Safety As noted in the discussion of the disadvantages of mobile home living, about 6% of the respondents to the Impact Center's survey mentioned that they felt mobile homes were more subject to fire hazards than other types of residences. About 8% of those living in mobile home parks mentioned fire danger as a disadvantage, compared to only 3% of those living on their own land. In 1975 Oie incidence of fires in mobile home parks was not significantly different from the occurences in those on private land. More concern about fire safety by park residents may be related to the fact that many of the respondents live in the larger mobile home parks where it is more likely that they have seen a mobile home fire. It appears that the difference between fires in mobile homes in parks and those on private land is not the rate of occurence, but :he percentage of loss. Curtis Green of State Farm Insurance noted that the proximity of neighbors in mobile home parks increase the chance that a fire will be detected sooner. He said that it had been State Farm's Fairbanks North Star Borough Mobile Home Fires by Cause 1970-1975 1976-75 1970-75 % of % of 1970 Total Known 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 -75 Causes Causes Electrical 2 2 5 2 2 6 19 13% 21% Smoking 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 4% 6% Children 1 0 0 1 0 2 4 3% 4% Arson 0 0 0 0 2 '2 4 3% .@7 Furnace 4 2 6 7 3 6 28 20% 31% Carelessness 2 0 4 0 0 2 8 .6% 9% Cooking 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 2% 3% Miscellaneous 1 1 3 2 1 4 12 8% 13% Propane 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1% 1% Thawing Pipes 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 2% 3% Stove Pipe 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1% 1% Wood Stove 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1% 1% Unknown/ Unreported 3 .9 11 2 15 13 53 37% Total Fires 14 17 .31 15 25 40 1.42 142 142 Source: Chip Wagoner, Fairbanks North Star Borough Comprehensive Fire Protection (in press). Note: Data for causes of fire are based on mobile home fires in the Borough but not those in the City of Fairbanks, military reservations, or the University of Alaska. 40 experience both in Alaska and nationwide that the average dollar loss for mobile homes is higher for those on private land than it is for homes in parks. This difference is reflected in State Farm's fire insurance rates which are about 10% higher for mobile hoines on private land. State Fire Marshall Pete Sullivan told the Impact Center that fires in mobile homes spread more quickly than in conventional dwellings, primarily because the walls are not covered with sheet rock. He noted that some older mobile homes had flammable paneling finishes but the new HUD regulations have safety standards which require that materials be resistant to flame spread. Sullivan said some of the older mobile homes had aluminum wiring which is a much greater fire hazard than the copper wiring that is required in the present code. City Fire Inspector Bill Howe-observed that once a mobile home has had a fire it is rarely liveable again. Pete Sullivan.said, how- ever,that most of the Borough's mobile homes are located in areas out- side the city which do not have fire protection. He said fires in all types of structure in these areas are total losses much nore frequently than fires which occur within the City limits and have fire protection. Chip Wagoner, who is currently preparing a Fairbanks North Star Borough Comprehensive Fire Protection Plan, supplied the Impact Information Center with statistics on the mobile home fires between 19170 and 1975. This information revealed chat furnace malfunctions were the leading cause of fires in mobile homes, accounting for 31% of the known causes. By comparison, 19% of the known, causes of f i,res in conventional houses w-ere attributed to furnaces. Electricar fires ranked second'as 21% of the known causes, compared to 13% in conventional houses. Thus 52% of the mobile home fires were related to mechanical. failure or malfunction, compared to 32% in conventional houses. This data correlates with the resuits of-a study of.910 mobile home fires done by the National Fire Protection Association in 1975 which noted that: "Nearly half of all mobile home fires were the result of mechanical failure oi, maZfunction as compared with a little over one-quarter of the.fires in conventional homes. ConstrILC7'.-ion, design and installation deficiencies accounted for -*ust twice the percentage of mobile home fires as other dwellings. " ( A Study of Mobile Home Fires, j-JFPA,No. FR75-2, 1975, p.-2.) To prevent water and sewer pipes from freezing during extremely cold winter temperatures, many Fairbanks mobile home owners wrap plumbing with heat tapes. The NFPt report identified heat tapes as another potential fire hazard: "Heat tapes were involved in about twelve percent of the eZec- trical equipment ignitions. These are primarily used -In mobile homes in colder climates to protect exposed Plumbing against freezing in winter. Underwriters' Laboratories, has recently established new minumUm. requirements for electric heat-Ing cable units for mobile home water pipes. These are patterned genera".Zy on Canadian standards that have been in effect for several years 41 Fairbanks North Star Borough 1970-1975 '.C@mparison of Known Causes of Fires In Mobile Homes and Other Residences Mobile Homes Houses and Apartments Electrical All Other Causes 21% 50% All Other Causes iElectrical Furnace 46% 31% 13% Furnace Poodstove@-. lor Stovepipe 19% 18% Woodstove or Stovepipe Comparison of Fire Deaths In Mobile Homes and Other Residences Houses and Year Mobile Homes Apartments 1970 2 2 1971 .7 4 1972 3 2 1973 0 0 1974 1 2 1975 0' 2 Source: Chip Wagoner, Fairbanks North Star Borough Comprehensive Fire Protection Plan (in press). Note: Data for causes of fire are based on mobile home fires in the Borough, but not those in the City of Fairbanks, military reservations,'or the University of Alaska. Data for deaths is for all. fires in Borough. 42 and are credited with brin(jing about a significant reduction in the hazards of heat tape instaZZations.11 (Ibid) Between 1970 and 1972 mobile home fires accounted for 60% of the fire deaths in Fairbanks residences, although mobile homes were less than 20% of the total housing,units. Beginning in February 1973 mobile homes sold in Alaska were required to have smoke detectors in all sleeping areas. Between 1973 and 1975 only one fire death in Fair- banks occured in a mobile home, compared to four in other types of residences. It appears likely that the smoke detector requirement for mobile homes has been a major factor in reducing the number of fatal- iti'e@s in mobile home fires. The NFPA report on mobile home fires said: "None of the reports of fataZ mobiZe home fires reviewed in connection with "his study indicated that the mobiZe homes in which the fires occurred were equipped with either heat or smoke detectors." (Ibid.,p.11) The new HUD regulations for mobile homes which went into effect June 15, 1976 require smoke detectors in all sleeping areas. In the Impact Center's survey of mobile home residents the lack of fire protection, problems in obtaining fire insurance, and high fire insurance rates were mentioned as disadvantages by 7% of those living in mobile home parks and 11% residing on their own land. 'The Impact Center contacted State Farm insurance, the maj,ox f ire. insurer of mobile homes in the Fairbanks area, to discuss their, requirements for insuring mobile homes. Charlotte Huhn said that State Farm will offer insurance to residents,in only 13 of the mobile home parks in the Fairbanks area. She said the approved parks were usually new. Due to the potential of fire spreadi-ig*from one mobile home to others in a park, State Farm will only insure a percentage of the mobile homes based on the size and condition of the park. Mobile homes insured by State Farm must be less than 10 years old, have the wheels removed, be on a foundation, and be connected to all utilities. Mobile homes situated on private land must meet the'same requirements but the water supply must be from a utilities company or well. Water holding tanks alone are not acceptable. Consumer Complaints About Mobile Homes The Fairbanks Consumer Protection Office told the Impact Information Center that it had handled 33 mobile home complaints during the last three years, 18 of which were made between July 1975 and June 1976. The office said the complaints were primarily in regard to mobile home defects. Leo Howe of the State's Weights and Measures Section, said that about 20 of these complaints had been followed up by his office. He explained that the Weights and Measures Section does not have control over service 43 complaints, but can require that mobile homes meet code requirements. Howe said most of the complaints related to defects which caused interior icing, window icing, or condensation. He estimated that about 70% of the complaints warranted some corrective action. Howe said that to date the office has not bad to take official action against any Fairbanks dealers or their mobile home manufacturers but noted that they are required to post a bond with the state to insure that the homes meet the Alaskan codes. If they did not voluntarily correct defects, the costs for such modifications would be covered by the bond. 44 THE FUTURE OF MOBILE HOME LIVING IN FAIRBANKS As the graph below illustrates. there have been wide fluctuations in the annual. number of mobile homes brought into the state. Mobile home sales increased after the 1969 Bonus Oil Lease Sale, but when the oil pipeline was delayed sales declined, Beginning in 1973 Alaska's mobile home industry .experienced a rapid growth. A record 2,000 mobile homes were brought into Alaska during 1975, but the state's Weights and Measures Section estimated that the number brought in during 1976 would be considerably lower. In visits to the five local mobilehome dealers, Impact Center staff found that many of the units available for sale were 1975 models. Dealers said that their sales were down substantially from last year's levels. The lower demand for mobile homes reflects an easing in the Fairbanks housing market. The Total Number of Mobile Homes 2000- Entering Alaska 1968-1975 1800- 1600- 1400- 1200- 1000 - 800- 600 400- 200- 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 Source: Mobile.Home Inspector, Weights and Measures Section, Alaska Department of Commerce@, Anchorage. 45 Impact Center's survey of advertised housing rentals dipped to a low of only 18 units in March 1975, however, the survey for August 1976 found that 268 units were advertised. Although 87% of the mobile home residents who responded to the Impact Center's survey said a conventional house was their first housing choice, the high cost of such homes puts them beyond the reach of many Fairbanks residents. Nationally the percentage of families who can afford to purchase homes has declined. Fortune magazine noted: 11 . . . in 1959 seven out of ten American families had .enough income to make the monthly payments on a median-priced new house . . . By the end of Last year (1975), only about four of the ten families could afford the payments on that median-priced house (Fortune, April 1976, p. 84). The article went on to predict that high interest rates and increasing con- struction costs would create a continued demand for mobile homes: "A Large part of the demand for new housing over the next fifteQn years will be met by mobile homes, a sector of the shelter market that is sometimes overlooked . . . mobile homes have been providing nearly 20 percent of the nation's output of shelter and more than 90 percent of new housing priced below $20,000 (Ibid., pp. 86-87). Demand for mobile homes in Fairbanks during the post-pipeline period will be closely linked to the area's population level. At the present time one of the most frequently discussed questions is "How many people will leave Fairbanks when pipeline construction is over? Some predict a major exodus, "Do You Plan to Stay in Fairbanks Wben Pipeline Construction is Over?" Sample Type of Mobile Home Household Yes No Undecided Size All Households Surveyed 83% 14% 3% 529 Newcomers - in Fairbanks 3 Yrs. or Less 69% 26% 5% 220 Pre-Pipeline Residents - in Fairbanks 4 Years or More 92% 6% 6% 300 Mobile Home Park Residents 78% 18% 3% 319 Mobile Home Residents on Own Land 91% 6% 3% 169 Mobile Home Residents Not in Park@s or on Own Land 82% 15% 3% 33 Pipeline Worker in Household 65% 27% 8% 136 Alyeska Mobile Homes (Collegiate Park) 15% 73% 12% 26 Pipeline Workor in Household, not inclu- ding Collegiate Park 77% 16% 7% 110 46 ,others say that people will stay because of the potential for a gas pipeline and further resource development. The Impact Center's survey asked mobile home residents if they planned to stay in Fairbanks when pipeline construction ended and 83% said yes., A more'detailed breakdown of the responses for dif- ferent segments of the mobile home population is shown onthe opposite page. It is likely that some persons may change their minds about. whether to leave or stay depending on the availability of local employment.and the overall con- dition of the Fairbanks economy. Nearly a third of the mobile home residents surveyed by the Impact Center said they planned to stay in their mobile homes either permanently or had not made plans to live elsewhere. Three percent said they had sold their homes already and twelve percent indicated that they did not plan to remain living in their mobile home very much longer. The table below summarizes plans of several groups of residents regarding how long they will stay in their mobile homes: "How Long Do You Plan to Stay in This Mobile Homq?"* Resi- Resi- Mobile Home All dents dents Mobile Residents House- 3 yrs. 4 yrs. Home Park on Own holds or less or more Residents Land "Several years, permanently, no plans to live elsewhere," etc. 31% 29% 33% 29% 37% "Until we can buy or build a home" 20% 20% 19% 15% 22% "A few more years" 14% 16% 13% 16% 13% "Less than a year" 12% 13% 12% 15% 8% "Sold it already" 3% 3% 3% 4% 1% Other 5% 5% 5% 4% 7% "Not sure, don't know" 15% 14% 15% 17% 12% Number of Responses 422 152 262 245 141 *Question was only asked of residents who said they planned to stay in Fairbanks after pipeline construction ended. A number of the respondents to the Impact Center's survey expressed their viewsabout the future. One pipeline worker,who had recently purchased 47 7= a mobile home. and now has it for sale plans to leave Fairbanks. He com- mented: "I loved Fairbanks when I got here in December 1968, but 1 can't afford it when the pipeline is over Irm not tak- ing money and running back to the 'Lower '48' because I want to WN probabZy be back), but economicaZZy tiZ things settle down, I'm leaving , . . There's going to be one HELL of a mo- bile home market glut!" A mobile home resident who moved to Fairbanks from Kenai two year ago pre- dicted: "Fairbanks trailer owners will eventually encounter the scone problem as those in Kenai during the oil boom. The assessed value by the Borough and appraised value will remain far above the fair market vaZue.11 Other residents commented that they were looking forward to the 'end of pipeline construction: "We've been here this long why should we leave? We hope the boomers leave and let us get back to a good '@ife again." 48 APPENDIX FAIRBANKS NORTH STARBOROUGH B0X 267 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 IMPACT INFORMATION CENTER July, 1976 Dear Mobile Home Resident: The Impact Information Center is preparing a report on mobile home living in Fairbanks. The number of mobile homes has increased substantially during the pipeline construction period and we are trying to evaluate the role they have played in meeting the community's housing needs. Our report will include surveys of the major mobile home park owners and managers, mobile home dealers, and lending institutions which finance mobile homes. In addition, we plan to evaluate mobile home living from the perspective of mobile home residents. We encourage you to participate in this evaluation by completing the enclosed questionnaire and returning it to us in the return envelope provided. We have found that the questionnaire usually takes about 10 minutes. All replies will be kept strictly confidential and our report will not identify individuals or mobile home parks they live in by name. If you include your name and address, we will send you a copy of the final report. Thank you. Sincerely, Sue Fison, Director Impact Information Center. Enclosures IMPACT INFORMATION CENTER Survey of Mobile Home Residents July 1976 1. How long have you lived in Fairbanks? How long, have you lived in this mobile home? 2. How many people live in this, mobile home? Please give the ages of the residents: 3. Have you ever lived in a mobile home before? yes no If yes, where did you live before? (city & state) 4. Why did you decide to live in a mobile home in Fairbanks? I prefer mobile home living Other housing was too expensive No other housing was available Other If you do not prefer mobile home living, what is your first choice? Rent apartment Rent house Other: 0wn house Own condominium 5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of mobile home living in Fairbanks? Advantages Disadvantages 6. What type of mobile home do you live in? Singlewide Double-wide Bedrooms-: 1 2 3 4 or more. Wanigan: yes no 7. Where is this mobile home located? Mobile home park Own land Other, Why did you choose this location? What do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this location? Advantages Disadvantages Do you plan to move this mobile home to another location? yes no no If yes, when and where do you plan to move it? (over) 50 8. If you own or are currently buying a mobile home please give the following information: How was purchase of your mobile home financed? Bank Dealer Credit Union' Previous owner Cash Other: Purchase price: $ Year purchased: Purchased: new used Does this purchase price include land? yes no Estimated costs to live in this mobile home (fill in blanks which apply to you): Monthly loan payment (for those purchasing a mobile home) $ Monthly land payment (for those located on own land) $ Monthly rental payment (for those renting a mobile home) $ Monthly space rent (mobile home park) $- Electricity: Most recent bill $ Most expensive month Fuel oil: $ _ per month, 6 months, year, Propane: $ per month, 6 months, year Taxes: $ per month, 6 months year, Insurance: $ per month, 6 months, year, Other costs: 10. Do you plan to stay in Fairbanks when pipeline construction is over? yes no If yes, how long do you plan to continue living in this mobile home: 11. Does anyone living in this mobile home work on the pipeline? yes no 12. Is this mobile home presently for sale? yes no We welcome any other comments regarding mobile home living in Fairbanks. NOTE- It is not necessary to give your name and address. If you would like the Impact Information Center to send you a copy of our report on mobile homes in Fairbanks, you may provide your name and mailing address below. Name & Mailing Address: N A OA ,SERI CES C,rR LIBRARY survey of Mobile Home Residents 6668 14112856 3 Questionnaire Return Rates Mobile Mobile Mobile Homes On Home Homes On Another's Parks Own Land Land Total Total Mobile Homes in Boro@Lgh 1,767 1,307 408 3,482 Number not sent questionnaires 259 27 1 287 Number returned undeliverable as addressed 190 48 62 300 Total assumed received 1,318 1,232 345 2,895 Total Questionnaires Returned 347 199 36 607* Not used 8 16 0 42* Late returns 16 9 2 27 Total analyzed for report 323 174 34 538* Return Rates Total returned -:- total mobile homes in Borough 20% 15% 9% 17% Total returned + total assumed received 26% 16% 10% 21% Sample Sizes Total analized for report total mobile homes in borough 18% 13% 8% 15% Total analized for report + total assumed received 25% 14% 10% 19% *Totals include questionnaires returned where location was not given. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Impact Information Center extends special thanks to the more than 600 persons who responded to our survey of mobile home residents. Research and preparation of the'report involved many, but I would like to acknowledge the following persons for their contributions: Cindy Quisenberry, Trisha Walker, Stephen West, Mim Dixon, Jack Kruse, Frank Hunt, Kathy Kibbee, Don Moore, -Zill McLaughlin, Axel Carlson, and Chip Wagoner. 52