In 2005, damage from Hurricanes Rita and Katrina felled a substantial number of dwellings in the Southeastern United States.

The response for immediate replacement housing was met by FEMA, through contracts with travel trailer and mobile home suppliers.  Clayton Homes booked a substantial amount of revenue from government contracts, although they were hardly alone.

Unfortunately, there were a lot of problems with how those contracts were fulfilled.  It has become fairly well known that levels of formaldehyde in trailers exceeded acceptable limits.  When the health of so many people was put at risk by a government intended to otherwise help them, it made the factory built housing industry look very bad.

In 2008, how will recent history influence the events surrounding this year’s disaster response?  In 2006 and 2007, the hurricane season was mild.  There was no dramatic event.  Already, though, Gustav has roared through with high winds.  Ike may be far worse, in particular if it goes through Miami and up along the East Coast.  The damage could depend more upon the path of Ike then upon the relative ferocity of the winds.

If a lot of homes are damaged, it might be an opportunity for huge sales in manufactured housing.  If only because no other product can adequately house so many people in such a short amount of time.

But any opportunity will be thwarted by memories of how things went just three years ago.

With time, it feels like Steve Preston’s appointment to lead HUD is making more sense.  Yes, he comes from a background outside of housing.  Yes, he only has a portion of a year to turn around an agency that has been run into the ground by its previous leadership.  Yes, there are good people available (more…)

When North Carolina Governor Michael Easley expressed his concern about formaldehyde in FEMA trailers, he joined a long list of critics. Easley was only the latest and perhaps an unusual voice.

What has not been said is that the manufactured housing industry was not entirely eager to be put in the center of the short-term reconstruction of the Gulf. The industry needed the sales, but still regrets the implementation and layout of the Katrina villages. FEMA’s land use plans went against prevailing wisdom within both the manufactured housing industry and the traditional public housing community.

In segregating the poor into concentrated communities, FEMA’s approach looked more like the Chicago Housing Authority (before Gatreaux) and less like Hope VI.

True, the acquisition of so many units provided a much-needed shot in the arm for sales departments of many of the leading manufacturers. FEMA bought approximately 20,000 trailers shortly after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Clayton Homes, for example, recorded more than $188 million in contracts from FEMA.

Nonetheless, the devil is in the details and that is where FEMA made trouble itself. The agency staged those trailers inland in places like Selma, Alabama and Purvis, Mississippi while seeking locations to establish new villages for displaced residents. Once they found their spots, they puts scores of displaced people in sometimes remote locations.

Newt Gingrich predicted that it would create “ghettos of despair.” Susan Popkin, a housing policy expert from the Urban Institute, simply said, “we know how to do this better.”

In the years since then, scores of encampments have sprung up. If the evaluation criterion was solely the ability of these units to provide temporary shelter, then they may have met that goal.

Unfortunately, there is no more permanent fix like the successful temporary solution. So, in some counties FEMA trailer parks are still intact.
The Katrina parks are now well-known eyesores. These communities remain, and as they persist, they become a vocal and malignant symbol of manufactured housing in the minds of the public. While one study found that rates of mental illness were high among Katrina survivors. Another report showed that rates of crime and drug use were high in the camps.

In a prescient Sept. 2005 note from the Manufactured Housing Institute, MHI pans the impact of the trailer communities. The note acknowledges the capacity for the FEMA plan to damage the reputation of the industry.

We also stated that the manufactured home industry is greatly concerned over FEMA’s plans to concentrate up to a thousand of these temporary homes, placed closely together, into large “cities” to house displaced victims. We noted the industry’s preference for FEMA to place these homes in smaller communities dispersed in multiple locations or incorporate them into existing manufactured home communities located throughout the affected area to lessen the social tensions and concerns inherent in these types of large, concentrated temporary “cities.”

The MHI statement goes on to say that “these FEMA-specified homes…” do not reflect the true nature of today’s manufactured homes or manufactured home communities, which provide a level of comfort and livability quite different from the images and perceptions being created by sensational media coverage. ”

The academics had doubts about the plan, too. One thought that it would re-create troubled neighborhoods. The Katrina parks create a rural version of the very set of problems that housing advocates have already moved past in urban areas. Think about the Richard Daley, Sr. approach to housing in Chicago.

Today’s approaches, implemented through Hope VI, focus on mixed-income, mixed use development plans. New Orleans began such a plan with the Department of Housing and Urban Development prior to Katrina.

The fact that Easley, as well as North Carolina Senator Richard Burr, have put manufacturers in their crosshairs, speaks to the fallout for the industry.

It tells us that you should not make toxic products.  It demonstrates once again that the manufactured housing industry has chosen short-term gains at the cost to its long-term reputation.  It dramatizes the consequences of letting an indifferent government agency have control of your reputation.

Now that the Centers for Disease Control has affirmed long-held concerns about fumes in FEMA travel trailers, change could be coming in the Gulf Coast.

The CDC reports that it has completed tests of 519 travel trailers. Their survey found that formaldehyde fumes exceeded normal levels by a factor of five. About five percent of surveyed residents had breathing problems that the CDC attributed to the fumes.

In acting upon the news, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicates that it will seek alternatives for the 35,000 families living in FEMA trailers in Lousiana and Mississippi. Residents will be moved to a variety of housing types, from apartments and hotels to mobile homes.

One option that wasn’t mentioned was the Katrina cottage. While those homes were heralded for their excellent urban design and affordablity, some reports indicate that

communities have attempted to use zoning laws to block the homes from their borders. That is not a surprising reaction. In fact, it mirrors some of the obstacles that face any attempts at manufactured housing.

Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, for example, has attempted to put rules into place that limit Katrina cottages to land zoned for commercial mobile home parks.

In Mississippi, where about 30 percent of households lived in rentals, just 10 percent of Katrina funds for housing rehab have gone to rental units.

All of this could suggest problems when it comes to moving people. While FEMA might decide to shut down the trailers, they might not have a enough alternatives in place to move all of these people.

Even now, four years later, existing biases in zoning are predicating that manufactured housing cannot be fully utilized to answer the needs of residents.  Systemic lack of investment in rental housing does not help.

Many non-profits (like this one) in the area are finding ways to respond.  They are doing great work.  But they cannot do it alone, and they should not have to work against the current of government agencies.

FEMA officers indicate that one big problem will be accomplishing the relocation before the summer. When its hot, the fumes are worse.

One of the best pieces of advice to come out of the latest CFED I’m Home Conference was news that the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) will supply its homes to nonprofits virtually without cost.

FEMA has a lot of homes in staging areas in three cities in the Southeast. They are considering another in New Jersey. One reports says that in all, FEMA has more than 16,000 units.

These are not travel trailers, but instead high-quality manufactured homes designed to meet all kinds of bad weather conditions. These homes must be able to withstand high winds on the Outer Banks, snow loads in the upper Plains, and cooling demands for the desert.

The backlog of homes has created an opportunity for nonprofits. FEMA wants to get rid of the homes. If a non-profit works through the requisite paperwork, they can get homes for only the cost of shipping. For nonprofits in the Southeast, that could work out to as little as a few thousand dollars per home.

One housing director from Minnesota indicated that his group paid a little over $5,000 per unit. Either way, it is still an excellent price for a new home.