I imagine it's nation-wide. Most "in-town" areas that I've seen already have square-footage requirements which would eliminate tiny homes right off the bat.I read that article and it seems like the coastal Elites have ruined the tiny house movement over on the West coast. Leaves me wondering what other parts of the country have experienced
I think states struggle with how to classify these homes. Since a lot of the earliest tiny homes were all built on trailer frames, some states want to class them as RVs, but then the RV industry is just like, "Whut" because they have a lot of regulations to follow. (Also, you know, how are they going to sell $250,000 RVs when Bojack can legally build a Tumbleweed replica in his backyard?)
I noticed that a lot of shed companies have quit selling cabin shells. Tuffshed was one of my favorites to tour and play inside, they had two-story shells you could get for $8000-12000, with enough square footage to actually be a legitimate apartment (300-500 sq. feet). And the timber and floors were actually proper floors, not just "good enough for a shed loft" flooring. I can only guess they were getting in trouble about these, because people definitely wanted to buy them.
Personally, I think it's a sad state of affairs. We might technically have TONS of open land available in the US, but anyone who's honest about it should admit a lot of that is rocky badlands with no access to potable water. When you subtract all that land, and then subtract all the private land that people are squatting on and will never sell, you realize we DO have a housing/space problem. I don't know if "tiny homes" are the answer, but we do need something better than tenement buildings that feel like rat warrens for the homeless and laws requiring sprawling estates for neighborhood building.