> leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. Funnily enough, there's a city nearby that's quite expensi

> leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. Funnily enough, there's a city nearby that's quite expensive to live in (even for California), because it's beach-side. And of course in every expensive city there's an even more expensive neighborhood. Except, for some bizarre reason, this wealthy neighborhood has a similar arrangement where the residents own their homes, but rent the land. Except all the homes are your typical McMansions and permanent; they aren't mobile homes. I was a bit baffled by the whole thing. It's like an HOA but worse. Perhaps those living there believe that because they are wealthy they aren't worried about any of the consequences normally associated with the mobile-home trap.