tiny, tiny houses

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/10/22/tiny.houses/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

No one thinks this is a sustainable trend, do they?

it's as sustainable as a clown trailer, which isn't that unsustainable, to be honest.

I mean that "house" is totally lulz, obv

MORE CLOWNS LESS PATIO

Doesn't seem much different from living in an Airstream, to me. Except Airstreams are awesomer.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_Od5Y-KUmNPc/R47MEj3vxCI/AAAAAAAAAPM/rTMjoAfmZLg/s400/Small+house+1.bmp

We could all live in a storage unit like WALL-E and back into a tiny cubby every night to sleep amidst our forks and zippos.

my dad gets a variety of handyman/contractor/etc mags and there was a spread in one of them on these tiny portable houses a couple of years ago. some of them were really kind of awesome!

This micro-compact home (a 2.6m cube) was shown at the pre-fab home exhibit at MoMA recently:

http://www.microcompacthome.com/

no billiards room, no credibility

This is where most people in England live.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/suffolk/content/images/2005/01/12/southwold_beach_huts_robin_keightley_470_470x300.jpg

i love tiny houses!

i don't see what the problem is, here

so it's basically like a portable dorm room with a loft. I can see that.

No one thinks this is a sustainable trend, do they?

no one has a choice!!! under obama's tax plan we will all have to live like this, especially small business owners!

These books by Sarah Susanka are pretty good, you guys! For in-between houses that can fit a real family but are still not-so-big.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51QK6FXCT1L.jpg

http://www.notsobighouse.com/plans/index.asp

these all look pretty big to me.

I can understand minimizing/choosing a smaller home, but particularly as I look towards having kids I can't fathom only having 100 square feet of living space and I ESPECIALLY can't fathom the the guy living in a house so tiny that his wife can't live in it, too. There's "small house" and then there's "lol no room for wifey".

Also this is kind of bullshit: It hasn't been without its challenges, but Sharon Kastrinos says it's exhilarating to no longer feel compelled to keep up with the Joneses. "There's a tremendous burden that's off your shoulders," she says. "Small is OK, and it might even be better.

Um, you are pulling the "I can't compete with the Joneses so I'm going to change the rules so that I win" move, not the "I don't need to compete with the Joneses" move; if competition/ostentation wasn't your thing, why is your house SO amazingly tiny?

Yeah, the first one I lookxp ed at has 4000 sq ft under roof, 2800 finished. That's huge.

100 sq ft isn't realistic, but I've got a book somewhere that focuses on houses in the <800 sq ft. range, which is quite reasonable.

that xp in there was supposed to be before yeah. hmmm

I enjoy the writing in, and philosophy of The NSBH more than the floor plans for sale: I have a feeling the architect started out with more modest projects but unfort the money in that market is in appealing to people who could AFFORD McMansions or similar, and convincing them they can have something beautiful that is somewhat less wasteful. The books that I've seen had some very sensible designs in them.

Another thing she does that is hard to put yr finger on, is that she's vocal abt designing things that satisfy/appeal to humans and are in proportion for us...like certain lines of sight, or a window at the end of a hallway so that you are walking toward light and not a dead end, and little things that are very Timeless Way of Building instinctive-like. This makes good sense to me.

Because I mean who HASN'T seen some crazy shit in "renovated" apartments with the walls moved around, and brand-new suburban homes where the layouts don't make sense or shunt people away from the main spaces, and things like that? Last year I toured luxury apts right OVER the East River that were $5000 a month to rent and were laid out for SHIT.

They still own their 1800 sq. ft. house - how is this that different from camping?

I'm all for downsizing, but I think this is just a stunt.

The thing about tiny, tiny houses is that it's workable for single people or those without kids or those in clement climates, but gbx and Dan and lots of people know that you have to have some "play inside" options in February. If your house is too small for a few kids to be running through it without you needing to kill them with the KitchenAid mixer, it's too small. We should be able to have gracious living spaces that feel good to us, if we're being honest about how we live. Plus not that we NEED a lot of stuff, but it's nice to have some stuff for when you want it, and storing extra clothes in my car is not really workable or intriguing to me.

And by "feel good" obv I don't mean, "feel good in comparison to the neighbors" but, like, if the rooms and doorways fit us and the sight-lines highlight things that are restful and attractive to the eye, and whether floorplans encourage people to travel toward the social centers (kitchens, dens) or stay away from them in their own rooms, and stuff like that.

I thought this comment was interesting:

Well, this just won't work in most places because the County Health Departments in a lot of places won't allow this type of residential dwelling (if you can call it that). Here, it's illegal in some counties to "camp" more than 3 days straight on your own property! I mean, you have to have water and sewer of some description............There is too much room for abuse of any rules here...... That thing is smaller than a Winnebago! and how sturdy is it? We Northeasters here yearly with 50 mph wind not to mention hurricanes. And for the uninitiated, you usually don't have time to just pick up and "outrun" a hurricane.......where are you gonna go? The Highways fill up quickly, so it USUALLY (not always) better to hunker down in a well constructed Block or Brick Building "on a hill" with a windload design of 120mph +........just thinking out loud......

(the ordinance portions of it, basically)

not enough room in a 100 sq ft house to store any ordinance

I was telling a coworker the other day who was thinking about moving into the city that it's actually really easy to live as a single dude in less than 700 sqft. I also told him if he wants to move in together with someone, even someone you expect to share the bathroom, kitchen and bedroom with, you still need to basically double that amount so you don't go Q#$^BTAERTBAGADR$Q&$%^&E

^^^^^^ all so true.

Mr. Jaq and I just finished living in basically a 700 sqft open room w/ a single (though gigantic) bathroom (and 2 cats). The new flat is a bit more than twice the sqft (also has 2nd toilet w/shower), so both of us will make it through the year without a spousicide.

Why aren't micro apartments more of a thing? Rents are exorbitant almost everywhere, but f*** a roommate. I'd gladly live in smartly designed 250 sq ft at a 30% discount from regular studio/1br rates just to have my own space. I suspect the problem is that a drastic cut in space does not equate to a comparable reduction in ownership costs/expenses (for the owner).

This place is near me, 220 sq ft studios, but I think the rent is close to $1000/mo now.

https://media.apts247.info/dc/dcd74e1096074faab46164a218bf8e5c/floorplans/studio.png

The complex: http://www.theaquasuites.com/