() open steps over the food preparation area is not particularly sanitary due to what can fall off the bottom of a person's shoes, socks and feet...neither is using a food preparation surface as a tread.
() Considering falls are the principal mode of fatal and serious domestic injuries, no handrails on a winding stair that the occupant will be navigating to use the toilet in the middle of the night is unconscionable design.
() The simple task of making the bed becomes a gymnastic exercise performed without a net.
() Because it has fenestration on three sides, it's not efficient in terms of footprint. The safety, hygiene and convenience compromises are unnecessary - a larger footprint could be equally cost effective in single application and more environmentally sound by allowing denser development (e.g. as a grouphouse, rowhouse or flat in a multistory aggregate.
I think your first two points are mostly trivial to address - put a board going beneath all the steps and add a handrail.
The bed seems a poor idea to me too though. Maybe if it were just for one person or if you used a futon that you'd roll up. Isn't a futon more in-line with the micro home concept anyhow?
I had the same comment about the stairs above the food area. Even if occupants remove their shoes, there is always dust and dirt being tracked around (especially in a house that doesn't have an in-out transition area such as a covered entrance). Partially enclosing the stairs would help, but even then you could still have dust and dirt floating down. I also see this bad design in sailboats (another exercise in small living), where the companion-way steps go over the counter or sink.
For the bed in the loft, I think the open areas are more about wasted space. The downstairs has plenty of light, so the opening could be replaced with shelving or closed storage. The lost windows could be replaces with a skylight.
The thing that stood out most as missing to me is a shower. Sure, I suppose you could do that at a gym, but still - having at least a shower is a pretty big quality-of-living improvement (or lack thereof).
This probably competes with the IKEA houses announced in the past few years. But the best concept for modular, mobile micro homes in my opinion is still the Nagakin Tower (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakagin_Capsule_Tower).
Imagine taking your home cube with you to another big city and having it attached to a fixed base (your choice of floor and orientation as available), or even just relocating to be in walking distance from your new office.
- No temperature control. This could only work in areas with moderate temperatures year-round. You probably wouldn't want one of these in Arizona or Montana.
- Seems like it would have the same tenuous relationship with tornadoes that trailer homes/parks do.
- Lack of a divider between the stairs and the kitchen makes it seem like it would be too easy to accidentally knock things off of the shelf or counter while going up the stairs. I especially don't like that the counter turns into a stair without any sort of clear dividing line.
If you made this out of plywood/polystyrene sandwich and gave it a slightly more aerodynamic shape, you could probably arrange to have this quite securely anchored, depending on the ground where you are moving. The hyper insulation of such materials would also do a lot to alleviate the climate control issues. You'd want to arrange for shade to control solar heating in warm climates. Also, such a small house would be easier to cool using solar and wind power.
Your third objection probably kills this, though. I'd just make the place 5' longer.
Make it modular and expandable, have like a 'base house' with the kitchen, 1st bath, 1st bed, and living room then then add the ability to add Bedrooms, and Bathrooms as 'modules' -- basically a house building block system, --that would be cool.
This is a really cool idea. It would be awesome if the walls were also modular enough that you can take the glass doored walls off the original structure and put them on the new pieces you purchase.
No. A couple minutes with zillow.com or trulia.com will show you lots available for well under $10,000. Sure, they won't exactly be in premium locations, but with some work you can find some that are desirable & decent. I've seen some under $2000 just outside Atlanta, rural half-acre lots close to rivers & lakes.
I think many of these kinds of designs are very expensive, and often not as sustainable as I'd like.
When I finally settle down and build my own tiny house, I will likely start from an existing structure. Either a classic RV (like an Airstream of Avion) or a shipping container, and build up from there. It'll still end up costing about $15k-$30k, but I'd also like to reuse old materials wherever possible; not so much to save money (as I have a decent income), but to reduce waste and environmental impact. All of these "sustainable" building designs always use so much newly manufactured material. It makes it somewhat less impressive, to me. Another option might be natural building materials; cob, earth bag, etc. I've only recently started learning about them. Though they have other issues...they take of a lot of space, and often make it more difficult to build up, when you need more space. Tiny houses built with conventional modern building materials can be quite tall without a lot of extra effort. At the very least, a loft bedroom is pretty useful in building with a smaller footprint.
I think old RVs are flimsy and poorly insulated, and good ones hold their value and can still be used as vehicles. The idea of recycling shipping containers is really just a designer's dream--you only ever see new-looking containers in their images. Decomissioned containers are probably rusty and/or bent/damaged and thus unsuitable for a dwelling--if they were good enough for living in, they're probably still usable for shipping. And I haven't done the math, but coverting a shipping container to a living space (insulation, plumbing+electric, doors+windows) seems like more waste than recycling the steel into a new container.
Cob/earth and/or locally sourced logs are great from a sustainability point of view (though not available in all locations), but they don't make portable housing. I would think that a house such as this, with its small size wouldn't be too expensive even if made with sustainably harvested wood and other building materials--you could also substitute recycled building materials.
Pretty to look at it but deeply impractical. Others have described the faults better than I could, so here's a couple of builders, who have houses actually in production, which beats this micro house in both price and practicality.
Scott Stewart builds some interesting designs and most of what he sells is under $30k. His modular design at $8k per module has some potential.
For the people objecting to an open staircase over the counter - I'm pretty sure the only reason there isn't more to the stairs is because this is a display model, and building the stairs that way lets you see the stairs.
Couple missing things that I see in this: cooling/heating, electrical, missing shower etc.
I entertain fantasies about living in a small home like this but the reality is this is only for one or two people. It rapid breaks down when you try to expand beyond that.
Quite dangerous to sleep like that, right over the stairs...You can easily fall down. Also it looks like its going to be hard to get in/out of the bed.
That brings up the interesting topic that the "natural" design progression seems to be making a fancy mobile home, but I'd think you can start from a fancy RV just as well.
The RV part would help when you're out in the wilderness instead of in a utility provided mobile home park. Some RV features like batteries for DC power, extensive ventilation instead of relying on AC powered air conditioning, etc.
Of course on the other hand RVs aren't as energy efficient as mobile homes because of a desire to minimize the tow vehicle gas/diesel consumption rather than propane heating consumption.
As a specific criticism I am fairly unimpressed with the size and features of this $30K "rv". Its not that much better than an elaborate $5K or so teardrop trailer. On the other hand its a little bigger than a $90K conversion van. (And when exactly in my lifetime did conversion vans change from middle class machines in my youth, to the current mid level sports car prices?)
There is quite a market for them, don't knock it. Buy a cheap lot somewhere, pour a slab, wheel the tiny house into place, nice starter home for a young'un in one weekend flat.
[+] [-] brudgers|12 years ago|reply
() open steps over the food preparation area is not particularly sanitary due to what can fall off the bottom of a person's shoes, socks and feet...neither is using a food preparation surface as a tread.
() Considering falls are the principal mode of fatal and serious domestic injuries, no handrails on a winding stair that the occupant will be navigating to use the toilet in the middle of the night is unconscionable design.
() The simple task of making the bed becomes a gymnastic exercise performed without a net.
() Because it has fenestration on three sides, it's not efficient in terms of footprint. The safety, hygiene and convenience compromises are unnecessary - a larger footprint could be equally cost effective in single application and more environmentally sound by allowing denser development (e.g. as a grouphouse, rowhouse or flat in a multistory aggregate.
[+] [-] anonymous|12 years ago|reply
The bed seems a poor idea to me too though. Maybe if it were just for one person or if you used a futon that you'd roll up. Isn't a futon more in-line with the micro home concept anyhow?
[+] [-] 205guy|12 years ago|reply
For the bed in the loft, I think the open areas are more about wasted space. The downstairs has plenty of light, so the opening could be replaced with shelving or closed storage. The lost windows could be replaces with a skylight.
[+] [-] aiiane|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shazow|12 years ago|reply
via http://www.nomadmicrohomes.com/gallery.html
[+] [-] Avshalom|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lazyjones|12 years ago|reply
Imagine taking your home cube with you to another big city and having it attached to a fixed base (your choice of floor and orientation as available), or even just relocating to be in walking distance from your new office.
[+] [-] pyre|12 years ago|reply
- Seems like it would have the same tenuous relationship with tornadoes that trailer homes/parks do.
- Lack of a divider between the stairs and the kitchen makes it seem like it would be too easy to accidentally knock things off of the shelf or counter while going up the stairs. I especially don't like that the counter turns into a stair without any sort of clear dividing line.
[+] [-] stcredzero|12 years ago|reply
Your third objection probably kills this, though. I'd just make the place 5' longer.
[+] [-] nowarninglabel|12 years ago|reply
I've recently built a geodome structure and am working on a tiny house, which will probably end up like this wonderful abode http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toFBj9qBLQo
Small is beautiful.
[+] [-] gremlinsinc|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] decad|12 years ago|reply
[1] http://www.hivehaus.co.uk/
[+] [-] malandrew|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robmil|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ctdonath|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wcchandler|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcgain|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mediocregopher|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] malandrew|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aiiane|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SwellJoe|12 years ago|reply
When I finally settle down and build my own tiny house, I will likely start from an existing structure. Either a classic RV (like an Airstream of Avion) or a shipping container, and build up from there. It'll still end up costing about $15k-$30k, but I'd also like to reuse old materials wherever possible; not so much to save money (as I have a decent income), but to reduce waste and environmental impact. All of these "sustainable" building designs always use so much newly manufactured material. It makes it somewhat less impressive, to me. Another option might be natural building materials; cob, earth bag, etc. I've only recently started learning about them. Though they have other issues...they take of a lot of space, and often make it more difficult to build up, when you need more space. Tiny houses built with conventional modern building materials can be quite tall without a lot of extra effort. At the very least, a loft bedroom is pretty useful in building with a smaller footprint.
[+] [-] 205guy|12 years ago|reply
Cob/earth and/or locally sourced logs are great from a sustainability point of view (though not available in all locations), but they don't make portable housing. I would think that a house such as this, with its small size wouldn't be too expensive even if made with sustainably harvested wood and other building materials--you could also substitute recycled building materials.
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] bcbrown|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] segmondy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ExpiredLink|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] honestcoyote|12 years ago|reply
Scott Stewart builds some interesting designs and most of what he sells is under $30k. His modular design at $8k per module has some potential.
http://www.youtube.com/user/scottstew1/videos
Or there's this house, 12' x 24', for 20k. Not a modern design, but it looks quite liveable and is more practical than the 30k micro.
http://www.sugarloafsmalls.com/
Of course, there's always Tumbleweed but their prices tend to be around $50k if you have them build it.
I'd highly recommend Tiny House Blog if you find this type of house design interesting.
http://tinyhouseblog.com/
[+] [-] pessimizer|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lucaspiller|12 years ago|reply
http://www.hivehaus.co.uk/
It can also be upgraded as you need / can afford more space.
[+] [-] raphinou|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] volune|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newman314|12 years ago|reply
I entertain fantasies about living in a small home like this but the reality is this is only for one or two people. It rapid breaks down when you try to expand beyond that.
[+] [-] usaphp|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stcredzero|12 years ago|reply
Just add a safety rail. EDIT: Ah, there is a safety rail, but it should be extended so you have to get out of bed on the end.
[+] [-] eliteraspberrie|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wehadfun|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robotic|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] VLM|12 years ago|reply
The RV part would help when you're out in the wilderness instead of in a utility provided mobile home park. Some RV features like batteries for DC power, extensive ventilation instead of relying on AC powered air conditioning, etc.
Of course on the other hand RVs aren't as energy efficient as mobile homes because of a desire to minimize the tow vehicle gas/diesel consumption rather than propane heating consumption.
As a specific criticism I am fairly unimpressed with the size and features of this $30K "rv". Its not that much better than an elaborate $5K or so teardrop trailer. On the other hand its a little bigger than a $90K conversion van. (And when exactly in my lifetime did conversion vans change from middle class machines in my youth, to the current mid level sports car prices?)
[+] [-] ISL|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ctdonath|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snorkel|12 years ago|reply