|
Posted by Warm Worm on February 10, 2008, 8:59 pm
Edgar wrote:
>> Here're a few links to maybe help get your log rolling:
>>
>> http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/03/0314_microhomes/index_01.htm
>> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/04/very_small_hous_1.php
>> http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/houses.htm
>> http://www.landliving.com/articles/0000000581.aspx
>>
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0789309742/ref=sib_dp_pt/002-5878034-9377625#reader-link
>>
>> Still building big? Why? Why not?
>>
>> My initial questions/thoughts:
>> Do smaller homes provide bigger design challenges? More of a creative
>> attention to choreography and efficiency, etc.?
>
> Yes, function and overlapping functions would definitely help.
>
>> When designing for a small home, should we consider hiring/importing
>> Japanese over North American architect talent?
>
> Not necessarily. Any architect worth his salt can and should adapt to any
> design challenge.
>
>> Do small homes necessarily have to be/feel cramped or claustrophobic?
>
> I guess it can be, but a larger home can feel impersonal, empty, and cold as
> well.
>
>> Do you try to suggest a smaller/greener footprint for your new clients'
>> homes? (Can there be as much money in it?)
>
> I've tried to implement ideas in the design of schools, but budget is a
> major constraint. I stick to the easy stuff like building orientation. If
> I were to design homes, I think yes I would bring it up, but never force it
> on someone. In school we were always thought you should always have a
> reason for things you do. I would give them all the information they need
> and let them decide for themselves.
>
>> How Does Ken's apparent new Okanagan home compare with his others?
>
> Is this the tiny home? I think it's brilliant, but I'd imagine it is
> definitely a lifestyle, not just a home.
>
>> Feelings? Ideas? Conclusions?
>
> I personally think smaller is better. I've always like the use of layers,
> and I think a smaller space benefits more from them. I think there can be
> more creative use of things normally left to standard design and detail, for
> instance a wall could be much more than just studs and drywall, as there is
> wasted space between those studs. Or a ceiling or attic space. Lots of
> little nooks and crannies for everyday little things that get ignored when
> you have all the space in the world to work with.
>
>> How small has Don designed? How big?
>> Anyone here specialize in small/green? How easy is it to find one who
>> does?
>>
>> How might have Chris E. responded?
>>
>> This thread is dedicated to the late Christopher Egan, who initiated my
>> interest in "choreography".
>>
>> Rich
>
> My current home is around 900 S.F. I couldn't imagine owning more than
> that, but of course I have no kids or anything like that. It is plenty of
> room for a couple, 2 cats, and a dog. Actually my dog probably has the most
> room of all being able to use the rest of the 6000s.f. or so of land while
> we're out of the house.
To me, 2 cats and a dog equal about 1 kid. ;)
> I think I would enjoy designing smaller homes just as much as bigger ones.
> What I hate, and what seems to be the trend, is that smaller homes here in
> California, equate to not only crap homes, with no character, but also homes
> where you could reach across and touch your neighbor.
"Excuse me, neighbor, but your shampoo just fell out of the tub...
Actually, just a minute, let me to get it for you..." (climbs over &
through window)
(neighbor says, "Oh hey, hi-- great, thanks!", while continuing to rinse
ears of soap.)
> It was one of the
> reasons I wanted an old Bungalow. There is actually lots of room to expand
> on my lot, which I would enjoy doing someday, but for now I'm good.
Was it you who posted a pic of your house awhile back?
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap