|Re: Micro Living Units -- Affordable||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Ken Winter (kensunward.org)|
|Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:17:16 -0700 (PDT)|
Wow. Very well said! I haven't been following this thread, but I happened to read this one, and I'm glad I did. A lot of wisdom in a few words. ~ Ken, from Sunward Cohousing On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:38 AM, R Philip Dowds <rpdowds [at] comcast.net> wrote: > > I will re-configure some points I made in an earlier response to this > concept: > > Tiny spaces are cheaper than less-tiny spaces. But not a lot cheaper. > Think about it. A minimalist dwelling unit might include two doors, a > window, a compact bathroom and kitchen, and a micro-studio of, say, 12 x 12 > feet square. A more comfortable and practical dwelling unit might be > exactly the same, except the studio would be maybe 16 x 20 feet. The extra > construction is mostly … air. Air is pretty cheap, and doesn’t add much to > construction costs. OK, it’s not quite that simple, but the underlying > point is valid: In buildings, it’s features, not space, that tend to cost > the most. > > So now: How do you simplify or reduce features, save lots of construction > cost, and still have a good home? I have two suggestions topping my list: > Multi-family construction. Single family homes are incredibly inefficient > at providing X square feet of amenable interior space. Foundations and > weatherizing envelope are extensive and costly, relative to habitable > square feet, and building utilities like HVAC cannot benefit from any > economies of scale. If you’re trying to limit the cost per square foot of > housing, apartments and condos will always beat out single family homes — > with one hand tied behind their backs, and wearing a blindfold. > Sharing. Who says every individual or couple needs a private bathroom or > kitchen? Well, we all do, that’s the American way. But there are > certainly many other residential amenities that can be successfully shared > by a residential community, instead of privatized as in the single family > model: A guest room; a workshop or arts and crafts room; a swimming pool; a > party/banquet room; even an automobile. This is where cohousing steps in > to make life in a small unit reasonable: by providing options and > opportunities to serve occasional needs in a communal rather than > privatized way. And more communal models, like congregate care for the > elderly, really do find ways to share a kitchen and bathrooms among a dozen > unrelated adults. Now we’re gaining access to a lot of nice spaces, at a > modest price. If — and this is big if — we can get comfortable with > sharing. > Thus my proposition is that we can save a little money by putting our > products in the squeezer-compressor, and living with tiny houses or tiny > cars. But we can save a lot more money by changing our lifestyle > paradigm. For instance, to density and transit. > > RPD > Cornerstone Cohousing (Life in the Big City) > > > On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:08 AM, VAN DEIST <vandeist [at] msn.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Tiny > > House / Retirement Cottage > > > > The > > current Tiny House phenomenon has focused primarily on singles & > > young professionals seeking financial relief in high cost areas. > > That's a very good concept which also applies to senior singles & > > couples trying to maintain their life styles on moderate incomes. > > > > Downsizing > > appeals to many seeking to age-in-place; who have sorted through > > their priorities; and who have made some crucial decisions. As one > > of those, I decided that I want a free-standing house with a little > > land around it. It needs to be a wheelchair friendly home that is > > not located in a flood zone. I want energy efficiency, storm > > resilience and fire & termite resistance. I want to be safe and > > snug in my strong home and not have to evacuate. I want enough room > > for me and my stuff but not too much to keep clean easily. > > > > Working > > with Banyan Tree Construction in Sarasota, I have helped design what > > we believe to be the smallest floor plan that can still be w/c > > accessible. It can have any façade, but we have chosen a 1920’s > > style cottage with a metal roof and front & back porches. Its > > construction material is neither cement block nor wood but is > > Structural Insulated Panels (SIP’s), a strong, well-insulated > > building material which is also fire & termite resistant. The > > assembled panels create the home’s exoskeleton; don't require > > trusses; and provide vaulted ceilings throughout. These ceilings > > create a light & airy environment which belies the cottage’s > > small, 24’X24’ footprint. > > > > This > > cottage utilizes energy-efficient, space-saving appliances which > > lower the square footage cost but do add to the appliance allowance. > > To me, this trade-off is a good investment in, both, design & > > ambiance. The idea is to save money by downsizing the home while > > maintaining a high ft2 value. > > > > > > The > > cottage has 576 ft2 of a/c space; a 94 ft2 front porch; and a 128 ft2 > > back porch, and it costs $120K complete on a developed lot. > > Technically, that’s $208.33 per a/c ft2, and it reflects the value > > of this home’s practical amenities & lifestyle enhancements. A > > home is first & foremost a safe, comfortable, and enjoyable > > environment. > > > > > > For > > those requiring more space, there is a 2BR, 2BA model available which > > adds a master BR to the rear of the 1BR, 1BA cottage. > > > > > > We > > offer study plans at no charge upon request: vandeist [at] msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > >
- Micro Living Units -- Affordable, (continued)
- Micro Living Units -- Affordable VAN DEIST, October 21 2014
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.