Comments on: Tiny Prefab Plans

By: dizzyfingers

dizzyfingers — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 12:31:48 +0000

Ijust read SteveR’s interesting comments and will get those books.
The US is a big country, only some of which or perhaps very little, really, is suitable for living outside in a house built of what can be found. I did once approach a cave on the beach near Tillamook and found signs that someone was living there, and have spotted open-living “camps” in shrubbery along the Kennedy Expressway in Chicago, I don’t know how these would work out in the winter, or in most places in the US in winter.
I love the idea of a moveable tiny house — like a turtle’s shell — and think that if things get worse than they are now, which I expect, that many folks might eventually come to believe as I do that “owning” property is the last thing they want to own. I have many reasons for thinking this, not the least of which is that the US government believes it owns everything…(including us?!).
My grandfather built himself a small house in an odd but appealing location and apparently enjoyed his life there very much, so the idea of alternatives to our cookie-cutter society aren’t foreign to me, and I’m not surprised at the idea that “architectural” homes of today are built to suit manufacturing or ease of construction, not the convenience and comfort of living in the buildings. We struggle everyday with the limitations and inconveniences of manufactured products from our clothing to appliances and fixtures in our homes. No one product fits all individuals just as no one individual is like any other.
Your home designs fit the people who will choose to use them. Some will fit some folks perfectly, and some will be modified to work better. Most people who live in the US require shelter from the elements, but that problem is substantially different depending on where they live, and I think the adaptability and ingenuity of the people who use your designs will take care of whatever problems arise.
I do want to comment on the shed roof and sun adaptation — moving the house so that less sun enters. Our stationary passive solar ranch has deep overhangs at the rear, enabling more sun to enter in the winter when the sun is “low” in the sky in the fall and winter and less when it is “high” in the spring and summer. I love this feature, and the overhang of your shed room could be adjusted to incorporate this advantage.
Keep on keeping on. I love perusing your tiny homes’ floorplans and already am on-board regarding the advantages of a moveable tiny house. No more property tax, no mortgage, and complete freedom to come, go, and do what we wish when we wish with no extraneous attachments.
I realize that only very indpendent and confident individuals will comfortably envision such a life. I hope that over the next couple of decades that many young folks will find the idea attractive, because I think the reinvigoration in the US of person independence and freedom is a must. Thanks for doing your part to ignite the idea and provide a practical solution for implementation.

By: Michael Janzen

Michael Janzen — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 20:59:58 +0000

Hi Michelle,

Land can cost a lot and be hard to build on, but it really depends on location. I think the hardest part of making the transition to a sustainable life is figuring out where and when to move.

By: Michele

Michele — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:35:15 +0000

It is a nice idea and I love it. I like the idea of having just what you need, and less clutter. i would have to have my own, seperate from my husbands..lol. and also where could you put it? a piece of land still costs you an arm and leg, and the other alternative is renting a lot in a small house version of a trailer part– still very pricy

By: Simple Living News Update: Week of Sept 28th

Simple Living News Update: Week of Sept 28th — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:41:53 +0000

[...] Tiny prefab plans [...]

By: Laura

Laura — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:37:52 +0000

I agree with Michael – as a former homeless person, I can attest that it is indeed “not always about the house.”

But providing low-cost, clean and decent housing villages would go a long way towards helping many retain their dignity and a roof over their heads. The current govt. approach towards homelessness is to give slum landlords $35-100 a day for hotels, some of which demand that the family (usually lots of kids) move out during certain day hours. The govt. could build a small home using about 3-6 months worth of federal housing allowances, if the land and utility connections were already in place. It would be much cheaper to build independent housing for those who want a safe place to stay. This does not answer the problem of how to protect those who are either willfully anti-social or through not fault of their own mentally ill (including violent drug users, who may fall into either category) and who are not, for various reasons, able to live independently or in communities without supervision and/or sanctions to keep them from hurting themselves or their neighbors. I was homeless for economic reasons, and it was (thank God) very temporary, but it opened my eyes to how often we stereotype the homeless without realizing, as Michael says, that it’s a complex situation.

By: SteveR

SteveR — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 10:43:02 +0000

Hi Michael,
Thanks for the response. I’m glad you took my comments the right way.

You are right, the landscape for temporary shelter is rapidly changing and this may be a good alternative to the tent cities. Since it is relatively low-tech, the manufacturing and assembly could also spawn its own small business and job creation ( or perhaps job substitution – keeping current builders in work by shifting to new products).

Btw, you might be interested in knowing that the moodular pre-fab panel method is already the current state of house building in New Zealand. These are not SIP panels though, just the wall framing. Framed panels are pre-built in factories for model X, arrive on a flatbed and the walls are erected on the foundation in a single day using a crane and a team of framers who nail gun it together. No sheathing is used( see previous comments on the expense of plywood). They put up house wrap and outside cladding. Insulation and wallboard added the traditional way.

By: Michael Janzen

Michael Janzen — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:00:41 +0000

EJ… not yet but I’m certain it would cost more to build this way than conventional framing. The benefit here is that it can be assembled in the field with not much more than a cordless drill.

By: ej

ej — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:29:09 +0000

Have you priced this?

By: Michael Janzen

Michael Janzen — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:02:45 +0000

George… I actually noodled over the glued-up self-fab panel idea too but since there was a lot of engineering there I kept these simple and leveraged a familiar construction method to make it potentially easier to get approved by more building/planning departments… but I think glued-up foam/sheathing panels would be a great solution. They’d be much more like homemade SIPs and probably perform similarly.

By: George

George — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:13:29 +0000

Michael,
Thanks for the response. I will look forward to your 12/12 option if and when you might publish it. I do understand the reason for the low pitch for starters.
I have also been curious about SIP alternatives and have looked to no avail for a DIY version and instructions. One of the things I had considered was a hybrid of your design with solid panels loose or glued within the framing of your components.
Thanks again,
George