
Architect's Dream House: Less Than 200 Square Feet  - RougeFemme
http://www.npr.org/2013/12/27/257560971/architects-dream-house-less-than-200-square-feet
======
nostromo
I think technology is the enabling factor behind the tiny house movement.

Books, CDs, movies, photos, files, paperwork, videogames: all compressed down
to the size of a hard drive. So many random gadgets have been replaced by a
smart phone, like camera equipment, phones, flashlights, calendars, etc. Now
people are ditching TVs as well and just using iPads and laptops to watch
video.

There are other more subtle things as well. For example, I haven't needed to
iron a shirt in years because nice shirts come out of the dryer looking
perfect. So no need for an iron or ironing board.

Then there's service-economy-ification. Most of my neighbors don't mow their
own lawn, none of them fix their own cars, and several don't even clean their
own house. I wonder how many brew their own coffee? That's a huge amount of
equipment that is no longer needed. When I lived in New York, literally 100%
of my local friends used wash-and-fold and owned nothing to take care of
clothing. A close friend of mine confessed recently that he hasn't prepared a
real meal in years; his kitchen cabinets are nearly empty.

The sharing economy is pushing this further. There's a tool-share co-op in my
city for those things you need once-in-a-while, like a ladder. Car2Go and
ZipCar mean people don't need 2 and 3 car garages at all anymore.

I can't wait to get rid of more stuff!

~~~
clarkm
I just finished watching _BBS: The Documentary_ and noticed the same thing. It
seemed like everyone they interviewed had an entire room full of old computer
equipment. They had boxes of software, walls of hardware manuals, stacks of
monitors, cabinets of capacitors and resistors, rows of soldering irons, and
at least one fully-equipped workbench.

Up until the past decade or so if you wanted to be a serious computer
enthusiast you needed an empty garage; now you just need space on your desk
for a Macbook Pro.

~~~
zobzu
i like minimalism but to a point. i have a full workbench for example as i
like to fix stuff on m own. not just computers, mind you. i also like creating
physical stuff - i think most ppl on HN revolve around creating non-physical
stuff most of the time.

i also cook my own food more often than not. both are more economical _and_ i
enjoy it. ive a 800sqft 1 bedroom in sf so its not that small either.
workbench isnt in a garage so its pretty compact yet is a real, full featured
bench. 2500sqft with unused rooms certainly is way too big tho.

~~~
derekp7
I know what you mean about physical stuff. Many years ago, when I'd finish a
cool software project, I couldn't really show it to anyone -- it was just a
bunch of gibberish to them. But once I started some wood working... I can
still to this day show people my home made computer desk, book cases, etc. But
none of my early software hacks still survives.

------
SpacemanSpiff
My wife and I live in a ~720 sq. foot loft we built inside of an airplane
hangar. The story is here: [http://www.makingthishome.com/hangar-loft-
remodel/](http://www.makingthishome.com/hangar-loft-remodel/)

We really love living in smaller spaces.

~~~
dredmorbius
So ... I saw Katie's "Tire House" post. I've seen and read some of Mike
Reynolds' work, but hadn't seen anyone specifically critical of the Earthship
design. Is there a specific post which gets into the downsides of the mode of
construction or do I have to read her whole blog to find out?

[http://www.makingthishome.com/2009/05/27/earthship-tour-
aka-...](http://www.makingthishome.com/2009/05/27/earthship-tour-aka-tire-
house-tour/)

~~~
SpacemanSpiff
In a nutshell, we encountered two problems (which may or may not be prevalent
with all Earthships)

1\. Extreme temperature fluctuations. You're essentially living inside a solar
collector. In the fall, the sun would blaze in through the windows, and I know
you're supposed to have overhangs, shades and air vents and underground air
circulation systems, all of which we used. The bottom line is you can't cheat
physics. Even with the shades closed, the house is receiving over 300k BTU/hr
of solar heat. This is just too much for any reasonably sized cooling system
to handle. My infrared thermometer measured surface temperatures in excess of
140 deg. F on surfaces near the windows. In the winter, the same windows would
leak heat like a sieve. Here in Montana when it's overcast, 10 deg. F, and the
wind is blowing 30 mph the front of the house would barely reach 55 deg F.
This was with the 30k BTU propane furnace going 100% duty cycle. I would work
at my computer with long pants, a sweater, a blanket over my legs, and an
electric heater blowing under the blanket :) The rear of the house is built
into the hillside, so it would be warmer in the back, but you could never get
the place past about about 65-68 in the winter no matter how much you tried.
The sheer size of the front windows and lack of insulation again made the
house design at odds with thermodynamics in my opinion.

For the sake of comparison, our place in the hangar has ~R30 walls to the
hangar, and again about ~R25 walls to the outside. We have in-floor radiant
heat provided by our geothermal heat pump. Earlier this month when it was -20
deg. F outside we were toasty warm at 74 (we have a newborn child in the house
now). And we were using significantly less energy to heat than at the
Earthship.

2\. Mice. The house construction methods are inherently porous, and mice have
infiltrated the entire structure. They live in the cavities the walls form
(and the roof supports), along the utility raceways in the ceiling, under
cabinets, everywhere. I surmise that the mice have tunneled through the back
of the hillside, between the tires, and up into the hollow cavities which
support the ceiling. They then use this space to move around the inside of the
house structure to other areas. No amount of trapping poisoning, etc. has
slowed the onslaught of mice into the house. If the only way to prevent mice
from infiltrating your supposedly green house is to use concrete in its
construction and set outdoor poison traps which potentially kill hundreds of
mice and may harm animals which then consume the poisoned mice, is this really
such a green alternative?

I've visited an Earthship being constructed in Big Sky Montana by Mike
Reynolds this year. The design changes I've seen may partially address point
1, but as far as point 2 I'm not at all convinced that this new house will be
any better. I admire his vision, and that he's been able to take his ideas so
far. From an engineering standpoint, even taking into account the ecological
footprint of the structure, I'm not convinced that his approach is the best
when you look at the whole picture.

~~~
sliverstorm
These pushes for housing like Earthships are curious, especially in light of
your comments (which mirror my expectations). Not curious by themselves, but
curious in what they represent. Humans developed modern housing specifically
to combat weather, slow ingress by pests, etc. I wonder if this Earthship
(etc) movement represents a shift in where we are living. Ages ago, Europeans
& Mediterraneans lived in a lot of unfavorable weather. Do more people live in
temperate regions today, for a movement like this to happen? Why would that be
the case? Perhaps shipping & the global economy have created a class of
peoples that can live wherever they choose, where such a class of people did
not exist before?

~~~
dredmorbius
_Humans developed modern housing specifically to combat weather, slow ingress
by pests, etc._

That's part of the push.

There's also a _lot_ of influence from real estate developers, financiers, and
the like, to produce a, hate the word but it fits, "product" which will entice
purchasers.

Much of the construction materials and standards are of the bare minimum to
pass inspection. If you're in the trades you'll hear terms for wall blocks
(the horizontal pieces placed between studs) depending on whether they're
attached with one or two nails per end (the latter is marginally more
expensive, but more robust), the thickness of studs, type of sheeting used,
etc. Notably, contractor friends when building their own home significantly
upgraded construction standards from code with an aim toward longevity and
robustness.

The principles behind Earthships (and other sustainable designs) are to,
generally, minimize both environmental impacts (through locally sourced and
recycled materials) and ownership costs (through passive heating and cooling,
water collection and reuse, etc.). Earthship Biotecture discusses the motives
and evolution of their designs:

[http://earthship.com/a-brief-history-of-
earthships](http://earthship.com/a-brief-history-of-earthships)

The key principles:

⚫ A structure built from largely recycled materials

⚫ Heating and cooling

⚫ Electrical system

⚫ Water harvest system

⚫ Contained on site sewage treatment system

⚫ Food production

The designs (or variations on it) are used in a wide range of climates, from
alpine to desert to tropical to temperate.

As for the pest-resistance -- rodents and insects aren't unheard of in modern
and/or traditional construction either, though it would be interesting to get
a direct comparison of the Earthship vs. more conventional designs in similar
areas.

~~~
sliverstorm
You are starting to sound like you have a bridge to sell. I was just
speculating about earthships, extreme climates, and the evolution of housing.

~~~
dredmorbius
No bridges. However there's this phenomenal set of clothes which only the most
discerning can appreciate ... ;-)

You asked a question. I answered it based on both 1) my direct experience with
construction and constructions standards and 2) material which is directly
viewable on Earthship Biotechture's website.

As I stated above: I've known of the general concept for years (decades --
first heard about "junk houses" in the 1970s), but really only started
revisiting it in the past year or so. And I'm genuinely interested in what the
negatives of the design are.

I'm also generally somewhat skeptical of alternative concepts. Widely used
designs are, if not always ideal, at least generally well understood
particularly in their shortcomings and/or failure modes. And a _lot_ of
alternative concepts tend to be oversold, especially by their creators and
proponents (and Reynolds is nothing if not a crusader).

If you're interested in the evolution of housing, it's helpful to realize that
there's a _vast_ diversity of designs applied to many different locales. Much
of the variance is due to local needs, materials, costs, and capabilities.
E.g., building with loose or lightly mortared stone and mud brick is cheap,
but not particularly proof against earthquakes.

If you'll travel across the US, you'll find very, very similar designs being
built independent of climate or location. I could speculate on specifically
why, but a huge level of concentration in the homebuilding industry likely has
a great deal to do with this. I'm also well-acquainted with fairly recent
construction which has fared poorly even in only a few years, hence my
comments on construction quality.

------
Brakenshire
This is fine in a warm country, or in a place where you're going to be in or
out of your house all the time. Living in a cold and/or isolated place, being
cooped up in such a small area would be unhealthy, you need to move around
much more as a matter of course. Particularly if you're working at home, you'd
have to be very proactive to avoid serious impacts on your health, because
your lifestyle would be almost inherently sedentary. Exercise is not just
doing a certain amount of cardio each week, you have to have movement
interspersed throughout the day.

I reckon you could have various different 'pods', though, rather than a
standard house. A small space like this, then an isolated office room five
minutes walk away, perhaps a cafe/communal eating area somewhere else ,and so
on.

~~~
kaib
Having been raised in a cold and isolated country (Finland) I think you
incorrectly assume that means a lot of time spent indoors. This can be true,
but does not have to.

I do think you are on to something with the idea of pods, most farmhouses
where I come from are arranged in a number of small separate buildings.

~~~
sliverstorm
Sure you went outside plenty, but did you go outside at night? Personally,
where I live, when the temperature drops below freezing at night, I stop going
outside when it is dark, and as the nights get longer that means at least 14
hours a day indoors.

~~~
SG-
I go out every night and mostly only at night when it's -20C. I do stay in
when it goes below that usually, you just need to get used to it and dress
properly.

This is just something you need to change yourself and get used to, it won't
get any easier if you just ignore the cold.

~~~
sliverstorm
The problem isn't being cold; I have good clothing and don't mind 40F in the
slightest. The issue is I haven't really discovered reasons to even be
outside- good activities I can safely enjoy among the ice & snow and in the
extra-dark of winter

------
viame
You can compress these things and a lot of people have, but to live like this
is another story.

I myself build homes, apartments, I also design kitchens, did flips, and I can
tell you that I have not met one person that could live in a tiny box like
that. Yes, it is a dream of everyone, to be very simple and live like this,
but this is not going to happen.

She moved from 2,500sqft to 200sqft, why? You don't wake up one day and do
that unless you cannot afford living in a house, and I don't care what she
says. Maybe it's her cottage or trailer, I really don't know, but don't
believe anything they say on the news.

A lot of people would go insane in a 200sqft space. It's like a cell. If
anyone wants to try, please come live in my shed. It's very minimalistic, raw,
super nice like this place.

:)

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Agreed. Stunts like this are done by design students; what evidence that
anyone lives in it, for any significant amount of time?

I've had a strange notion recently, that these things are actually not helpful
in the larger scheme of things. Some creative person goes an lives in a
shoebox; no room to design or socialize or have a hobby or even bring work
home. Now we've taken a productive person out of society and turned them into
a hermit. How does that help? It seems selfish at some level.

~~~
walshemj
Octu in a capsule hotel sounds like hell on earth

------
voltagex_
I'm in a wheelchair. Brand new houses built with stairs make me sad. I've
often thought I'd love to work with an architect to design accessible houses:
it's not just for me, anyone with limited mobility or energy would benefit.

~~~
001sky
This is basically a mobile home, which has no foundation. As such, there is
nothing in the design which is not easily re-built to your spec. The design is
inherently modular. When you are dealing with a 200sq ft living space, its
best to have it tailored to your own needs, and not a random or lowest common-
denominator-based spec. The common areas, however take on more importance in a
community or non-remote setting ans thus are the relevant areas to consider
from an architecture perspective.

~~~
mapt
"Tailored to your needs"

"Not a random or lowest-common-denominator-based spec"

So you want it to _cost_ what a 1,200 sqft building would cost, but you want
to spend it on architects and custom builders instead of cheap efficient
standardized parts & designs.

A wheelchair ramp, sure I guess... but the general principle of housing for
most of us can't be "Find a way to occupy the unemployed architecture majors
of the world".

~~~
001sky
No, the house in the article was built for $11,000 dollars. That's the cost of
provisioning about 5 square feet of London real estate. You're mis-reading be-
tween the lines, by a couple orders of magnitude.

------
officemonkey
My sister, who lives in midtown Manhattan, lives in an apartment smaller than
this place. If you're downsizing from a bigger place, you basically get rid of
everything. I have 30+ wine glasses in my condo in Chicago. My sister has two.

The other thing that happens in a tiny space: you end up buying quality. You
will wait to find "just the right desk lamp" and then pay a premium for it.

~~~
datasage
With space you end up buying so much stuff you may end up not really using, or
buy low quality stuff just to fill the space.

~~~
officemonkey
I've got 30 lineal feet of bookshelves in my house that are filled with books
I bought over the last 30 years. If I lived in my sister's house, I'd have to
get rid of 80% of them.

I could do that, but I don't have to, so I don't.

~~~
GuiA
Books are the one thing that a subgroup of hackers has a hard time parting
with. I'm fairly minimalistic with all of my possessions, but books... man, I
would have a really hard time getting rid of my library :(

~~~
officemonkey
I'm a lot more pragmatic. If Amazon told me they would give me an ebook
version of each book I sent to them, I would immediately get rid of 90% of my
books (everything except my coffee table books and a couple dozen books that
hold sentimental value.)

------
samstave
If you haven't seen the documentary "tiny house movement" watch it...

Personally, I think these efforts lack an understanding of basic annoyances:

Assume you want to sleep when others don't? Oh - the answer is this is for
happy single people.

Assume you overcook your steak and the whole place smokes up and your bedding
now stinks.

Assume you have more than (1) friend over.

Have kids?

I LOVE small/minimal spaces - but they are really not for the majority of
people. They are too small cramped and inefficient for average living.

Christ, my closet is bigger than that unit.

~~~
gaadd33
Somehow most people living in dense cities make do with a small amount of
space. For example it's not uncommon to find 300sq ft apartments in Manhattan.
Some people even manage to raise kids in such space. Look at places like Hong
Kong and similar where small units are the norm and yet people seem to be able
to live with the issues you mention.

~~~
nilkn
Some people live without a home at all. That doesn't mean it's a healthy way
to raise kids.

~~~
gaadd33
Are you comparing living without a home to living in a small apartment in a
major city?

Given people seemed to raise kids and survive in 983 sq ft during the 1950s
(average house size) I don't see why people think we need massive houses to
raise children in today.

~~~
Goronmon
_Are you comparing living without a home to living in a small apartment in a
major city?_

No he's saying that an environment being "survivable" isn't an argument for
what should be an acceptable environment for everyone.

------
geuis
If you're interested in learning more about this, I highly suggest subscribing
to Kirsten Dirksen on Youtube.

[http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDsElQQt_gCZ9LgnW-7v-cQ](http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDsElQQt_gCZ9LgnW-7v-cQ)

She publishes new videos every couple weeks or so and is intimately tied into
the tiny house movement.

She also covers things involving alternate ways of living, diy, etc. Lovely
person.

~~~
macarthy12
Yeah she has a bunch of interesting videos on this.

------
shawnee_
Living small(er) in order to minimize carbon footprint makes sense. _Green
Metropolis_ by David Owen is a fantastic book that makes the case for
Manhattan being a great blueprint for the ideal city of the future -- people
living more densely = less energy use individually & less "space" to
accumulate stuff and waste. Trash disposal in the city is such a complex
problem that residents are literally forced to be economical about their
consumption habits. Traditional concepts of homesteading on the plains,
whether with large ranch houses or an "eco" house made of straw and mud are
not necessarily ecologically friendly when there's imperative need to drive to
get to the nearest urban area for work, school, shopping, etc -- these, he
argues, are the antithesis of efficiency.

Small eco-homes are not just a trend; they are the new era in real estate
development. But they need to be built such that they can collectively share
infrastructures the same way city residents do. The project I'm working on,
applied to YC with (and was rejected from) last batch is built on this idea of
more ecological homesteading _in order to create better_ urban planning.
Masdar City [http://www.masdarcity.ae/en/](http://www.masdarcity.ae/en/) is an
interesting prototype for the future of cities. We've schooled our youngins
enough for them to know that ecological awareness needs to be a lifestyle.
They're surprisingly aware that the world they are inheriting has exponential
population growth, limited resources, and that the "industrial revolution"
model of economic viability just isn't going to work forever they way it has
been working.

------
flexie
Cute little cabin and amazing what you can put into 20 m2. And it must be nice
to know that you've built it yourself.

But I don't believe for a second that this is the architect's dream house.
Come on. It's like saying that a static blog is a programmer's dream project.

She may have had a dream one night about living in a small house but I am sure
that as soon as she can afford to, she will move into something bigger. Let's
not kid ourselves :-)

~~~
drivingmissm
Yeah it is just a tricked out mobile home.

~~~
hsitz
Actually, no, it's not just a tricked out mobile home. Apart from size, it's
constructed like most regular homes, but even higher quality. Most tiny houses
are built using stick framing, same as regular houses, with 6" exterior walls
and lots of insulation (higher insulation level than most regular homes), have
level of interior trim that is similar to but usually better than regular
homes. Also most tiny houses are built so at least part of structure has very
high ceilings, 11 to 12 feet, which greatly adds to feeling of spaciousness.
Tiny homes cost much more per square foot than regular size homes, but of
course are much cheaper overall. Even though they're usually built on wheeled
trailers and can be moved, they're not built for constant moving.

In short, tiny homes are built to "feel" like a regular home, even though much
smaller. Mobile homes, in contrast, are not, generally feel cheap and light,
much different experience.

------
alan_cx
Take a look at this:
[http://www.cubeproject.org.uk/](http://www.cubeproject.org.uk/) Genius use of
space.

Saw it on a great UK TV show called George Clark's Amazing Spaces, where there
are lots of brilliant creative ideas.

Edit: Link to a brochure with a nice expanded drawing:
[http://www.boltonbuildings.co.uk/PDF/Cube.pdf](http://www.boltonbuildings.co.uk/PDF/Cube.pdf)

------
z92
The difference is 'Family'. Inevitably you will need to have a partner and
say, four children, for the human race to survive. At that point you have to
go the traditional route.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
There are many, many, many people producing children at well above replacement
levels, and we are already well above the carrying capacity of our
environment. I have no personal guilt at choosing not to have children.

~~~
drivingmissm
Actually most advanced societies are not producing enough children to keep the
population stable.

~~~
nilved
Which is a very good thing.

~~~
Goronmon
Is it? Advanced society's dying off isn't something people usual celebrate.

~~~
nilved
Nobody said dying off, but it's a well-understood fact that humanity is
growing at an unsustainable rate.

------
joshferg
Should be retitled "Architect randomly decides to build a single-wide trailer
home"

------
Casseres
That's a great looking tiny house. If you're interested in seeing more and
learning about other people's experiences building and living in tiny houses,
I recommend checking out [http://tinyhouseblog.com](http://tinyhouseblog.com)

------
dhughes
My aunt and I think eight or nine sibling grew up in this house
[https://maps.google.com/?ll=46.24838,-63.12407&spn=0.001167,...](https://maps.google.com/?ll=46.24838,-63.12407&spn=0.001167,0.002411&t=m&layer=c&cbll=46.248423,-63.123932&panoid=5LCBKNv5GdwogSFlCpYjYg&cbp=12,174.91,,0,17.74&z=19)

~~~
cipher0
"eight or nine"!! You don't know how many siblings you have bro?

~~~
jdeibele
Siblings of the aunt.

~~~
dhughes
To be fair I should have wrote that sentence a bit clearer, phone + cold
fingers (-15C) + damn autocorrect + impulsiveness + poor spelling ( _her_
sibling _s_ ) don't work in my favour.

------
yachtintransit
I find a 37ft sail boat fits my needs completely. Some added benefits:
relocatable, scenery and built in furniture.

------
design-of-homes
The house is lovely, but...tiny homes in the US are mostly detached and
surrounded by wide open spaces or have long views out of the windows. They
also have plenty of natural light. These factors don't make the homes feel
tiny.

The real challenge for most cities is to build high-density housing where you
might not have pleasant long views out of your window or lots of natural
light. Higher-density housing doesn't mean high-rise, but it probably won't
include building (many) detached homes. Apartments and terraced (row) houses
are more suited to high-density developments.

Could you still live in a 200 square feet home if it was a single-aspect
apartment in an apartment block? (Single aspect = windows along just one side
of the apartment compared to a double-aspect apartment with windows at the
front and back of the apartment). Or could you live in an equivalent tiny
terraced house?

Just for comparison, London now has minimum space standards for new homes (but
England and Wales do not). A one bedroom apartment for two people must be a
minimum of 50 square metres (538 square feet). In Germany, the equivalent
apartment is 60 square metres.

[http://designofhomes.co.uk/images/046/space-standards-
london...](http://designofhomes.co.uk/images/046/space-standards-london-vs-
germany.png)

To me these spaces are modest in size rather that palatial but space is
relative and we all have different ideas of what tiny, small or large mean to
us depending on where we live. New build homes in the UK tend to be the
smallest in Europe and the quality of many new build homes is poor. Here's a
comparison of the average size of new homes in the UK, Ireland, Netherlands
and Denmark:

[http://www.withoutspaceandlight.com/resources/img/space/comp...](http://www.withoutspaceandlight.com/resources/img/space/comparison.png)

~~~
hindsightbias
Here's a US architect that I think is more realistic towards downsizing:
[http://rosschapin.com/Plans/plans.html](http://rosschapin.com/Plans/plans.html)

------
sifarat
I am going against the wind. It's not only stupid but also ugly.

Having your bedroom near or inside a kitchen is a total chaos.

>I think technology is the enabling factor behind the tiny house movement.

Technology has helped most persons own a 'palace' which was only possible for
super-rich in the past, due to lack of 'economical' technology and
advancements.

------
zephjc
The subreddit /r/tinyhouses has lots of this sort of thing, and is a pretty
good collation of various blogs and articles on the subject, with some pretty
decent conversation.

~~~
oceanician
[http://www.reddit.com/r/tinyhouses](http://www.reddit.com/r/tinyhouses)

------
mojuba
Just one small correction. The cost of a house like this is $11,000 + the
money she never made because of her own time (18 months!) invested in
construction. So the total, strictly speaking, is way way higher than $11k.

------
allochthon
I love that she designed and built the house herself, and I love that she did
a great job on the interior design. I also like that there's a little bit of
yard (perhaps a lot -- hard to tell from the photo).

I like the 200 sq. foot size a little less. My own dream homes (there are
two):

1\. A small home (> 200 sq. feet) or perhaps unit in a larger condominium
complex or communal living space in a denser urban conglomeration. The
town/city is not so large that you cannot easily walk or ride a bike through
the length of it. Lots of trees and green space. Light rail transportation to
nearby urban areas. Not as dense as SF or anywhere near as dense as Manhattan.
But not so suburban that you need a car. Building height is kept at or below
five stories, and averages two stories. The buildings do not block sunlight.
There are places at the edge of the town/city for long-term car storage, but
driving is not permitted within it.

2\. A nice cabin or ranchouse (~1000-2000 sq. feet?) in the countryside with
access to light rail within biking distance.

------
ChuckMcM
Nicely efficient use of space. Reminds me of a motor home (as opposed to a
'mobile home' which tries its best to avoid reminding you it is only 10'
wide). I enjoyed the comment that read "I only need 200 sq ft to live in but I
need 4000 sq ft for storage." :-)

~~~
ghaff
Storage actually makes a huge difference. I wouldn't be especially into 200
sq. ft. in any case :-) but the difference between a house that has X sq. ft.
of finished room with minimal storage--no basement, attic, maybe no garage--
and a house that has one or more of those things is huge. To be sure, those
spaces attract stuff that should just be unloaded, but it's a big difference.

------
minimax
What is the difference between this and a single wide trailer home?

~~~
garrettgrimsley
This home is far smaller than the average single-wide. I looked around online
for floor plans and it appears that the smallest plans available are 600sqft
or larger.

[http://www.mheinc.com/singlewide.htm](http://www.mheinc.com/singlewide.htm)

[http://www.solitairehomes.com/models/single-
wide/floorplans....](http://www.solitairehomes.com/models/single-
wide/floorplans.aspx)

I'm also a delivery driver with a large (>200 unit) trailer park nearby and
none of the homes come close to being this small. Additionally you will note
that the trailer that the tiny house is situated on has a fifth wheel for
being pulled by a truck, while a single-wide typically will be on a platform
with a conventional style hitch.

~~~
minimax
Good points. Thanks!

------
infinotize
Is there anyone on HN who doesn't aspire to the minimalist, tiny (usually
urban) home, outsourced lifestyle (by that I mean, laundry service, car
rental, eat out vs cooking, etc)? I'm genuinely curious.

~~~
dsr_
Hi. The only part of that grouping I'm interested in is "urban". When you get
enough people close together, you can do things that are otherwise
unprofitable.

I live in a fairly large house on a road with real bus service that connects
me to Cambridge, the Boston MBTA, and a commuter rail in and out. That means
that we can get along with one car instead of two. We do our own laundry, cook
most meals from scratch, and keep multiple cats. We have a standing
arrangement with a housekeeper to help clean our house a few times a month.

My chief desire is to be comfortable, not to live a life of ascetic
minimalism, aesthetic cleanliness, or meditative contemplation. There are
books in every room in the house. There is always a computing device with
internet access within a few steps. We have space for Lego, toys, hobbies and
tools.

I understand how someone who lives alone might want to be in a tiny space --
because they don't really live there, they live outside the house anyway. But
that's not what I want, and it's not what I have.

------
akcreek
200 sq ft would be hard for me personally, but mid-January I'm closing on a
375 sq ft building that I'm converting to a living space for myself, my wife
and our dog. It will be short term for us while we restore the main building
though... probably 18-24 months. After that it we'll use it as a guest house
and I'll probably put it on Airbnb or similar as well. I've always wanted to
live in a smaller space though so I'm excited. I'm used to about 1,000 sq ft,
but we keep most of that empty really.

~~~
stirno
Super efficient apartments/small living spaces are very attractive to me. I've
never tried actually calling one home though -- not very common where I live.

How creative do you expect you'll have to get in a space that size?

~~~
mortenjorck
I scaled down to a ~550 sq ft unit a couple of years ago, but had an
interesting realization a few months after moving in that the walk-through
closet that leads to my bathroom (maybe 175 sq feet together) could
theoretically work as its own micro-apartment. I closed the door, and started
mentally fitting a bed, mini-fridge, microwave and hot plate, and desk into
the space. It all fit, give or take a half a foot here or there, and assuming
a bit of custom storage.

Admittedly, though, I must have limits for small living spaces. My favorite
part of this exercise was opening the door back out into the rest of the
apartment, upon which my studio suddenly felt palatial.

------
cturner
I like the idea of efficient space and less to keep clean. But I want a well-
stocked lab at home: toolboxes, musical instruments, books, hardware projects,
cooking equipment. Piles of junk are hard to clean around. I've been thinking
that a 'compactus' unit like this might serve all needs:
[http://www.officecentre.com.au/prod1129.htm](http://www.officecentre.com.au/prod1129.htm)
You could probably get it installed to house servers in the end-units.

------
oceanician
I've debating about doing this in the UK with a 32ft shipping container, and
possibly straw bail externally for insulation, and a water collector on the
roof for grey usage.

Seen some great projects in London & Brighton, but non in Manchester for homes
yet. Though there's been a great use for offices in the Sharp project.

Anyone else in the UK looking at this sort of thing?

One question: Why the wheels if you're only going to move it every so often -
say a couple of years?

------
treenyc
If you guys like this, then make sure to look at an interview with Marcin
Jakubowski the founder of Open Source Ecology.

He said that you can build your own house for $2000 dollar.

I can't find that report now, but here is a link to their discussion form.

[http://forum.opensourceecology.org/discussion/903/building-a...](http://forum.opensourceecology.org/discussion/903/building-
a-house/p1)

they even open source the design to build your own brick presser.

~~~
treenyc
here is more detail. It is called a

OSE Microhouse

[http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/OSE_Microhouse](http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/OSE_Microhouse)

------
squozzer
I like this idea a little better --
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/9243318/Container-
living...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/9243318/Container-living-a-
home-for-under-50000.html)

------
apunic
Macy Miller's Tiny House is _the_ trend but there are way nicer
implementations for just double the price:
[http://www.ecospacestudios.com/](http://www.ecospacestudios.com/)

------
smrtinsert
I think I saw this first on yahoo.com, but once on npr.org, top of hacker
news!

------
afterburner
Is this to get people used to rising real estate costs?

------
BadassFractal
I'd totally live in a 200sqft apt in SF if someone were to offer one this well
thought-out.

------
platz
Check out the tiny house blog

