Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Shiny Things' started by osii, Jul 25, 2010.
Hmmm... here's something similar, but rather fancy
Agree with you in that respect - many of these tiny houses don't have year round residents, and to ME, that's the difference between a hotel room for two weeks and living in one the other 50 weeks in the year!
Our place, imperfect as it is, is a liveable house and it's got the clutter to show for it.
Maybe that's a floorplan issue and a quantity-of-stuff issue more than a square footage issue?
We live in a 1200 sq foot house, and it is too big for just the two of us, but too small when we have guests. I think ideally I'd have a smaller house but with a separate little guest house. Relatively small details in terms of layout can make all the difference in terms of livability, and even more so being willing to get rid of stuff.
I agree. I love the photos and blogs and descriptions, but not many of them pass the red-face test of being places a person could really live year-round. And even fewer pass the sustainability test of being houses that would work in a relatively dense neighborhood.
from an architect's perspective, that's kinda sad.
Hey, but it still looks quite nice. I swear my place was built on Monday mornings and Friday afternoons.
These days, that is probably a good thing. You receive many fewer complaints and hate mail that way.
I guess it's always been a good thing in that respect. In a firm with three partners, you get to play who's-gonna-stamp-the-drawings.
The other thing I suspect about the "Tiny House Movement" it's another, "TV? I wouldn't know. I don't even own a TV."
"2,500 square feet? Wow. What do you do with all that space? I mean, I'd get lost in there. You see, I live in 250 square feet and that's more than enough."
They'll then proceed to tell you about living in their "Tiny House" in minute detail.
That and that "Tiny House" becomes as much hobby or pastime more so than a simply a dwelling.
Think of it as the opposite of the desire for McMansions. Some people are overly proud of their gargantuan houses. Others, their minute boxes in the woods.
I'm searching publications for that 2 story cabin, as it looks perfect in size for me. As a second home I can spend long periods of time in. Depending on where it's placed, I couldn't live there as I work with computers for a living...
Exactly, two sides of the same coin.
here is my mobile tiny house
and both become a labor of love, as they get to the extreme, hence both can really become a "hobby," keeping up with your lifestyle. I'm sure there'd be some who think that climbing up to haul water up to your cistern so you can take a warm shower in the middle of the winter because you chose to live in a portable "house" that is incapable of keeping utility hookups that don't freeze in the winter is just as fucking annoying as mowing 2 acres of lawn in the spring. Both are a little extreme, and take a bit of work to do. But some love it, and would have it no other way.
Alot of folks like it as a 2nd home...which means it *isn't* about minimalism...at all. It's about luxury. It's about escapism.
Live-aboard boats...that seriously deserves its own thread!!
S2 11.0 meter (36 ').....12 foot beam......<300 sf...2 story
Well, I tend to think of our palace, at 800 SF as more of a 'small' than a tiny house. For us, it did start as a luxury item - a second house. Our intention was not to live here full time when we bought the place.
I was fortunate that the place grew on my wife and I we decided to try it - and decided we do like it. For me, it's more location - I don't think that had we swapped our old place for this place in the location of our other house, we would be nearly as happy, but we swapped 1/5th acre for 7 acres and that makes another huge difference.
And, yea, we don't have a TV yet - use netflix on DSL since its cheaper than 'real' TV satellite service here. No cable.
I'm a fan of doing with less, but I don't think we have to live like monks, either.
Something about balance, right? There is adequate space, then there is vastly oversized, IMHO. Robert Mondavi's house in Napa Valley was 10,000 square feet, and a one bedroom. Granted he used it for a lot of entertaining, but seriously....
voluntary simplicity is a noble goal
Simple living encompasses a number of different voluntary practices to simplify one's lifestyle. These may include reducing one's possessions or increasing self-sufficiency, for example
and climate counts too I would imagine. If you can live in the outdoors for many months of the year, then 800 sq ft is going to be very comfortable. If you're cooped up because of inclement weather for ten months, maybe not
I thought he was in the import/export business.