Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Shiny Things' started by osii, Jul 25, 2010.
that's OK, I like that so much, I'm gonna start using it
I would imagine in Florida the trailer would hold up well since you have to run the AC all year round most of the time.
I guess that's the part I wasn't putting together. These "tiny houses", unless you build them yourself, are every bit as expensive as some normal small houses, and... You probably can't get a loan for a "tiny house". There's usually a minimum square footage for it to qualify as a "house".
I've always maintained there's a market for 1,200 to 1,500 sq ft houses that have the amenities and niceties of a 3,000 sq ft house.
My in-laws were in Rockport, TX ~ right on the gulf. I fear part of their problem may have been a leaky slide-out . . . . so maybe. But I've seen the condensation here in Colorado from the extreme cold outside and the furnace going full blast inside.
Pirate John could tell you more about living on the coast in one of these. He's currently in the Rio Grand Valley in TX, spent time on South Padre Island and Corpus Christie, TX and time in Florida as well. I only chimed in based on the warning I'd read in a unit similar to the park models that photos have been posted for.
... back to the future, as it were.
Here in Denver, there are several older neighborhoods which have the smaller house size. Sadly, in some neighborhoods, they scrape off the old and pop in the huge (on little lots).
Agreed. But sometimes even when you're putting up a house that has no more square footage than the old ones it can be cheaper to go back with all new. Trying to get the plumbing, electrical, insulation, closet space and open floor plans people want in newer, smaller, homes can simply be too much of a pain to do in some older construction. Just because we're ready to go back to between 900 and 1,250sf of living space doesn't mean people are willing to go back to 2'x2' closets, no master bath and R.00029 walls. The cost to move load bearing walls, or add beams that can drop rooms down to 7' ceiling heights, move windows and then brick up moved exterior wall openings, etc. can exceed the cost of just going back with new. Not always, but often.
... yep, but when you not only expand up (pop the top), but out, it changes the feel of the old neighborhood. If they are actually modernizing, and maintaining the integrity of the neighborhod, that's another thing.
But who am I to say
Well BMW kind of follows the same idea
there are bikes out there that are much faster and cheaper.
But BMW has managed to make a market for their bikes.
So has tumblewoodweed homes.
It's all about marketing, convince people you have a superior product that's worth more.
Some people will believe it and some wont.
But to say the whole "movement" is based around making mobile homes "gentrified" is a little far fetched. Even if there are elements that are doing just that.
ever been around someone who just quit drinking? because they can't or choose not to do it, they don't want anyone else to do it, either.
so let's say they have some enthusiasm for their newfound discovery. like the first time you got your noodle wet. i know i couldn't stop talking about it for a while. hell, i still think about it from time to time.
anyway, on to the little house stuff in several posts because this is something i have been interested in for some time.
the Brits have been on to something for quite some time:
and i certainly wouldn't toss Sarah out for eating crackers in bed
HA HA !!!
Beck's website here:
i dunno if that would be too economical - living in Malibu
agreed - BUT - the guy got it into mainstream AND is getting more pussy than a gynocologist in that tiny, poorly ventilated, loft bedroom.
seriously, look at some of the hippy housing ideas of the late sixties and early seventies which eventually made it into main stream construction at big buck prices. post & beam, cathedral ceilings, architectural salvage, all quite avante garde coming from the ozzie & harriet, june & ward cleaver, levittown fifties & sixties.
poke 'round heres:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart_Brand - also, his book http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Buildings_Learn - shows his shipping container office
It's an interesting question.
It is a very multi-layered problem - since inheritence taxes are levied based on lands market value, families are often forced to part with land to pay taxes when family members die. This is one reason for urban sprawl.
Once we change the tax codes to permit farmland/ranches to be valued as the business value/income rather than the land value, the old "Highest and Best Use" that developers like to talk about, then maybe we can change that discussion.
I have mixed feelings - on one hand, there's a big new subdivision down the road closer to town and on small lots for about the same money - new houses and everything. And it's higher density. Some land use people feel this is better than ranchettes, but if it's got to be built on, I think I would rather see small houses on really big lots with lots of open space.
most construction is higher per square foot for smaller sizes. anything you build yourself (if i understand that you are not taking a wage, but donating your time) is cheaper.
businesses have to pay someone to run down to the supplier to pick up things, overhead, marketing, et al, which the guy who whacks together a shed in his back yard never does, or leastwhile considers an expense related to the job.
"yeah; me an' sally's brutha put the roof on and went through two pizzas and a case of bud. doctor said his leg will heal almost as good as new..."
Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the new, designer "tiny house" premium.
The word, "liar," comes to mind. Of course, I wouldn't use that word. Instead I will provide this link, http://www.snopes.com/photos/architecture/redneck.asp . I realize that this is JM; but, people are trying to have a serious conversation and learn about something that is sparking an interest. Please don't litter the thread with stupid.
Think in terms of BMW/Mini vs. Chevette. You pay extra for perceived quality and image.
And no, I'm not justifying or rationalizing or anything. It's just the way it is. The Tiny Home guy has used significant "capital" (for lack of a better word) plugging and promoting the concept.
Once upon a time you could have your Frank Lloyd Wright-inspired house built by Wright Himself or any one of any other architect. From what I have heard many or most of the Wright house had serious practical design issues (supposedly many of them leak) but they are worth a ton of money today because they were designed and built by The Man.
Your mileage may vary.
Personally, I'd be inclined to have someone other than Wright build a similar house for me if it saved me some $$$ and he'd give me a warranty. Evidently you feel the same way.