Author Topic: Buildings under 200 sf  (Read 415546 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zeeya

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • CountryPlans member
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #200 on: October 14, 2006, 10:45:15 PM »
Quote
This one is my favorite. Who says a tiny house can't be architecturally interesting!?!



mikeschn

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #201 on: December 02, 2006, 12:09:26 PM »
I sure would like to see some more activity in the "under 200sf" category!  ;)

Mike...

ergodesk

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #202 on: December 02, 2006, 01:11:22 PM »
MIke, under 200 just might be a TearDrop Eh.

mikeschn

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #203 on: December 03, 2006, 06:11:26 PM »
Nah...

32 sq ft is a teardrop...

200 sq ft is a tiny cottage!

Mike...

Quote
MIke, under 200 just might be a TearDrop Eh.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2006, 04:27:55 PM by mikeschn »

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #204 on: December 08, 2006, 04:20:20 PM »
I saw this website looking for something else looks neat!  8-)

Anyways I was looking around and saw this thread so I put together a little neat place after alittle time getting it right and signed up so I can post it. Tell me what you think!  ;D

Its 14x14 feet so 196 square feet. Has 4 4x3 windows, 1 2x1 high window in the washroom, and a 2x3 window near the sink. As well as windows on the doors. Fits everything I need and the TV can be moved so I can work on my workbench or use the computer to under the bench. The Hot water would come from one of thouse mini-water heaters and heating of the place with a heater both hidden in the attic.  ;)

PS. No I didnt make it just drew it up in the last few hours. :)

Dimitri
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 04:22:16 PM by Dimitri »

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #205 on: December 08, 2006, 05:56:16 PM »
Welcome to the site Dimitri.  What about kitchen stuff-- refrigerator, cook stove etc?

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #206 on: December 08, 2006, 06:17:38 PM »
Glen,

Bar fridge under the Convection oven hidden in the Cabinet look alike wood door. The Convection/microwave combo oven is for the cooking and maybe a hotplate. Essencially I looked around my place, decided what I'd keep and got that out of it. Bare minium. Other designs I saw here look more comforatable I've got to admit especially if there is more then one person. But for a single guy this would work.  ;D

Dimitri
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 06:18:00 PM by Dimitri »

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #207 on: December 08, 2006, 06:21:17 PM »
Sounds good to me.  I think that would work great. :)

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #208 on: December 08, 2006, 06:27:48 PM »
Still I think the smallest amount you could live really comfortably with is 300 square feet. anything smaller and you start removing things you'd like to keep but dont got space for.

Dimitri

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #209 on: December 08, 2006, 06:33:35 PM »
I keep digging holes and building but still don't have enough room -- that's why I had to stay out of this contest/project.  I'm a bad example.  There are a lot of cool toys out there and I need them.   :-/

jraabe

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #210 on: December 09, 2006, 09:42:40 AM »
I generally agree that 200 sf is too small for a real house for most people (and, of course, this is why it is exempted from permit requirements in many locations  :D)

A house should really be big enough for 2 people to share if you are going to go to the trouble to build it.

I think a 300 to 500 sf contest would be more practical for a small house design.

Anyone interested in doing this again! I'll come up with some prizes if there is interest. Think about the parameters of the contest and give me your suggestions. For instance, should it use standard framing?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2006, 09:43:07 AM by jraabe »

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #211 on: December 09, 2006, 09:55:13 AM »
Sounds like it would be enjoyed by many of the members here.  While I think it should be done with a backhoe, I think standard framing is the way for most of the members.  :-/

Maybe you should think of a subject and start a topic on it to get it on the road. :)

jonseyhay

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #212 on: December 09, 2006, 04:29:18 PM »
A good idea John. I think the size restriction is about right but as far as type of construction, "anything goes would be good".  There is nothing wrong with using alternate building materials.

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #213 on: December 09, 2006, 04:33:33 PM »
Tell me something when measuring square feet of a house do you count the footprint you know around the outter wall on the outside or the actual living space the inside part of the outter wall ??  :-?

Dimitri

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #214 on: December 09, 2006, 04:38:23 PM »
Depends - I have heard of a few different ways to do it - don't remember the details though.  I just know they were not all the same.

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #215 on: December 09, 2006, 04:40:48 PM »
Thanks Glenn, well using Bob Vila Home Design (a older copy) I've been measuring the footprint (the outside of the outter wall). Which is ok wasnt sure how to do it.  ;D

Dimitri

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #216 on: December 09, 2006, 04:53:25 PM »
It is quite common to refer to the outside footprint as the size of the house but it is not all considered living space.  I refer to my first house as 1200 square feet - 30x40.

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #217 on: December 09, 2006, 05:04:50 PM »
Ah ok thanks Glenn, I've got to admit I dont know much about home design, just tid bits from here and there watching TV shows and talking to people I know who have built their own houses.  :)

Dimitri

Freeholdfarm

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #218 on: December 30, 2006, 05:05:09 PM »
A 300 s.f. to 500 s.f. contest would be good.  I've got several plans in that size -- can't go much smaller, because my family consists of me and my 26-y-o autistic daughter.  We need some separate space for the times when she's crabby enough to drive me nuts!  And I have to bathe her, so need a full-sized tub, too.  Plus room for the treadle sewing machine that used to belong to my dad's mother.  

I've wondered about how to measure the square footage with some of my designs, since some are either cob or strawbale, with very thick walls.  

And there was a question up there that I think was meant for me.  I'd mentioned that in Oregon we are allowed to build up to 200 s.f. without having to get a building permit (provided there is already a legal house on the property), but it can't be more than ten feet high.  The ten feet is from ground level.  As far as I know, we can put a basement under it if we want, and in fact my mother and I were talking about that one day when she was here (she and I have been building an attached garage here at my grandmother's home, where I live).  We decided that we could not only have a basement, but there could be underground rooms attached to the basement that didn't show at all above ground!  These un-permitted structures have to be at least six feet (including eaves) from any other building, but with an underground room or two, we could have passages connecting two or more 200 s.f. buildings that were above ground.  Mom and I have decided that next time we build anything, it will be without building permits!  Just a small garage has been quite a hassle (though probably not as much of a hassle as in some other areas).  But we've learned a lot -- neither of us had done any cement work before, and Mom hadn't done much framing, either.  She's 70, by the way -- age is little barrier to accomplishing things!

Kathleen

Amanda_931

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #219 on: December 30, 2006, 05:19:57 PM »
Some places, at least, the 200 sf is footprint.

While you're playing with that idea, get Mike Oehler's $25 and up Underground House book.

He's not real fond of purely underground rooms but he does have an inexpensive way to build underground.

Dimitri

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #220 on: December 30, 2006, 05:21:01 PM »
Kathleen,

I'd go with the inside of the wall if the walls were really thick, but watch it your local building inspectors for the place you live might not do it that way.  :-/

Dimitri

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #221 on: December 30, 2006, 05:32:15 PM »
Kathleen, if you are thinking of joining the troglodyte way of life, you may want to look at Mike Oehler's book, The $50 and Up Underground House.  It could give you some ideas for your underground structures as far as framing member sizes go.  

John has talked about a pressure treated wood basement type plan also.  I can't remember if there is anything posted here or not.  Possibly a search will turn up something.

Amanda_931

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #222 on: December 30, 2006, 05:48:48 PM »
For some reason, I keep thinking it's $25.  It's $50.

Good book.

glenn-k

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #223 on: December 30, 2006, 07:46:45 PM »
This house is much more expensive than $25, Amanda.  It's $50 and his book is under $20

desdawg

  • Guest
Re: Buildings under 200 sf
« Reply #224 on: December 31, 2006, 06:29:11 AM »
Inflation and improvements. It was considerably less back in the day and before the rocket stove.  :)