0tterbot wrote:
no. not like that either.

What is your objection to these houses? Three bedrooms, one bathroom,
open plan living/dining/kitchen. Looks modest and functional to me.
Your complaint was that kit builders only offered mcmansions with
rumpus rooms.

evidently you have no idea how cheap strawbale or onsite stone houses are,
or houses built from 2nd hand materials, or houses built into the earth,
(etc), if you are sticking to this line.

Actually I know plenty about these things, but you were talking about
kit homes, which generally means light, framed construction.

Strawbale is much hyped, but the economic benefits are questionable:
* high labour (make sure you include all the rendering in your
estimates)
* generally requires slab or strip footings, with associated termite
issues
* requires a lot more floor and roof. The walls are 600mm thick (vs
less than 100mm for framed construction). This means that the
slab area of a small house is significantly larger. For instance, a
building 12x8m would need a slab and roof 22% larger if it were
built in strawbale. Strawbale walls need larger roof overhangs to
protect them from weather, making the problem worse
* Most of the heat loss/gain in a house is through the roof and
windows, so the very high insulative benefits of stawbale suffer
from diminishing returns
* Walls are usually not weight bearing, and you still need to frame
around all your openings. You may actually end up using more
timber or steel than you would if you built a framed house

Stone masonry has it own problems, as do your other suggestions.

you're not, of course, claiming that _ceramic_ tile is helpful in terms of
saving energy, are you.

The issue wasn't just energy. You said environmentally sound.
To me that means eliminating outgass materials like laminex
and synthetic carpets. Carpets are particularly nasty for
people with allergies, even wool carpets. Alternatives include
oiled timber, ceramic tile and oiled concrete. Oiled concrete
is cheap but not very attractive (I know, because that is what
we have, pending the money to install timber). The other options
all cost more than cheap carpet.

obviously. i've answered that. 2nd hand timber windows are worth the
relatively small amount you pay compared to new aluminium

I can't imagine that builders are going to start installing 2nd
hand timber windows. The cost of reconditioning and installation
would be prohibitive. Of course, if you are owner building this
is an option, but then you are comparing apples with watermelons.

. not everyone
needs consider termites, and termimesh and poison are not the only two
options.

I realise this, I was just giving examples. My point was simply that
these things cost money. Making your house more environmentally
friendly increases the sticker price of the house. In some cases
this may be offset by long term savings elsewhere.

greywater planned into the system is NOT "more" expensive unless
such a thing is not allowed for in the first instance, when it should be
anyway, of course. we're not on the sewerage system at all so the greywater
system is fabulously simple and would only have cost the same as sending it
somewhere else anyway, and everyone can make the choice of where to send
their greywater if they're building from scratch.

Most people need a sewer connection anyway, so anything at all
will be an additional cost. For instance, if you are not fortunate
enough to have sufficient slope on your block, you may need a
holding tank and pump. The pump is a significant expense.
Should the builder factor in this cost for all customers, irrespective
of whether they have a sloping block, or a garden at all for that
matter?

Don't you think
there should be the odd mandated feature that's just standard?

I do, and there are. 5 years ago there was no requirement to
for ceiling insulation in WA. Now builders must install R2 insulation
as a minimum. No doubt there is a lot more that can be done, but
it is happening.

I designed my sister-in-laws house recently,

hence your interest, i take it.
/rolls eyes

Try not to be obnoxious. I am studying building design and
expect to make a career change in the next year or two. I
have taken an active interest in alternative house construction
for decades. I love this stuff.

well, obviously, as well as that, there are other requirements. modesty's no
good if the house is a toxin-exuding energy-wasting piece of shit that will
fall down in 20 years. but don't mind me - i didn't do months of research on
this or anything, i just felt like saying that, so i did. aren't i wacky?

I suspect that you didn't find a plan to suit you, and you
are making the assumption that there is a huge hidden
market consisting of people with exactly the same wants.
I am not convinced. You say that the kit homes only sell
mcmansions, so I show you some counter examples. You
say my examples are too small, so I show you something
between the two extremes. Then you start talking about
strawbale and earth-sheltered housing. I think you just
made an off-the-cuff statement and I read too much into it.

passive solar needs to work on orientation towards the north or it doesn't
happen, i think some basic plans are well possible, don't you?

There is more to it than that. The eave overhangs need to be
adjusted based on your latitude, for instance. And a house
designed for winter solar gain won't work in tropical areas.
And existing trees and new planting should be considered.
You might have other needs that are in conflict with solar
design principles which need to be considered.