Joe wrote:
I think there
should be some sort of incentive for owners of existing homes to install
tanks as well - maybe a one-time reduction in their water rates.

We get a rebate here in WA. Or we did until recently, not sure if
it has been extended or not. It was worth $500 if I remember correctly.

"meeee" wrote in message
...

lol absolutely true. It's happening here in cairns too...we have this
lovely big mountain behind us, beautifully rainforest and every weekend
there seems to be a new white and orange Tuscan style horrible Mc Mansion
on it. DH's boss has one up there, but I love him for it because he seems
to be the only guy who has a timber and brown colourbond house with trees
actually left around it....can't see the house at all.

recently, for reasons which are actually irrelevent now, we were looking at
what sorts of kit homes etc one could buy. it was often the case that the
more pleasant, smaller, subtle houses did not represent "value for money"
(cough) as the whoppers. i mean, a house half the size or less was not half
the price. (nor really relatively cheaper i think i mean, since some costs
are fixed). most of the companies had these horrific monstrosities out the
wazoo & only a few small, nice ones. not enough companies had passive solar
design or inclusions like solar, or solar hot water, or such as that. it was
disappointing to say the least. i can't fathom why developers in australia
are allowed to run riot. well, i know why, but it's not acceptable. ffs it
doesn't need to be _encouraged_!

As for the other atrocities...I'm
hoping for mudslides. Not deadly ones of course...just enough to
thoroughly disenchant them with hillside show off living.

what a grand plan! ;-)

Ridiculous. And afaik my
great uncle still has his patch of paradise in kellyville...probably much
to the disgust of his Gucci clad neighbours.

cough i don't think they're wearing gucci, i think they're wearing target
cough
kylie

recently, for reasons which are actually irrelevent now, we were looking
at what sorts of kit homes etc one could buy. it was often the case that
the more pleasant, smaller, subtle houses did not represent "value for
money" (cough) as the whoppers. i mean, a house half the size or less was
not half the price. (nor really relatively cheaper i think i mean, since
some costs are fixed). most of the companies had these horrific
monstrosities out the wazoo & only a few small, nice ones. not enough
companies had passive solar design or inclusions like solar, or solar hot
water, or such as that. it was disappointing to say the least. i can't
fathom why developers in australia are allowed to run riot. well, i know
why, but it's not acceptable. ffs it doesn't need to be _encouraged_!


Yes, we've been doing the same thing. My parents ended up building their own
stone house for the same reason. Totally solar powered with wood fire etc.
Dad loves it when there's a blackout cause he's the only one with TV! We
might end up doing the same thing eventually. DH is a lot more handy than
dad so it might not take him 10 years to finish....

As for the other atrocities...I'm
hoping for mudslides. Not deadly ones of course...just enough to
thoroughly disenchant them with hillside show off living.

what a grand plan! ;-)


LOL I'm evil I know....but I live in hope.

Ridiculous. And afaik my
great uncle still has his patch of paradise in kellyville...probably much
to the disgust of his Gucci clad neighbours.

cough i don't think they're wearing gucci, i think they're wearing
target cough
kylie

In article . com,
says...
Joe wrote:
I think there
should be some sort of incentive for owners of existing homes to install
tanks as well - maybe a one-time reduction in their water rates.

We get a rebate here in WA. Or we did until recently, not sure if
it has been extended or not. It was worth $500 if I remember correctly.

That's A Good Thing. I used to live in the West, way back in '81-'84.

0tterbot wrote:
recently, for reasons which are actually irrelevent now, we were looking at
what sorts of kit homes etc one could buy. it was often the case that the
more pleasant, smaller, subtle houses did not represent "value for money"

Most kit home builders have 2 bed (or even 1 bed) 1 bath designs. Try
finding a 2x1 house anywhere else.

http://www.ezyhomes.com.au/manadalay.php
http://www.beachlifehomes.com.au/kit...kitplans_id=58
http://www.kithomes.com.au/326-budget.html

House construction definitely falls into the "economies of scale"
syndrome. For instance, the kitchen and bathroom are the most
expensive rooms in the house, and the cost of a kitchen or bathroom
is the same irrespective of the total cost of the house. Then you have
to get the trades in - it is cheaper to get in one electrician to wire
up a large house than to wire up two houses half the size. These
things are fairly self-evident, and if there is not much demand for
small houses it is because customers aren't prepared to pay a
higher price per square metre. It isn't really the builders' fault.
They just want to sell houses. Customers want environmentally
sound houses until they have to pay for them.

only a few small, nice ones. not enough companies had passive solar
design or inclusions like solar, or solar hot water, or such as that. it was
disappointing to say the least

Much of the passive design involves correctly orienting the house
on the site. Most builders will let you move windows and modify
window size at little cost, and passive design largely involves
relatively minor customisation to suit the house orientation. Most
kit homes are lightweight framed construction, so not suited to
thermal mass principles, but you can pack plenty of insulation
into the frame/ceiling/floor. As far as your water heating goes,
a kit supplier might offer a particular solution as standard but
you are free to install something else.

wrote in message
ups.com...
0tterbot wrote:
recently, for reasons which are actually irrelevent now, we were looking
at
what sorts of kit homes etc one could buy. it was often the case that the
more pleasant, smaller, subtle houses did not represent "value for money"

Most kit home builders have 2 bed (or even 1 bed) 1 bath designs. Try
finding a 2x1 house anywhere else.

sorry, by "small" or "modest" or whatever i said, i meant, "has three
bedrooms (or two BIG bedrooms, like a proper old-fashioned house), but no
"rumpus room" as big as a football field, or "parent's retreat" or any of
that crap they come up with. kwim?

http://www.ezyhomes.com.au/manadalay.php
http://www.beachlifehomes.com.au/kit...kitplans_id=58
http://www.kithomes.com.au/326-budget.html

those are cute. i did see a lot of cute, little ones. but we're a family of
4. i (at the time) just wanted a normal-size little house. there wasn't
enough that was practical & modest.

House construction definitely falls into the "economies of scale"
syndrome. For instance, the kitchen and bathroom are the most
expensive rooms in the house, and the cost of a kitchen or bathroom
is the same irrespective of the total cost of the house. Then you have
to get the trades in - it is cheaper to get in one electrician to wire
up a large house than to wire up two houses half the size. These
things are fairly self-evident, and if there is not much demand for
small houses it is because customers aren't prepared to pay a
higher price per square metre. It isn't really the builders' fault.
They just want to sell houses. Customers want environmentally
sound houses until they have to pay for them.

"environmentally sound" does not equal "ridiculously expensive" (nor even
"more expensive") and i think that last sentence of yours isn't quite
correct anyway - the ostentatious brigade don't give a shit, & they
evidently(?) comprise a fair segment of that market, _if_ the market is
genuinely supplying what people "want". i understand your points above -
some costs are fixed & that is that, but it's nevertheless true that an
unfortunate majority of these types of things are just ostentatious crap
which ALSO represent an overly-expensive product which just isn't good value
:-) of course there are good ones - but they're far too rare. there should
be more in the middle - not a granny flat or weekender, but not an
ostentatious piece of rubbish which takes several hours just to vacuum. and
that's all i'm saying :-) you'll have seen yourself there's just a gap in
that middle section of the market.

only a few small, nice ones. not enough companies had passive solar
design or inclusions like solar, or solar hot water, or such as that. it
was
disappointing to say the least

Much of the passive design involves correctly orienting the house
on the site. Most builders will let you move windows and modify
window size at little cost, and passive design largely involves
relatively minor customisation to suit the house orientation.

one should not have to customise to fix designers' ignorance or mistakes. it
is they who should be making as good a product as possible, because that's
(supposed to be) their job.

Most
kit homes are lightweight framed construction, so not suited to
thermal mass principles, but you can pack plenty of insulation
into the frame/ceiling/floor. As far as your water heating goes,
a kit supplier might offer a particular solution as standard but
you are free to install something else.

same as above. i fully realise they're not all awful. i'm bitching because
too many of them are awful, the "norm" for kit homes is, in my opinion,
awful :-) i gave up & was going to get a converted container (or two), but
at any rate it didn't matter in the end.
kylie

"meeee" wrote in message
...

Yes, we've been doing the same thing. My parents ended up building their
own stone house for the same reason. Totally solar powered with wood fire
etc. Dad loves it when there's a blackout cause he's the only one with TV!
We might end up doing the same thing eventually. DH is a lot more handy
than dad so it might not take him 10 years to finish....

no, that would be a bit much....

we ended up with a solar-powered glorified shed, which i'm doing up (as
necessary) with 2nd hand stuff, but it's a bit of a struggle -i've
discovered none of the rooms are actually squared :-). we have to save up
for improvements to the power because we need to run the generator for a few
hours every day, which is absurd, but there's no other choice (as you've
probably discovered from your dad, you can't let the batteries run right
down). which, naturally, led to dh fantasising about building a straw-bale
house - never mind how to power it. by the time i finish with this one, i'm
NOT LEAVING!! i can't seem to make him understand that, though ;-)

at any rate, we're all set to be the first on the road with a wind turbine
too. the joneses, we _are_! lol.
kylie

0tterbot wrote:
sorry, by "small" or "modest" or whatever i said, i meant, "has three
bedrooms (or two BIG bedrooms, like a proper old-fashioned house), but no
"rumpus room" as big as a football field, or "parent's retreat" or any of
that crap they come up with. kwim?

http://www.ezyhomes.com.au/manadalay.php
http://www.beachlifehomes.com.au/kit...kitplans_id=58
http://www.kithomes.com.au/326-budget.html

those are cute. i did see a lot of cute, little ones. but we're a family of
4. i (at the time) just wanted a normal-size little house. there wasn't
enough that was practical & modest.

Something like this perhaps?
http://www.ezyhomes.com.au/images/ou...Floor-Plan.jpg

or this:
http://www.beachlifehomes.com.au/kit...kitplans_id=55

I see lots of designs in this range. I see an awful lot of "home
theatres" as well, but apparently lots of people want those.

Customers want environmentally
sound houses until they have to pay for them.

"environmentally sound" does not equal "ridiculously expensive" (nor even
"more expensive")

It definitely equals "more expensive" (at least in up front cost).
Any insulation is going to cost more than no insulation. Larger
eaves cost more than "tuscan" eaves. Timber or tile floors cost
more than carpet. Termimesh costs more than poison. A
greywater system costs more than linking straight
into the sewer. A rainwater tank costs more than a sump. Timber
window frames cost more than aluminium. I could go on ad nauseum...

I designed my sister-in-laws house recently, and I specified
reverse-brick-veneer walls, which have pretty much ultimate
thermal performance. The cost is about $10 to $15K over
conventional double brick. How many buyers are prepared
to pay that for something you can't even see?

and i think that last sentence of yours isn't quite
correct anyway - the ostentatious brigade don't give a shit, & they
evidently(?) comprise a fair segment of that market, _if_ the market is
genuinely supplying what people "want".

There are lots of builders who don't target the "ostentatious" end of
the market. A quick flick through the weekend paper shows that the
majority of builders are targeting something a bit above the "first
home builder" (a vanishing species) but certainly not ostentatious.
Pretty plain actually.

there should
be more in the middle - not a granny flat or weekender, but not an
ostentatious piece of rubbish which takes several hours just to vacuum. and
that's all i'm saying :-) you'll have seen yourself there's just a gap in
that middle section of the market.

No, I don't really. Are you talking kit homes here or project homes?
I see a shortage of houses that have real design flair, that look a
bit different from the other houses in the street, that use
unconventional
materials, or that include serious environmental modifications as
standard. In short, the market is depressingly conservative. But
there are lots of houses of around 150sqm or less which are modest
in appearance and function.

.... actually, I think the kit home market is generally better than
the project home market in most of these respects.

Much of the passive design involves correctly orienting the house
on the site. Most builders will let you move windows and modify
window size at little cost, and passive design largely involves
relatively minor customisation to suit the house orientation.

one should not have to customise to fix designers' ignorance or mistakes. it
is they who should be making as good a product as possible, because that's
(supposed to be) their job.

Passive solar design revolves around designing to suit the site
and climate. You can't design a passive solar house without
knowing where it is going to be located and which direction it
is going to face. So there is always going to be a certain amount
of customisation to make it happen. The problem is particularly
tricky for kit home builders, who might ship one house to far
north queensland and the next to southern victoria.

no, that would be a bit much....

we ended up with a solar-powered glorified shed, which i'm doing up (as
necessary) with 2nd hand stuff, but it's a bit of a struggle -i've
discovered none of the rooms are actually squared :-). we have to save up
for improvements to the power because we need to run the generator for a
few hours every day, which is absurd, but there's no other choice (as
you've probably discovered from your dad, you can't let the batteries run
right down). which, naturally, led to dh fantasising about building a
straw-bale house - never mind how to power it. by the time i finish with
this one, i'm NOT LEAVING!! i can't seem to make him understand that,
though ;-)

at any rate, we're all set to be the first on the road with a wind turbine
too. the joneses, we _are_! lol.
kylie


Lol I lived a large part of my childhood in a small solar powered glorified
shed. If you'd like I could put you in touch with my parents; they have a
lot of contacts and knowledge about everything alternative building wise; it
wasn't lack of time or ability on dad's part but lack of money so they are
experts at doing stuff with recycled materials!! He did all the solar
himself so he would even know/know of someone who did about stuff you migth
need/where to get 2nd hand stuff. Anyway let me know if you want his email

wrote in message
ups.com...
Something like this perhaps?
http://www.ezyhomes.com.au/images/ou...Floor-Plan.jpg

no. not like that.

or this:
http://www.beachlifehomes.com.au/kit...kitplans_id=55

no. not like that either.

I see lots of designs in this range. I see an awful lot of "home
theatres" as well, but apparently lots of people want those.

"environmentally sound" does not equal "ridiculously expensive" (nor even
"more expensive")

It definitely equals "more expensive" (at least in up front cost).

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. i'm not comparing a daddy mcmansion
to a baby mcmansion, i'm comparing houses all around. and since the
instant-house industry hasn't got enough to offer that is suitable from both
points of view, there you are. i didn't claim there weren't ANY. i said
there are not ENOUGH and there aren't enough.

Any insulation is going to cost more than no insulation.

ffs, even my glorified shed has insulation.

Larger
eaves cost more than "tuscan" eaves. Timber or tile floors

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

cost
more than carpet. Termimesh costs more than poison. A
greywater system costs more than linking straight
into the sewer. A rainwater tank costs more than a sump. Timber
window frames cost more than aluminium. I could go on ad nauseum...

obviously. i've answered that. 2nd hand timber windows are worth the
relatively small amount you pay compared to new aluminium. not everyone
needs consider termites, and termimesh and poison are not the only two
options. 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. and so on. if a project or
kit home doesn't make allowance for greywater recycling, then magically it
will cost more to "add" something that's not there, eh? don't you think
there should be the odd mandated feature that's just standard? and reduce
costs elsewhere on things that are simply a waste.

I designed my sister-in-laws house recently,

hence your interest, i take it.
/rolls eyes

and I specified
reverse-brick-veneer walls, which have pretty much ultimate
thermal performance. The cost is about $10 to $15K over
conventional double brick. How many buyers are prepared
to pay that for something you can't even see?

well, why don't you tell me?
i would pay extra for something that saves extra, because it would save much
more than that in the long run.

(snip)
that's all i'm saying :-) you'll have seen yourself there's just a gap in
that middle section of the market.

No, I don't really. Are you talking kit homes here or project homes?

kits mostly, but both applies.

I see a shortage of houses that have real design flair, that look a
bit different from the other houses in the street, that use
unconventional
materials, or that include serious environmental modifications as
standard. In short, the market is depressingly conservative. But
there are lots of houses of around 150sqm or less which are modest
in appearance and function.

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?

Passive solar design revolves around designing to suit the site
and climate. You can't design a passive solar house without
knowing where it is going to be located and which direction it
is going to face. (snip)

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?
equally, the plethora of bad kit & project home designs that are entirely
unsuitable in materials and general layout, for virtually anywhere, almost
defies belief. i maintain that this is both extremely common and very
unfortunate, and you can think what you like. how's that?

"meeee" wrote in message
...
this one, i'm NOT LEAVING!! i can't seem to make him understand that,
though ;-)

at any rate, we're all set to be the first on the road with a wind
turbine too. the joneses, we _are_! lol.
kylie


Lol I lived a large part of my childhood in a small solar powered
glorified shed. If you'd like I could put you in touch with my parents;
they have a lot of contacts and knowledge about everything alternative
building wise; it wasn't lack of time or ability on dad's part but lack of
money so they are experts at doing stuff with recycled materials!! He did
all the solar himself so he would even know/know of someone who did about
stuff you migth need/where to get 2nd hand stuff. Anyway let me know if
you want his email

that is lovely of you! i think i might feel shy ;-) are your parents in qld
too? because a lot of this sort of thing is about finding local sources;
we're in nsw southern tablelands, which is pretty good for this sort of
thing, it seems. there are some fabby places in canberra for used stuff,
it's bliss. (yet when i lived there, i could NOT get out fast enough, lol).

there is a solar person in town (who gave us a quote when he eventually got
round to it after we phoned/went in a number of times - a telling point in
itself) but the whole thing is really bothering me. firstly, his quote is
outrageous, considering we aren't starting from scratch. when dh let him
know (or rather, confessed ;-) he & his bestie are building a wind turbine,
solar-dude said "oh, that will be a nice addition" and yet, best as anyone
can work out, the turbine should be supplying a fair bit of energy, which
i'd think would mean elements of his quote could be downgraded somewhat -
but apparently not (HMMMM). i got the number of another person who operates
in our area part-time & really want a 2nd opinion because my gut tells me
going with the first guy just doesn't make sense. i think the first guy has,
amongst other things, entirely misunderstood the situation & thinks we want
to be able to run toasters and microwaves & multiple computers & whatnot all
at once - yet he's been here & had the opportunity to notice we haven't the
room nor the powerpoints for multiple appliances even if we did want to use
them at all, OR all at once (which we don't). stuff like that. i'll see what
the other fella says about it. my microwave & toaster were great, but,
they're gone now & i don't even notice they're missing, so i think there's
been an attitude or aspiration disconnection entirely!

anyway. there you are! let me know how your parents feel about fielding
emails from complete strangers :-) thanks for your help :-)
kylie

that is lovely of you! i think i might feel shy ;-) are your parents in
qld too? because a lot of this sort of thing is about finding local
sources; we're in nsw southern tablelands, which is pretty good for this
sort of thing, it seems. there are some fabby places in canberra for used
stuff, it's bliss. (yet when i lived there, i could NOT get out fast
enough, lol).

there is a solar person in town (who gave us a quote when he eventually
got round to it after we phoned/went in a number of times - a telling
point in itself) but the whole thing is really bothering me. firstly, his
quote is outrageous, considering we aren't starting from scratch. when dh
let him know (or rather, confessed ;-) he & his bestie are building a wind
turbine, solar-dude said "oh, that will be a nice addition" and yet, best
as anyone can work out, the turbine should be supplying a fair bit of
energy, which i'd think would mean elements of his quote could be
downgraded somewhat - but apparently not (HMMMM). i got the number of
another person who operates in our area part-time & really want a 2nd
opinion because my gut tells me going with the first guy just doesn't make
sense. i think the first guy has, amongst other things, entirely
misunderstood the situation & thinks we want to be able to run toasters
and microwaves & multiple computers & whatnot all at once - yet he's been
here & had the opportunity to notice we haven't the room nor the
powerpoints for multiple appliances even if we did want to use them at
all, OR all at once (which we don't). stuff like that. i'll see what the
other fella says about it. my microwave & toaster were great, but, they're
gone now & i don't even notice they're missing, so i think there's been an
attitude or aspiration disconnection entirely!

anyway. there you are! let me know how your parents feel about fielding
emails from complete strangers :-) thanks for your help :-)
kylie

Lol my parents wouldnt mind at all, dad would love to help out as he knows
how hard it is to break the mould and start out! When they moved out of the
city to the country, no-one spoke to them for about 10 years as they were
too 'weird' living in a shed and having goats etc....OMG why are they not
slashing and burning their block and running cows? They're a bit odd...best
stay away.....type of attitude!! Anyway they are in sthrn qld, I'm not sure
what NSW contacts they have, although mum's family are in sydney, and were
in canberra so on various trips down i seem to vaguely recall them doing
some research at places on the way/in the cities themselves. My email is
pacific underscore siamese at yahoo dot com dot au; if you email me I can
give you their email/phone and send you what pics I have of their setup.
Trust me, Dad is very friendly and loves to help with this kind of
thing...and if you want to know obscure permacultureish gardening
facts....my mum will talk your ear off!! Hopefully it will get her off
mine...lol just joking. Anyway let me know!!

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.

wrote in message
oups.com...
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.

so? they're not what i'd pick if i was getting a house built from scratch.
what was your point? that such things exist? i already know that.

Your complaint was that kit builders only offered mcmansions with
rumpus rooms.

I DIDN'T. for the third time, and with different wording yet again in an
effort to get the concept clear - there are not _enough_ modest houses on
offer, comparitively. in the modest-house range, there is _very little_
choice compared to the mcmansion-like market (in particular). this is simply
a _fact_. you can keep supplying plans for 2-3 bedroom kit houses until the
cows come home, but they are well outnumbered, by my calculations, by the
ostentatious-****** houses, and even by the granny-flat models. where they
do exist, there is the further problem that most of them (regardless of
size) don't offer as standard things which should be standard in 2006.

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

sigh. think about why a person would be researching kit homes. it's either
because a: they're a kit home freak & they're amassing a collection, or b:
because they are inclining towards buying property with no house already in
place. in the latter case (much more common ime) such a person (for example,
me) has to think about, and research, their options. ONE option of several
is to buy a kit home. i did not state i was keen on getting a kit home in &
of itself. i merely remarked that i had been researching them for reasons
now irrelevent (i.e. the property we bought has houses already - so the kit
thing became a non-issue overnight). therefore, at that time, i had to
consider _everything_ from living in a caravan, to buying a kit home, to
buying a big shed, several converted containers, building a house from
scratch ourselves (while living in shed/caravan/what have you) and so on.
the kit idea was one of many, but it was also one where i could look at LOTS
of different stuff being offered.

Strawbale is much hyped, but the economic benefits are questionable:
(snip)
Stone masonry has it own problems, as do your other suggestions.

everything has problems. nothing is perfect. everything is done on balance.
one has to decide what's best for the particular situation.

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.

ceramic tile for living areas is an abysmal idea from every imaginable angle
& like you, i KNOW the hard way & cannot imagine anyone suggesting it tbh.
laminex & synthetic carpets are irrelevent. other flooring types include
slate, earth, seagrass and similar, and so on. and again, nothing's perfect
& everything has it's problems, but that's no reason to suggest ceramic
tile, quite frankly.

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.

i'm not. i'm talking about my own situation, if you would stop & read what
is there. i have every intention of installing 2nd hand timber windows in
the house i have. making blithe statements about this & that may be
pertinent to _you_, but since you've evidently misunderstood not only what i
originally said but also why i said it, i don't think there's any need to
lecture anyone on what is prohibitively expensive. the circumstance is
totally different.

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.

no doubt, but i assure you i'm doing a makeover on this house that's as
cheap as chips, so frankly, i'm not wrong. you are not considering all the
possibilities, but i am. shrug so i say, and i know, that making one's
house more environmentally friendly is NOT more expensive. rather, less.

a similar, yet different, issue to making horrendous kit homes more
environmentally friendly and for a better price, but there you have it. what
you lose on the swings you save on the roundabouts, as we all know. if 90%
of kit home manufacturers don't want to rethink what they are doing, i can't
do anything about that. but they will rethink eventually, because "cost" can
be many things, & anyway, they'll have to.

(snip)
No doubt there is a lot more that can be done, but
it is happening.

quite frankly, it's going to have to happen a whole lot faster, as this is
an explosive issue. everything has changed. you are thinking about the
status quo of a year ago (it seems) but you're going to have to think ahead.

Try not to be obnoxious.

under the circumstances, it's somewhat of a struggle. it is not unreasonable
to be frustrated when someone won't just read what you said for what it is.

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.

i'm really not getting the impression that you are understanding what i am
saying. somehting for you to take on board for your future career, perhaps.

I suspect that you didn't find a plan to suit you,

i didn't, although i may have found one eventually had it been needed after
all, or (more to the point) i would have eventually had this segment of the
kit market been bigger, don't you think? if i get to choose a house from
scratch, i'm going to want things which i'm happy without in a house which
already exists. i'm sure that makes sense. if i get to pick my layout, it's
going to have to be a great layout for us. if i don't get to pick after all,
big deal - i'll live.

and you
are making the assumption that there is a huge hidden
market consisting of people with exactly the same wants.

don't know where you got that from. i was bitching from my own perspective
only. i suspect (but don't assume) there's an unfulfilled market of some
kind, for modest & more responsible & less ugly kits that isn't being
broadly fulfilled atm - those people make other arrangements that don't
involve unimaginative kit manufacturers, don't they, just like i would have.

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 hope you understand now that you missed the initial point. land with no
house = looking at all possibilities in order to supply a suitable house at
a suitable price. i was looking for a house or what to do about a house, not
for a kit in particular.

I think you just
made an off-the-cuff statement and I read too much into it.

do you think so?

There is more to it than that.

and yet, in many ways, there's less to it than that. since kits come in
variable standards, it's my opinion that the initial standard should be
lifted (and yes, this is a different issue to price/size) in order to allow
for any variations that need to be applied for the site. but there's a basic
standard and range of things if a house is to be solar passive. the rest is
stuff that you cheerfully inform me can all be changed anyway, which i knew,
while allowing that it is hardly the job of the _buyer_ to be _improving_
the seller's product. the buyer should only be choosing from options which
work better for them personally, and their property and location. and there
you have it!

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.

We live in Melbourne and had our house placed with large windows to the
north. We have insulation in the ceiling and walls, also had brown ceramic
tiles on most of the floors. In winter the sun shines most of the way across
the room, heating the floor which keeps the room warm for hours after
sunset. (provided there is sunshine). In summer the eaves block most of
the sun, we have trees which cast shadows as well. The next thing is to
make exterior blinds of shade cloth for the in between times ( autumn).
This system works quite well.
Marie









"0tterbot" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
oups.com...
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.

so? they're not what i'd pick if i was getting a house built from scratch.
what was your point? that such things exist? i already know that.

Your complaint was that kit builders only offered mcmansions with
rumpus rooms.

I DIDN'T. for the third time, and with different wording yet again in an
effort to get the concept clear - there are not _enough_ modest houses on
offer, comparitively. in the modest-house range, there is _very little_
choice compared to the mcmansion-like market (in particular). this is
simply a _fact_. you can keep supplying plans for 2-3 bedroom kit houses
until the cows come home, but they are well outnumbered, by my
calculations, by the ostentatious-****** houses, and even by the
granny-flat models. where they do exist, there is the further problem that
most of them (regardless of size) don't offer as standard things which
should be standard in 2006.

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

sigh. think about why a person would be researching kit homes. it's either
because a: they're a kit home freak & they're amassing a collection, or b:
because they are inclining towards buying property with no house already
in place. in the latter case (much more common ime) such a person (for
example, me) has to think about, and research, their options. ONE option
of several is to buy a kit home. i did not state i was keen on getting a
kit home in & of itself. i merely remarked that i had been researching
them for reasons now irrelevent (i.e. the property we bought has houses
already - so the kit thing became a non-issue overnight). therefore, at
that time, i had to consider _everything_ from living in a caravan, to
buying a kit home, to buying a big shed, several converted containers,
building a house from scratch ourselves (while living in shed/caravan/what
have you) and so on. the kit idea was one of many, but it was also one
where i could look at LOTS of different stuff being offered.

Strawbale is much hyped, but the economic benefits are questionable:
(snip)
Stone masonry has it own problems, as do your other suggestions.

everything has problems. nothing is perfect. everything is done on
balance. one has to decide what's best for the particular situation.

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.

ceramic tile for living areas is an abysmal idea from every imaginable
angle & like you, i KNOW the hard way & cannot imagine anyone suggesting
it tbh. laminex & synthetic carpets are irrelevent. other flooring types
include slate, earth, seagrass and similar, and so on. and again,
nothing's perfect & everything has it's problems, but that's no reason to
suggest ceramic tile, quite frankly.

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.

i'm not. i'm talking about my own situation, if you would stop & read what
is there. i have every intention of installing 2nd hand timber windows in
the house i have. making blithe statements about this & that may be
pertinent to _you_, but since you've evidently misunderstood not only what
i originally said but also why i said it, i don't think there's any need
to lecture anyone on what is prohibitively expensive. the circumstance is
totally different.

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.

no doubt, but i assure you i'm doing a makeover on this house that's as
cheap as chips, so frankly, i'm not wrong. you are not considering all the
possibilities, but i am. shrug so i say, and i know, that making one's
house more environmentally friendly is NOT more expensive. rather, less.

a similar, yet different, issue to making horrendous kit homes more
environmentally friendly and for a better price, but there you have it.
what you lose on the swings you save on the roundabouts, as we all know.
if 90% of kit home manufacturers don't want to rethink what they are
doing, i can't do anything about that. but they will rethink eventually,
because "cost" can be many things, & anyway, they'll have to.

(snip)
No doubt there is a lot more that can be done, but
it is happening.

quite frankly, it's going to have to happen a whole lot faster, as this is
an explosive issue. everything has changed. you are thinking about the
status quo of a year ago (it seems) but you're going to have to think
ahead.

Try not to be obnoxious.

under the circumstances, it's somewhat of a struggle. it is not
unreasonable to be frustrated when someone won't just read what you said
for what it is.

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.

i'm really not getting the impression that you are understanding what i am
saying. somehting for you to take on board for your future career,
perhaps.

I suspect that you didn't find a plan to suit you,

i didn't, although i may have found one eventually had it been needed
after all, or (more to the point) i would have eventually had this segment
of the kit market been bigger, don't you think? if i get to choose a house
from scratch, i'm going to want things which i'm happy without in a house
which already exists. i'm sure that makes sense. if i get to pick my
layout, it's going to have to be a great layout for us. if i don't get to
pick after all, big deal - i'll live.

and you
are making the assumption that there is a huge hidden
market consisting of people with exactly the same wants.

don't know where you got that from. i was bitching from my own perspective
only. i suspect (but don't assume) there's an unfulfilled market of some
kind, for modest & more responsible & less ugly kits that isn't being
broadly fulfilled atm - those people make other arrangements that don't
involve unimaginative kit manufacturers, don't they, just like i would
have.

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 hope you understand now that you missed the initial point. land with no
house = looking at all possibilities in order to supply a suitable house
at a suitable price. i was looking for a house or what to do about a
house, not for a kit in particular.

I think you just
made an off-the-cuff statement and I read too much into it.

do you think so?

There is more to it than that.

and yet, in many ways, there's less to it than that. since kits come in
variable standards, it's my opinion that the initial standard should be
lifted (and yes, this is a different issue to price/size) in order to
allow for any variations that need to be applied for the site. but there's
a basic standard and range of things if a house is to be solar passive.
the rest is stuff that you cheerfully inform me can all be changed anyway,
which i knew, while allowing that it is hardly the job of the _buyer_ to
be _improving_ the seller's product. the buyer should only be choosing
from options which work better for them personally, and their property and
location. and there you have it!

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.