Would you be interested in....

Home improvement Q&A, pictures and news fro Mid Century Modern Homes and Houses(NOT for Real Estate)

Moderators: I_LUV_POWER!!!!, Joe, Adriene, moderns-r-us, Tony, Futura Girl, nichols, Java

User avatar
Stephen
Modern Guru
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:35 am
Location: Tustin, CA
Contact:

Would you be interested in....

Postby Stephen » Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:19 am

A flat-pack, (mostly) put-it-together-yourself home? Think Ikea on a MUCH bigger scale.

On architect and myself are working on something unique and I was just wondering if that concept completely scares people or not.

We're working on some ideas to get a modern home system under $150/sq ft at 1800-2000 sq ft -- while still offering some of the elements that make homes like Kappe's LivingHomes so spectacular. We're aiming for something like that but designed for people who can't afford $900k + land + site work.
Stephen Meade
SoCal Realtor - DRE 01378749
Pacific West Assoc. of Realtors President-Elect
http://www.OCModHomes.com
http://www.CliffMaySocal.com
and
Cliff May Homeowner

User avatar
Dallasmodern
Modern Master
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Postby Dallasmodern » Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:27 am

It's a good idea. Several metal building systems offer these kind of 'kits", but they are more often reserved for utilitarian uses such as warehouses and barns. Over the last twenty years they have become more popular with churches and schools, typically with limited budgets. It's a good fit. But I have yet to see the idea carry over to the residential market. I'm curious, tell me more...

fillmore
Modern Socialite
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:55 am
Location: seattle, wa

Postby fillmore » Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:34 pm

ive been interested in something like this for several years, but i guess my only fear is public perception as far as re-sale value. technically, its a modular home on a typical spread footing foundation.

i really like the flatpak system by the lazor office. the only problem i see is that this could only be a feasible solution as "affordable" family housing in a limited market of regions. of course, california would be one of those markets.

www.flatpakhouse.com

User avatar
SDR
Lotta Living FANatic
Posts: 4783
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: San Francisco

Postby SDR » Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:42 pm

Nice. Go thru this photoset.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/flatpakhou ... 570777466/

Let's see what you're up to, Stephen. It's a crying need. . .


SDR

User avatar
Joe
Lotta Living Host
Lotta Living Host
Posts: 4624
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:10 am
Location: sunny Eugene, Oregon
Contact:

Postby Joe » Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:55 pm

already exist. see my article in California Modern from last Summer

fillmore
Modern Socialite
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:55 am
Location: seattle, wa

Postby fillmore » Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:54 pm

SDR wrote:Nice. Go thru this photoset.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/flatpakhou ... 570777466/

Let's see what you're up to, Stephen. It's a crying need. . .


SDR

yea, thats the house of the lazor office founder. there was also a real interesting piece done on it on a hgtv episode of "whats with that house." it gave a real cool video tour of the home, and covered the construction phase. the only problem is, this still isnt considered an affordable option in much of the country.

User avatar
Stephen
Modern Guru
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:35 am
Location: Tustin, CA
Contact:

Postby Stephen » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:37 pm

To add some clarification. We're looking at (various) methods to help us get to $150/sq ft + land on a 1700 - 1900sq ft design. A panelized low-skill assembly process was just one idea.

The idea is to create an attractive, innovative, modern home targeted to many "second-time" homebuyers. It's designed as a viable alternative to a 2000-2200sq ft typical tract home. Another design criteria is to maximize usability of smaller lots (4000 - 6000sq ft). The last point could really help keep costs of the finished product low. We're initially thinking the target is for infill residential development, rather than the typical onesie custom-home market.

Interestingly, one idea that keeps coming up between us is somewhat of a "reinvention" of the Cliff May prefabs. At first I dismissed this as romantic nostalgia but the more I thought about the more it seemed like an idea worth exploring. Frequently the big voice against this is that because of code changes it would simply not be possible. However, I believe I have a handle on solutions for all of the problems.

Structural: a steel post-and beam structure is recyclable, easy to assemble, and will easily meet any shear-strength requirements in earthquake areas.

Title 24: Modern windows and doors along with SIPs for other outer walls and roof should give us enough of a boost to maintain compliance without reducing fenestration.
Stephen Meade

SoCal Realtor - DRE 01378749

Pacific West Assoc. of Realtors President-Elect

http://www.OCModHomes.com

http://www.CliffMaySocal.com

and

Cliff May Homeowner

User avatar
Joe
Lotta Living Host
Lotta Living Host
Posts: 4624
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:10 am
Location: sunny Eugene, Oregon
Contact:

Postby Joe » Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:49 pm

been there, done that. good luck finding land.

User avatar
SDR
Lotta Living FANatic
Posts: 4783
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: San Francisco

Postby SDR » Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:03 pm

The man is SUCH a downer. . .





SDR
"I laugh in the face of danger! Then I hide until it goes away." Bender

User avatar
Stephen
Modern Guru
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:35 am
Location: Tustin, CA
Contact:

Postby Stephen » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:33 pm

SDR wrote:The man is SUCH a downer. . .


SDR


Haha...you said it not me, SDR ;)

A lot of the things we have planned are either not fully-formed ideas or things we'd rather keep secret. What would the fun if there was no sense of mystery and surprise?
Stephen Meade

SoCal Realtor - DRE 01378749

Pacific West Assoc. of Realtors President-Elect

http://www.OCModHomes.com

http://www.CliffMaySocal.com

and

Cliff May Homeowner

Ricola
Modern Fan
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:50 pm
Location: Duluth MN

Postby Ricola » Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:36 am

When I was 18 I worked for a place that did this. (32 yrs ago oy!) We built floor panels, wall panels and roof panels. Most of the places were split entrys with vaulted livingrooms. :eek: Not my cup-o-tea. But the point is, we built the walls including wiring, insulation and sheet rock. The bathrooms were pre-built and plumbed in our factory and set in as a cube with walls attached. This was almost a DIY thing except you needed a crane to set the thing up. Every panel was numbered and went together in order. Here, everyone builds a basement because you need to get footings below the frost line anyway. May as well finish the hole and pour a slab be the footings. our floor panels dropped on the basement walls. The wall panels were set up, the the roof panels were boomed over and set in place. The finishing crews went in. Roofing, siding, interior walls framed and taping and painting crews, flooring guys walked out and handed over the keys. The house could be done in about 2 weeks.

I would entertain the idea for our lot. Just don't make the houses look like shipping containers. :P
Rick Ollah

Who say's Aliens only abduct people.

User avatar
Tony
Lotta Living Host
Lotta Living Host
Posts: 718
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 3:42 pm
Location: The Desert
Contact:

Postby Tony » Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:57 am

Joe wrote:been there, done that. good luck finding land.


Well I don't know about the first half of that statement, but the second part is certainly accurate - in urban Southern California at least. Unless you are looking out in the fringe there are no inexpensive lots left. Unless, that is, they are vertical. All the flat land is gone and to get such a lot you have to buy a tear-down at considerable cost. This fact has turned out to be the hidden flaw in the present PreFab environment.

Tony
Tony Merchell

Architectural Photographer
www.glassandsteel.com

User avatar
Stephen
Modern Guru
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:35 am
Location: Tustin, CA
Contact:

Postby Stephen » Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:04 am

Tony wrote:
Joe wrote:been there, done that. good luck finding land.


Well I don't know about the first half of that statement, but the second part is certainly accurate - in urban Southern California at least. Unless you are looking out in the fringe there are no inexpensive lots left. Unless, that is, they are vertical. All the flat land is gone and to get such a lot you have to buy a tear-down at considerable cost. This fact has turned out to be the hidden flaw in the present PreFab environment.

Tony


That's the top among several reasons why we're focusing more on in-fill development targets.
Stephen Meade

SoCal Realtor - DRE 01378749

Pacific West Assoc. of Realtors President-Elect

http://www.OCModHomes.com

http://www.CliffMaySocal.com

and

Cliff May Homeowner

User avatar
jesgord
Modern Master
Posts: 487
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:04 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Postby jesgord » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:06 am

I think its a great idea (but not necessarily a new one). Look at Karl Koch's techbuilt homes and many of Norman Cherner's low cost designs in which all major components (wall, floor, and roof panels) were built on 4 foot modules. The techbuilts were delivered on a truck and could be assembled in a few days.

Image

User avatar
scowsa
Modern Guru
Posts: 1366
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 4:47 pm
Location: Culver City, CA

Postby scowsa » Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:28 am

Regarding in-fill opportunities, I posted this one last year in a different thread, where a house was built on the rear of a R2 lot -- which allows two properties..

It is in Culver City -- featured in Dwell -- and was built this way as the lot had to have 4 covered parking spaces -- 2 for this house and one for the original smaller house at the front of the lot.

There's a lot of R2 properties in SoCal and many have a smaller property at the rear which is typically rented. In this case the guy who built this lives in the modern one and rents out the front. Obviously, having rental income changes the financing dynamic, if one can accept sharing one's lot, and not all areas require the 4 parking spaces.

Maybe one could build two new, modern, smaller footprint ,houses on such lots.

Image
scowsa

User avatar
Tony
Lotta Living Host
Lotta Living Host
Posts: 718
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 3:42 pm
Location: The Desert
Contact:

Postby Tony » Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:14 pm

Hi Scowsa,

I happened to visit that house on a tour I gave last weekend. Really nice. And a "green" manifesto. Using an R-2 lot like that is a creative way of redeveloping. One could live in the front unit while building the new back unit and then move in and build a new unit in front. Not that this is happening at that house though.

Tony
Tony Merchell



Architectural Photographer

www.glassandsteel.com

User avatar
Joe
Lotta Living Host
Lotta Living Host
Posts: 4624
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:10 am
Location: sunny Eugene, Oregon
Contact:

Postby Joe » Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:10 pm

here are some links to architects/builders I profiled.

I really liked the Yeh + Jerrard design.

http://www.eichlernetwork.com/draw_2.html

fillmore
Modern Socialite
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:55 am
Location: seattle, wa

Postby fillmore » Sat Aug 30, 2008 2:47 pm

Stephen wrote:To add some clarification. We're looking at (various) methods to help us get to $150/sq ft + land on a 1700 - 1900sq ft design. A panelized low-skill assembly process was just one idea.

The idea is to create an attractive, innovative, modern home targeted to many "second-time" homebuyers. It's designed as a viable alternative to a 2000-2200sq ft typical tract home. Another design criteria is to maximize usability of smaller lots (4000 - 6000sq ft). The last point could really help keep costs of the finished product low. We're initially thinking the target is for infill residential development, rather than the typical onesie custom-home market.

Interestingly, one idea that keeps coming up between us is somewhat of a "reinvention" of the Cliff May prefabs. At first I dismissed this as romantic nostalgia but the more I thought about the more it seemed like an idea worth exploring. Frequently the big voice against this is that because of code changes it would simply not be possible. However, I believe I have a handle on solutions for all of the problems.

Structural: a steel post-and beam structure is recyclable, easy to assemble, and will easily meet any shear-strength requirements in earthquake areas.

Title 24: Modern windows and doors along with SIPs for other outer walls and roof should give us enough of a boost to maintain compliance without reducing fenestration.

on the code issue, a serious consideration is that california is probably very close to amending the cbc to adopt leed regulations. its hard to say yet how this will affect residential, but i assume it will only add to the difficulty. doing business in california is rough these days.


Return to “Mid Century Modern Houses and Homes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests