Thoughts about non-traditional ways of building homes

[Minz]

I will try to make this concise.

I'm a Realtor and also working on becoming a "simple-living" type person. I've become so uneasy seeing so many buyers, including myself, get in these 30 year mortgages. I feel we are slaves to banks and debt. The more I've learned about how banks and the Federal Reserve operate, the more suspicious and disheartened I've become. However...I like to think I'm a "solutions-type" person and I'm optimistic...and I feel there must be a better way. I've been brainstorming ideas for some more non-traditional ways of people being able to live in nice, quality homes without getting into crazy, long-term debt.
.
Anyways...here are some ideas I've come across in my research...



1) I've been researching builders who claim they can build quality homes at a fraction of the cost of traditional homes and do it in a "green" way. I'm still researching this and I want to visit some of these companies and their sites. Apparently it is an efficient process because the wood is cut by a machine and in-shop and then shipped out to the site.

2) Someone buys land and then have a community-based-group who shares in the work of building/assembling a home. They it would be a pay-it-forward or barter type of thing. They can even up-cycle and use materials that have been discarded. This concept would rely on a community-grass-roots type organization.

3) then there are non-traditional homes like yurts, wooden yurts, pre-fab homes, earthships and so forth....

Any thoughts/ideas/feedback.

I'm just brainstorming at this point.

[befree]

I've thought about this for years, and have yet to take any action. But I still love to think about it! Here's some of what I've gleaned from research, correspondence, and on-site visits: "green" building seems to be MORE, not less expensive. Truly non-traditional building, like straw bale, earthships, or cobb, can be much less expensive, but you have to learn to build them, and be prepared to pay for them outright, since you can't get a mortgage on 'em. Your option #2 reminds me of a group in Huntsville TX (called Phoenix something?) that builds from scratch out of salvage and recycled materials...but these are very experienced carpenters, plumbers, etc who can not only do the work but do it out of the box, with funky materials. As far as building an affordable traditional home, I think Habitat for Humanity has really got it figured out...they repeat a very standard, efficient ranch house with a simple floor plan. Want a simple tiny home with no mortgage? Check out Jay Shafer's Tumbleweed Tiny House website. My very favorite tiny, affordable house still remains the 320 sq ft shipping container home sold by global portable buildings out of Calif. Not as "cute" as other options, but extremely efficient, well-built, and affordable.

[RCWRTR]

I'm in the homestretch of building a modest, but lovely, home with a custom homebuilder. I did a lot of research and came to the conclusion that the the options you've mentioned, Minz, simply are not an option in the area where I wish to live. As such, I decided to go with more traditional, locally-sourced, eco-friendly building products and construction methods.

I found that some eco-friendly construction products are actually of better quality and less costly than traditional construction products, while others are a bit more expensive. I was able to justify the additional expense due to their potential for energy savings and sourcing them locally, so I saved on construction supply transportation expense.

[ToomuchStuff]

Sounds like your talking prefab/manufactured housing (think a mobile home, without the axle). While some costs MAY be cheaper, you tend to have other costs (getting it there), as well as the possibility of mortgage issues.

I was interested in both Earthships, and straw bale homes for a number of years (never was sure about straw bale homes and allergies). But I found and walked through a local, non traditional home, that could be construed as green (that term needs better defining); Monolithic domes. They are a concrete and foam energy efficient structure (think super-insulated cave) that doesn't have a roof that will leak, or needs to be painted, or have a termite worry.

But I can also view what Habitat does as green, when they redo an older donated home for sale. (doesn't seem as much anymore)

[SteveinMN]

I've been researching builders who claim they can build quality homes at a fraction of the cost of traditional homes and do it in a "green" way. I'm still researching this and I want to visit some of these companies and their sites. Apparently it is an efficient process because the wood is cut by a machine and in-shop and then shipped out to the site. [... or] non-traditional homes like yurts, wooden yurts, pre-fab homes, earthships and so forth....


I found that some eco-friendly construction products are actually of better quality and less costly than traditional construction products, while others are a bit more expensive. I was able to justify the additional expense due to their potential for energy savings and sourcing them locally, so I saved on construction supply transportation expense.

I've been looking at eco-efficient homes for years; DW and I considered them seriously as an "our" house before her house spent months on the market during The Great Recession.

IME, the "fraction of the cost of traditional homes" seems to be somewhere around 95/100. >8) For all the stated improvements in building efficiency caused by not having to ship tradespeople and materials to a site and working in less-than-optimal conditions, there still must be dollars spent for creating a structure that can be built in chunks small enough and strong enough to traverse most roads to its destination, as well as whatever must be done to get the structure a local certificate of occupancy. The conditions a structure must withstand in, say, Minnesota are more severe than what it must withstand in, say, Arkansas or Oregon. That's one reason you don't see many shipping-container houses in this area: the amount of insulation required to efficiently heat/cool a metal box would take too much away from what little room exists inside. And, as RCWRTR points out, recycled/efficient building materials often are more expensive than their standard alternatives; it's their lower total lifecycle cost that makes them economically attractive to those who can envision that lifespan.

But the biggest hindrance to the acceptance of these structures, IMHO, is perceptual. Too many lenders see a pre-fab home and think "mobile home", with its lower construction standards and diminished public perception of value, not accepting that these pre-fab homes are built to at least the same standard as stick-built homes. Too many buyers are reluctant to make a 15- or 30-year bet against a construction model that has worked decently well for generations. And -- maybe this will change over time -- too many people are far more concerned with the price of getting in the front door than the price of keeping the house running over the relatively-few years they're in the house. That's what drives the sales of McMansions and "builder-grade" furnaces and DIY/improper landscaping/homesiting that cost long after they're in place.

There has to be a way to sell "simple and small" while avoiding the stigma of "cheap" or "starter home". Perhaps the answer lies in building structures that don't diverge that much from what people are used to (baby steps) offered as a complete package with competitive financing through an understanding lender and projections of monthly utility/repair costs over several years. Reduce the obstacles and objections and you may find some success.

[puglogic]

Minz, I love your thinking and am interested in what you find out.

I've been interested for years in building a strawbale home here where we live (we're in Colorado too, west of Denver). But when I researched the total cost of creating even a simple home, it actually turned out to be far more expensive than having a traditional custom home built. How that is, I'm not certain....

Anyway, good for you for moving in this direction.

[catherine]

Along the lines of your #2: another out-of-the box way to home ownership (and redfox, chime in here, as I know you are very familiar with this) are community land trusts. My son bought his home through one of these. Essentially a non-profit, community-based organization buys homes/land and then provides them to qualified people in a joint-equity situation. So, my son got a standard mortgage through a credit union, but he bought his home from the Land Trust. They gave him the down payment, essentially. But when he sells the house, he gives them half the equity, and they use the proceeds to purchase more homes. (I think that's how it works).

His house had been a run-down two-family and the Land Trust bought it and completely redid it--turning it into a single family and updated the kitchen, HVAC, bathrooms, siding, window, etc. It is a beautiful small, old house in a neighborhood that is up-and-coming, and actually Bernie Sanders used it in a photo op.

My son makes very little money working for a community college and it would have been very difficult to save up that money. He loves his house.. I think this is a great "people-oriented" solution

[Gardenarian]

I am also interested in alternative architecture.
A couple of my favorite books on the topic are A Pattern Language (http://www.amazon.com/Pattern-Language-Buildings-Construction-Environmental/dp/0195019199/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pd_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1C780SK00Y4JD&coliid=I3HYJV38VHKT3M) by Christopher Alexander and Shelter (http://www.amazon.com/Shelter-Lloyd-Kahn/dp/0936070110/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1C780SK00Y4JD&coliid=I1KPPVCEY3HWY9) by Lloyd Kahn.

I've built many simple tree houses and am fascinated by them. Pinterest has a lot of photos and links to all sorts of alternative houses - tiny, pre-fab, tree, straw bale, earth sheltered.

I think meeting building codes is often an issue. Lots of people might be happy with no electric and 6 1/2 foot ceilings, but it's not allowed. One way people get around that is to keep buildings under 120 sf - codes don't apply to sheds and such - and then link them in various ways.

In an alternative life, I'd go to the Yestermorrow Design/Build Schoo (http://www.yestermorrow.org/programs/certificate-programs/natural-building-certificate/)l.