How To Build an Open Source House? 274
An anonymous reader writes "I'm starting a project that I hope that the engineers, makers and general DIYers in the Slashdot crowd can help out with. The full story's on the website, but the short version is as follows: my aim is to make a cheap, recycled, sustainable building, to document the process fully and to release anything that would help others to do the same. I intend to use an old train carriage as the shell, but the ideas should extend to shipping containers, aeroplane fuselages or anything similar. I know I'm not the first to do this, but I can't see anyone else who's provided a detailed step-by-step account of the build, complete with plans and the rest. Before I start, though, I'm trying to draw on as much collective experience as possible, and to head off mistakes before they happen. My question to Slashdot is simple: what do you think I need to know before I begin?"
Use a shipping container (Score:1, Insightful)
Use a shipping container, install drywall, utilities.
FP
Know the right people (Score:5, Insightful)
First off, build a list of local electricians and plumbers, and the name of whomever is going to sign off on this house with regard to permits and other legal issues. IE: People who know your local regulations.
Get their opinion and evaluate their willingness to work with you, because the last thing you want is a finished project that gets condemned.
habitat for humanity (Score:1, Insightful)
As someone with an architecture background... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because every building, no matter how modular or factory-built, is very customized due to local building codes, site-specific issues, and the personal tastes of the owner or builder.
What you're doing sounds cool (London Tube train car into a home) but it's such a niche idea that of course you're not going to find step-by-step how-to guides. It's admirable that you want to share every step of the process online, but truly "open-source" doesn't really make a difference in this situation. Oh, and btw, there are legal issues with releasing your construction documents for others' use. Architects and contractors are licensed because they are taking on liability for the specifications and buildings they produce.
Building codes (Score:3, Insightful)
You need to know the building codes in the area.
You may have lots of great, cheap but illegal ideas.
Inspectors can be your friends, helping you do it right, or a real pain.
Re:habitat for humanity (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because his documenting everything and making it available to everyone won't help people that don't live where he lives. Right?
I believe that the point the AC was trying to get across is that helping others learn how to build poorly insulated homes out of materials that aren't really suitable for home construction, isn't really helping at all.
The traditional trilemma - you can pick two! (Score:1, Insightful)
Cheap, sustainable, and recycled - I suspect you can have any two.
Some of the most sustainable buildings are monolithic domes (http://www.monolithic.com) but they are neither recycled nor cheap - they are about average construction cost, but VERY efficient.
I can't see an airplane fuselage or a railway car ever becoming energy-efficient.
Whatever you know, it won't be enough (Score:4, Insightful)
What do you think I need to know before I begin?
Building your own house from scratch is not for the fainthearted. But if you succeed you will have done something most people dream of their entire life.
Re:Know the right people (Score:3, Insightful)
you'll still need to design plans, get permits and get the whole thing inspected and approved. And while most jurisdictions will allow you to make said improvements to your own dwelling, they're going to go over everything with a fine tooth comb if you're not licensed in that trade. My parents built their own home, but even still, got help from all the above to do the plans, oversee inspections and help with the trickier parts of each of those aspects. Good luck, though. A worthy endeavor.
Re:Whatever you know, it won't be enough (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Whatever you know, it won't be enough (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, except that when you screw up, you've not only wasted some time, but you've also damaged a bunch of expensive materials that you have to pay for again.
I know software isn't easy, but when the costs for prototyping and experimenting are so much less than in the physical world, it's amazing how much software still doesn't work well.
You sound hipstery (Score:2, Insightful)
While its all charming and cool to come up with an "open source house" - there are many pitfalls/roadblocks to just coming up with your own home design. Most of us call that "The Real World".
Re:To all the building code replies... (Score:3, Insightful)
He's in London. There's not going to be any escape from regulations and permits.
Re:Know the right people (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, I've only spent a few minutes thinking about it, but I'm having a hard time coming up with a way of adequately insulating a tube car without completely destroying the character of it. Especially if you don't want to spend a fortune on fancy materials. Maybe from the outside it'd still look like a tube car, but on the inside it would feel entirely different.
While I see the appeal in reusing existing containers of various sorts, really the only benefits they offer as a building material is that they already exist and they've got some structural qualities. Other than that, their original design requirements are often rather harsh in terms of long term human habitation. A storage container is a miserable place to spend an afternoon. Just because you can spend a bunch of time and money making it comfortable doesn't mean that that is a good use of resources.
Re:Know the right people (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure how true this is these days, but I always had the impression that, overall, European houses were of the built to last category, while US houses were rather faster and cheaper in construction. 1000 years without any kind of rework sounds a bit overengineered to me, though.
I think there is a difference between built to last, and built so that it's 1000 years before major renovations are required.
Many buildings in the US were built just as well as their European counterparts, but we lose a LOT to people who want something bigger or more modern. There are also few homes that have a succession of owners who have the financial means to perform the maintenance on an aging home. Mount Vernon, George Washington's home, was near collapse before it was purchased with the intent to renovate it.
Modern US homes do suffer from the problems that you are referring to, and I refuse to purchase (or rent) any of the homes in modern developments. I won't reward the developers or the enablers who continue to turn our countryside into throw-away cookiecutter landscape (Personal rant concluded)
But back on point, there are simply parts of homes that wear out. Plastics degrade, roofing is subjected to continuous weather (Stick a stone outside in the sun/wind/rain/snow for 500 years and see what happens). Technologies change (Anyone renovating even a 75 yr old house will know). Every known material will wear out during use.
Take a look at the stairs in some of buildings in DC. These stone staircases have significant indentations worn into them from people simply walking on them for less than 300 years. (I'm not sure if they have been repaired or replaced, so it could even be less) And of course, this ignores some of the issues with the environment changing. Rivers and streams change course even over such short times. Consider how much the Capitol of the Aztec empire has changed over a mere 500 years.
A better approach might not be to design things to last 500-1000 years, but design things to be easily repaired and replaced when they inevitably need to be.
Re:Know the right people (Score:3, Insightful)
Things I didn't bother thinking about until I bought a house:
The sad part of home ownership is that unless you paid cash you have a mortgage payment to make. If your property is devalued, you not only lose value (in the 'lost money on paper' sense), but if you say, lose your job and have to move elsewhere for gainful employment, you are now saddled with a huge debt or at least lose a lot of the equity you have accumulated (and then you might as well have been renting for the last 10-15 years).
This is why your neighbors get pissed when you build an eye sore. It isn't because they despise your rights as an individual (though there are some neighbors who get an obvious power trip off of it and some home owners associations who make fascist look reasonable), but because they want to defend their right to not have their $120K home become a $40K shack because you decided to "build" a stack of rusting shipping containers.
So in the end, yes, as messed up as it is, it is as much their business as they can legally make it and why I made sure not to live within a mile of another human being.
Buzzwords (Score:3, Insightful)
Fuck the government. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you build your own house, you should be able to build it however you like. Caveat emptor!