Ah, the 100K House. Finally someone did an experiment to see how low they could go while designing a green home. They are aiming for LEED Platinum, no less. This house sparked a discussion at the LinkedIn Affordable Green Homes Group: Does green affordable have to be ‘modern’ when most people like traditional style homes?
When it comes to ‘traditional’ home styles, there are a lot of decorative aspects that are very costly. The goal of green affordable housing should include options that allow for ‘traditional’ features, but the quality of material and space, daylight, views, energy consumption and private/public space integration should be of higher importance than things like excessive trim when money is the most pressing control over a green design. You could argue that the quality of home building has declined in part because the public feels that traditional-style features like trim are mandatory for a ‘good-looking’ home, urging them to spend their limited budgets on tacked-on architectural elements like faux brick and stone, instead of things that really make a home enjoyable and healthy.
Perhaps what you are feeling is that modern prefab architecture lacks a vernacular identity (FOR ALL NON-ARCHITECTS, THAT MEANS REGIONAL STYLE). I would also agree that this is unfortunate, but there are many cases in which a standardized, affordable home gains its own identity from its inhabitants, rather than from the designer.
Last week at Boston Society of Architects’ monthly “Conversations on Architecture” Rahul Mehrotra spoke about his project located outside of Jaipur, India that will provide housing for elephants and their keepers’ families. At ten dollars per square foot, stone walls and light frame roofing shelter both people and elephants. No decorative elements were included in the design, and someone asked, “Why not?” Mehrotra answered that his hope was that each family will move in and decorate entryways and walls themselves, giving each home a unique character. The project is on hold due to lack of funding (at $10/square foot… the excavation portion of this project is more costly than the homes themselves) but I can definitely see this post-move-in decoration happening upon eventual completion of the project. This is much more reflective of the people that live there than any “traditional” architectural elements. This minimalist attitude is what would get this project built so as to make homes for the otherwise homeless. Keeping our sights on this goal of affordable green housing is important. A flexible design that can be erected almost anywhere and endure the climate is necessary to meet the goal.
Ultimately, no style of architecture is unique. It’s a style, a fad, something that we may like or hate, as a group or individually. It is something that we copy over and over until it starts to give a location or region a sort of definition; think Swiss chalet.
Swiss Chalet
The 100K home breaks down basic elements that make the indoor space of a home and tries to amplify the benefits of ceilings, walls, floors, and windows to help make the most of very little. I feel that the designers did a wonderful job of transforming a little bit of material into a high quality space with multi-functionality- something that every family with small pockets needs. Tacking on traditional elements to this home could easily bring up the cost another 50%. When this means the difference between making the mortgage, and making the mortgage and putting food on the table, you begin to see that the traditional elements are not as critical as just getting by.
At some point, designers must give up the thought that their skills will be required with each family in need of an affordable home. For some people, the need for a clean space in a sturdy structure is more important than individuality. The 100k House has perhaps a far too unique facade, that when replicated, is too recognizable as the same as the neighbors model. A change in exterior color and a simple re-arrangement of windows could fix that issue. The 100k team already about of that: facades. If you consider the beautiful light achieved inside the 100k home, which splashes down the open stairwell from the light scoop on the roof, you can see that this highly affordable home is reaching far beyond what, typically, $100,000 would get you. Since this project was also publicized, the design team must have wanted to make a splash that would get some attention as well. So that can be taken into consideration- if this exterior material had been one color and the windows were all symmetrical along the building, it would be boring and maybe even ugly. So again, I feel that this design is great and puts a little bit of material to good use, making the utmost impact on the world of uber-expensive, exclusive designs that are not feasible for the general population.
Surely, a family that can only afford to build a 100k house would be very proud of this residence, when compared to the alternative in Philadelphia. This listing is going for 100k… click the pics to see more 100k homes in Philly.
This post was submitted by ThinkDwell. Visit Our Blog.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
They're faster at using computers and surfing the web than their parents. They are immersed in technology like Wii, iPhone, and navigation systems. They're also more in tune to energy issues. The government has targeted kids to lead the energy efficient home movement and kids have seemingly responded by making moves to position themselves as the green leaders of the future.
COMMENTS