80sqm blocks

Why not make it exactly like a townhouse complex but the land title isn't strata. That way you have the efficient use of land like a townhouse but ownership rights of a regular house. Best of both worlds.

 

I can't imagine this would take up much land... does look a bit like it belongs in a park home though. http://www.domain.com.au/sold/6-5-dickens-street-heidelberg-heights-vic-3081-2012094895?sp=1

 

Here's what 120sqm can do - one is a bigger family home the other is an apartment with a courtyard, still experimenting with that one as you will see.

80sqm should easily yield a more affordable product.

Trying to understand the push for smaller houses on individual lots - does nothing for community building and is a false economy at this size.

 

it's called "timber framing" - a concept so radical and underground in the Perth construction scene that they all look like "park homes" or "shipping containers".

 

oh yeah those..... they'll look ********* in a few years when the paint fades and things start settling and shifting!

i love the way they use fibro and the beads to be a feature! dont think there is anything else that screams "cheap" like it!

 

i do like the 3 level one with the mezzanine type opening. they have a "professional" type feel for a young couple and good use of space going up rather than out. you can also get families in there with some security gates on the stairs for the kids. are they being done in townhouse style? or as is in complexes?

i would think a 2x1 or 2x2 should be the minimum. cant really see the singles being of great interest

 

so cheap all the top end houses in City Beach use it.

they even use this thing called "render" which does this fading / shifting / settling thing you mention.

how the ex-returned services / homeswest brick veneer "cheap" mentality pervades 40 years later is beyond me - certainly one of a fast-approaching bygone era in Perth housing.

 

the "45" is a 2x2.

the 120sqm one you mention is for a family of four with two teenagers.

 

Yeah, I wasn't actually talking about the materials, it is the design that makes the building look "cheap". Timber framing does not have to look like that. The townhouses I linked to are in my investment area in Melbourne and I am very familiar with the product in the area. Aesthetically, these are the worst I have seen (in my opinion). I have seen a lot better in the area. Driving around, these caught my attention. They are still timber framing, but I think they look better than the first ones I linked to. I don't think photos in the ad do them justice. They are better looking in real life

http://www.realestate.com.au/property-townhouse-vic-heidelberg+heights-116432703

 

i thought they'd be done in the burbs being slapped up in no time. you could punch out quite a few in a very short period
Gladstone slapped up hundreds during boom time and they look terrible a couple of years after. hopefully you guys over west are following more stringent "quality processes"

 

@Perthguy - we have a very high standard of "project homes" here in WA so we must be mindful that the Eastern State's foray into this arena - at this level of spec - is usually done by builders, not experienced building designers / architects. Even our project builders at this level have excellent and well trained designers and ex-architects etc all working for them with a mountain of construction and marketing experience.

@bob shovel - Price. Quality. Speed - pick two.

 

I guess here is as good as any to ask this question. With the pdf I linked to, on the page with the heading 5.0 metre / 6.0 metre homes, there is a picture of a kitchen/meals/family room, with a raked ceiling. Does anyone know roughly how much more it costs to do this for a room this size vs a normal, flat ceiling? Only looking for ball park, not a firm quote

http://planningwa.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2012-11-15-G.Carter-HomeBuyers-LGPA-Seminar-–-Residential-Densification-Challenges-Read-Only.pdf

Any idea @Aaron Sice?

 

It's usually about $1000 a course - so a 31c ceiling is usually about $3300 extra over a 28c ceiling.

Raking ceilings really depend if you're getting above 27º pitch and 3m wall height. Odds are the wall height will be about 42-48c but roof pitch could be lowered.

This example is the expensive way to do it.



Also being able to build the rake into a truss setup can keep things cheap - so not pitching off the external leaf, but using a "cathedral" style in the middle of the room.

This image is much cheaper, but please don't get any ideas about the skylights or the recessed LED edge - but you get my point.



Last version only needs brickwork to standard ceiling height then is vaulted within the roof cavity, the first is a full structural component.

I would say the last photo would in the costing ball park of a standard 31c ceiling if trusses are employed for use.

 

Thank you @Aaron Sice, but dang. I'm looking at the expensive option

My mate's looking at a small, narrow, rear block and I'm throwing around design ideas with him. So this was my mud map concept plan with the red outline showing the raked ceiling part, including the alfresco but not including the garage. I doubt it would work on a budget. I have expensive taste Nothing serious at this stage. He just wants to be confident he will be able to fit a modest house onto the block before putting in an offer.

 

my 2 cents
it may be hard to get the look your after with that layout and room width. perhaps just sloping from one side to the other, plus it will let the light in.... see pic

 

swap your kitchen and your living and it's a winner.

 

Yeah, that's how it was. But he didn't like it. I did



Personal opinion I guess.

 

from this latest. id like the kicthen dining swapped!!

 

lol. kitchen, dining, lounge musical chairs! where they end up, no body knows.

If it was my place, I would have the kitchen there too so I could watch tv while I'm making dinner

The point of the exercise is not to lock down a final design, it is just to see if he could feasibly build a modest house on a small, narrow block.

 

And the winner is........the council. More lots, more subdivision fees, more contributions. These will form a greater % of the block costs.

Small blocks aren't necessarily more efficient when 30% of the subdivision goes to circulation space in a standard subdivision.