02-29-2008, 06:07 AM
When they first started delivering it, I though someone had bought a bunch of mobile homes overseas and had them shipped in. During assembly, I though they were a bunch of double wide - double long trailers. Next I thought it was 2 sets of double wide - double long being built close to each other. Suddenly it was two double wides - double longs being connected with a SIP patio cover. Finally the patio cover appeared to be enclosed and there you had a house.
In a nut shell its two houses joined together by an enclosed breezeway (hence name ?) making up the living and dining room. Simplistic in design with ever so much function.
Could containers be used? Absolutely!
As for the house itself, mixed feelings. The house is based on renewable and green material, but truth is, it's a fashion/design statement and I really don't think the "green" of the house was the priority and more that it was the now cliché to have material and design. Some of it was downright ugly and seemed to be a pain in the butt for maintenance but the owners never stop talking about the specialty of material in the house and such (along with the cost) at every chance they got.
My GC friend said the house could be built locally for a third what they paid using green and renewable material. He also said that there were many hidden environmentally unfriendly things as well. Some of the green and recycled material would require substantial treatment to make them usable, so that may offset any green advantage. Also for areas where green material wasn’t used, the amount of non-renewable and virgin material was large. He and I were impressed by the design and layout, but not the environmental reasons the house is being marketed. However, in all fairness, the owners are California snobs so I may be a bit bias in my view.[
]
In a nut shell its two houses joined together by an enclosed breezeway (hence name ?) making up the living and dining room. Simplistic in design with ever so much function.
Could containers be used? Absolutely!
As for the house itself, mixed feelings. The house is based on renewable and green material, but truth is, it's a fashion/design statement and I really don't think the "green" of the house was the priority and more that it was the now cliché to have material and design. Some of it was downright ugly and seemed to be a pain in the butt for maintenance but the owners never stop talking about the specialty of material in the house and such (along with the cost) at every chance they got.
My GC friend said the house could be built locally for a third what they paid using green and renewable material. He also said that there were many hidden environmentally unfriendly things as well. Some of the green and recycled material would require substantial treatment to make them usable, so that may offset any green advantage. Also for areas where green material wasn’t used, the amount of non-renewable and virgin material was large. He and I were impressed by the design and layout, but not the environmental reasons the house is being marketed. However, in all fairness, the owners are California snobs so I may be a bit bias in my view.[
]