Japanese 30 Square Foot Paco Home

Japanese architect Jo Nagasaka along with the Schemata Architecture Office have come up with a contraption that supposedly "rethinks" how much space we need for day-to-day activities; approximately 30 square feet.

This cube is to contain a hammock to sleep on, a Japanese-style recessed desk, and a sink, toilet and shower. Nagasaka has quickly put out the disclaimer that the Paco home is not an actual stand alone solution but intent is to supplement your particular living situation. It could be a beach house, a portable office — anything, really, as long as you find a way to lug it into place and hook up the water. Huh?


I don't get the point of this dumpster looking box as I can not for the life of me see what anyone would want to do with it especially when a more comfortable, more easily transportable and convenient solution exists (RVs anyone?). I had initially thought that this might be another "Universal World House" attempt until I realized that it didn't even have a kitchen. As it is, it looks like either a really well sanitized pod in some penitentiary or a cell in an insane ward, missing the pads on the walls. Nagasaka really needs to start "thinking outside the box!"






Images obtained from: www.nerdwithswag.com

Living In A Shipping Container

Adam Kalkin, a New Jersey architect isn't the first to seek to make homes out of shipping containers, I see them all the time on the planet green channel, but no one has employed them as intensively as Kalkin has to design luxurious homes, museum additions and refugee housing.

In architectural circles, no one is quite sure what to make of Kalkin and he is somewhat regarded as an oddball. His website includes lessons on hitting a tennis forehand and a selection of songs to sing after taking antidepressants (imagine going karaoke singing with him). Years ago Kalkin shaved while delivering a lecture at the Whitney Museum, which tends to make one wonder what type of Meds he must be on. Still, there is no denying the ingenuity and care with which he has designed his projects, 32 of which were included in the publication of Quik Build: Adam kalkin's ABC of Container Architecture. Some of these projects include the "Bunny Lane," a home he built for himself with a 19^th century clapboard cottage inside an industrial hanger, and the "Push Button House," a furnished room that unfolds from a container with hydraulic walls.

Although these projects may make practical sense, shipping containers are cheap, mobile and highly recyclable, they don't seem to make much economic sense as the average cost of these prefab designs range from $250 to $400 a square foot including installation, which is more than a thrifty consumer today would pay for a home built by an architect and contractor. Even with the suggestion that they might be used more in refugee relief and in providing low-cost housing in places like the Ninth Ward of New Orleans, it is still too expensive to warrant justification.

This is the same issue I have with the Ikea and Universal world houses respectively and can understand why if they are to be marketed as a cheaper and smaller alternative to expensive suburban homes, they are so expensive then. At $50,000, I would rather put the money in the bank and rent an apartment or use it as down payment on a California home than buy a 400 plus square foot shipping container to live in. Also, what is the indoor air quality (IAQ) like in the container with extreme temperature changes? I know it is pretty open, but its still made of metal. It might get way too hot in the summer and too cold in the winter.




Images obtained from: www.fastcompany.com
For more info, check: http://ecoble.com/2008/06/01/how-to-live-in-a-shipping-container/

Boklok, The Ikea House

Even though this product is a few years old, I wanted to take some time to talk about it, especially after my last posting about the "Universal world house." IKEA, the Swedish company we all know so well for making affordable furniture of poor durability, put out their Boklok (which translates to "smart living") house in 2007.

Though the company claims that it went to great lengths to consider aesthetics in the house design, it looks horrid to me. In most of the examples I've seen online, they are all "blockish" with very little consideration for allowing adequate natural light to enter the spaces. Also, the claims that it is very affordable, which is supposed to be the main selling point, doesn't make the slightest sense to me as prices range from €150,000 to €222,000 for between 46 and 81 square meters (495-872 square feet). I don't really have a good sense of what housing and accommodation is like in the U.K and Europe in general as its been many years since I lived outside of the United States but that sounds like a lot of money for very little space. For that much money, one can buy a very comfortable house in anywhere in the south of the United States so to pay that much for a space that is just about the size of my apartment when I was in college seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

Another thing that I find odd is why anyone would trust IKEA to build a house for them when the very same IKEA is notorious for making furniture that never lasts. Although they say that in the case of the Boklok, their professionals will assemble it for you, unlike their furniture, it still does not make me feel any more comfortable with it. If IKEA can't make bookshelves with a decent life-span, why should anyone dare to live in anything they have a hand in? Certainly not for over €200,000! Thank you very much but I prefer my suburban track home to that thing.

The only good that I see this contraption, for that is what it is, being useful for is solely for temporary shelter. This and the universal house would have been very good to have back in the aftermath of Katrina. When faced with a disaster like that which displaces so many people from their homes, one of the biggest dilemmas is how to find quick accommodation for everyone. The Boklok and universal house would be quick to set up and relatively easy enough to manage. Outside of that, I think they are a waste of time and definitely money. I have not actually seen them anywhere though I came across some old blogs from 07 on which many residents in London where excited about them and wondering where they could be purchased. I hope they found other alternatives.



Image obtained from spigel online
For more information, check: www.spiegel.de/international

"Universal World House" To Revolutionize The Look Of 3RD World Slums

A new Pre-fabricated house developed in conjunction with the Bauhaus University in the city of Weimar has been designed to change the look of shanty-towns across the globe, which mostly look the same; rickety zinc huts thrown together as rudimentary shelter for the destitute.

Gerd Niemöller, the designer of the cellulose material, said in an interview, "From the very beginning, our goal was to create practical, environmentally sustainable, and, most importantly, cheap living quarters for the slums of the Earth." Niemöller says that he envisions this product being developed in the countries where they will be needed providing much better insulation, sturdiness and very flexible making it optimal in areas with potential for earthquakes. Niemöller also added that the sticker price for the components for the 387.5 square foot homes wont be more than $5,000 and he already has a short list of countries who have expressed interest, Nigeria and Zimbabwe being a few.

This is a very noble effort but there are some fundamental problems. First of all, $5,000 is not very cheap at all. If this is to be a solution to the kind of shanty slums in South Africa for example, it has to be a relatively cheap option. Residents of these poor neighborhoods use zinc not because of any great aesthetic qualities, that stuff is terrible and rusts fast, but because it is readily available and very inexpensive. Most times, people find that stuff for free and bring it back home to use as housing material. If they all had $5,000 to spend i think their circumstances would be remarkably different. I mean, $5,000 comes out to over 500,000 Nigerian Naira (about a two month salary for a mid-level professional) and I guarantee you it will get you much more in Nigeria than it would in the United States. Also, if Niemöller and "The Wall AG, who hold the patent for the design, think that the federal government of these countries are going to purchase enough homes for every resident in every slum in their respective countries, they are very much mistaken. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe has better things to do like embezzling and continuing to destroy his country's economy.

Image obtained from Speigel international Online.
For more information, check www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,601067,00.html