Hey all, like to gather some opinions, especially from architects/designers and 'floorplan junkies'.

In '08 I'll be having a house built for me in the SF Bay Area, an expensive place to build, so I've got to 'build smart'.

It'll be a 3 bed, 2 or 2.5 bath 2-story (on a narrow lot) and money could be a bit tight... basically I can go 'small and awesome' or 'big and generic', far as the house goes... obviously the former is preferable.

My question is, what would be a good minimum square footage to shoot for? I want a nice tight floorplan, no fancy 'extra rooms' or jumbo 900 square foot great rooms, just the basics, the rooms that get used often, and in reasonably-sized proportions.

Looking around, it seems like the typical 3 bedroom house built without 'Not So Big' principles is in the 2000-2500 square foot range. Sarah says in her books you can usually reduce square footage by a third if you're building NSB, so I'm thinking I could have a very nice floorplan with as little as 1500-1600 square feet, if it were done right.

However, I get somewhat confused when I check out things like Sarah's allegedly 'Not So Big' showhouses, which are 3 bedrooms with el giganto decks and nearly 3000 square feet(?!?).

Is something like that REALLY 'Not So Big'? Seems more like a very nicely detailed monster home to me, but I guess there was a reason she did it that way. Otherwise, it would seem to be a case of 'Do as I say, not as I do'. Showhouses must impress, I guess.

Anyways, any thoughts/suggestions on square footage and efficient floor plans from experts or near-experts would be appreciated. I know some of it falls under 'it depends', but even so, you probably get the gist of what I'm shooting for here.

Many thanks!

--lee

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lee in NorCal,

Been messing around a GREAT deal with graph paper and pencil (still learning Google SketchUp), and I think I can get it down to 1700 square feet or so for a nice 3 bed/2.5 bath, without giving up anything I want or going with dinky/undersized rooms.

It doesn't seem to be that hard, you just don't spec big silly single-purpose formal spaces you won't really use, and use flexible living spaces instead.

I designed in a den/guest bedroom (via a Murphy bed), for example, and I'm working on some limited use of movable walls, so that if need be a corridor/window seat area can be easily converted to contribute enough space to help make a 4th bedroom (not planning to have a large family, but you never know what might happen).

I'm also trying to use the same concept to make a playroom/away room/'formal' dining area multipurpose space downstairs, adjacent to the living room. Helps that there's storage nearby, so hauling out the dining room table from time to time isn't that big a deal. Would suck if it was going to be stored in the garage.

I recommend sketching floor plans for anyone interested in building/remodelling... teaches you a lot about trade-offs and is sorta fun, actually.

Wonder if Sarah or Marie have any tips to share on 'floor-planning'?

...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lee in NorCal,

I was going to suggest about what you came up with.
We live in a space that's about 1500 square feet. It has two bedrooms, two bathrooms, two small kitchens and two living/dining rooms. You guessed it, it's two one-bedroom condos stuck together. I was picturing trading the second Living/Dining space for one more bedroom, and a bigger kitchen, and it would be completely adequate. I just need a bigger storage room for my junk.

Thanks for your reply, Kim. I've got almost 200 views on this topic, and you're the only one thus far who dared to venture an opinion. Its a bit funny, actually... in real life, you ask someone their opinion, and you can't shut them up. But on the NotSoBig forums, its the other way around, everyone's a lurker, not a poster.

I hope you're allowed to do what you want and knock down some walls and make your dual condo situation into one very nice integrated space (I don't know your particular situation or if there's some housing association rules to deal with on that).

For myself, I've noticed my square footage drifting up as I continue to redesign my future house... I'm getting close to 2000 square feet now. As newbie floor planners often do, I designed some spaces that were unrealistically tight, and didn't take things like exterior and interior wall thicknesses into account as much as I should've.

Hopefully I can pull some inspiration out and slim the house back down some without some dreadful compromises. It is not as easy as you'd first think, that's for sure.

...

Hi Lee,

I think the hesitancy to post a reply on this one is due to the fact that although Sarah might be able to tell you what's right for her, ultimately, it's what is right for you and what you want that counts.

Sarah's advice is to take a look at page 9 of Creating the Not So Big House for a clearer definition of "Not So Big". Under the heading, "How Big Is Not So Big?" it says:

Not So Big doesn't necessarily mean small. It means not as big as you thought you needed. People frequently ask me what is the ideal size for a Not So Big House. The answer depends on your financial situation, the size of your family, and your personal preferences. But as a rule of thumb, a Not So Big House is approximately a third smaller than your original goal but about the same price as your original budget. The magic is that although the house is smaller in square footage, it actually feels much bigger. I'm not advocating that people live in small houses and get used to feeling cramped. A Not So Big House feels more spacious than many of its oversized neighbors because it is space with substance, all of it in use every day.

With the showhouses, Sarah has found that if you make them too small, you can't get enough people into them at a time, as is necessary at conventions and homeshows, for people to learn anything from them. If their experience of the house is of cramped, that's what they remember. So Sarah makes them a little bit bigger to accomodate the situation. Your home obviously does not need to be as big as that.

Sarah also highly recommends that before you go too far with your floor plans, you find and work with an architect. This will help you avoid several pitfalls that it's hard to know about if you aren't trained in the profession. You can find an architect in your area that's familiar with Sarah's books by searching the home professionals directory on this website.

For more helpful information about the costs of building a house, look at the "Dreams, Details and Dollars" section of The Not So Big House and the last 2 chapters of Creating the Not So Big House.

Thanks for your patience and good luck!

Marie

Thanks Marie. I love the book excerpt you posted, though if you read my original post, you'll note that I already mentioned it. It is a good one.

What was really confusing me was why, despite Sarah's NSB principles, her showhouses were so 'ginormous' and seeming "not so Not So Big". But you totally cleared that up with your explanation, much appreciated.

I also very much appreciate Sarah's advice on working with an architect, and that is very much the plan. However, the circumstances are a bit unique... the project is a joint one with my brother (2 houses are to be built on the same lot, 1 for him, 1 for me), and father, who's a retired general contractor.

My father's expertise is an awesome plus, but the downside is that he's already selected an architect for us. One who's competent, certainly (he's already pointed out the need to design in guest parking... very helpful considering our congested street), but his forte doesn't seem to be NSB or any of the kind of styles I like (bungalow, craftsman, prairie, modern).

He's a good guy, just not the guy I would've selected, necessarily.

Therefore, it seems like I really need to nail down what I want in advance, and present it to him (thus my current Google Sketchup obsession), and then have him make only minor and necessary changes, if possible (i.e. I don't unknowingly ask for anything that's weird or impossible).

At the very least, he should get a great read on what I like.

My brother is very much in the same boat, but his tastes differ from mine, so it gets even more confusing.

And so the saga continues... its going to be an interesting process, in the vein of that ancient Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times."

This seems the way of it, given the personalities involved, but if you or Sarah have any advice on how to make the process less 'interesting', it is, as always, very much welcome.

And thanks again for replying... I hope you both had some very happy holidays.

...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lee in NorCal,

Lee,

This is your house, right? And you want it to be a place you'll love to live in?

The reason I'm asking is that if the architect that is designing your house isn't in tune with you and what you really want, the house will not necessarily be what you want. It might be what your father wants, or what the architect himself wants, but not necessarily what you want.

An architect is trained to take the information that you give him or her about the way you live and translate it into a house. If they can't hear you, their translation is going to be off the mark.

But giving an architect pre-drawn floor plans and asking them to stick to that is also not the answer. If they are too hemmed in by a solid plan from the get go, you may end up with less than they are capable of. It might limit their creative thinking (which is part of what you're paying him for) much more than it can help.

Sarah recommends that you give the architect copies of her books - especially The Not So Big House and Home By Design. Have a conversation with him and assess whether he's capable of designing something more along the lines of Not So Big, as you desire.

If it's still a problem, have a heart to heart with your dad and tell him what you're feeling. I don't know your exact situation, but if this is to be your house, it seems like you should be able to have a say in who designs it.

Thanks for writing.

Marie

Thanks Marie, and Sarah. Your advice is, as always, appreciated.

I'll try to be more open to what my father's architect can do for me, but his track record with our family has been 'good, not great', IMO at least. He's already designed another family member's (completed) house, so I can kinda see his style/capabilities some already.

The key of course will be to get him, my father, and me all on the same page. I think we'll get there, but it'll take time. But I'll attempt to keep an open mind, while communicating my needs as well. And if the current architect ultimately can't hear me, I will of course fight to get someone in there who can, even if some feelings get hurt.

Take care, and have a nice MLK holiday.


...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lee in NorCal,

Lee -- Don't wait too long to give the architect the books to look at -- give him time to think about them.
--Kim

Hey Lee -- I'm in the SF Bay Area also. Want to meet at a Starbucks or something and look at your plans together? I'm not an architect, but I have a degree in Kitchen and Bathroom Design and my talent is space planning. I'm not working in the field, but love to look at plans.
I'm in San Mateo. (raised in Marin)

Thanks Kim, that is a super-kind offer.

Unfortunately though, my plans are still a mess, and far from locked down yet. Plus, I have a great deal on my mind at the moment, and not in a good way.

In a few months I should have everything straight. I'll definitely try to give you a shout then, if you're around.

.

Lee -- That's fine. We're in the midst of a family crisis too, right now. I should be around, checking in now and then.

I don't think I even qualify as a "near-expert", but here goes ...

I think it somewhat depends on what type of layout you want, as in, if you want a first-floor master, you are pretty much forced into a larger house. I use Punch Platinum (3D home design program) to design houses for fun. We were thinking about building a first-floor master and I just couldn't get the first floor size down. I was always like "now what do I do with all this space upstairs???".

I did find this information on sunplans.com (D.R. Coleman's site):
http://www.sunplans.com/html/size_guidelines.php3
To stay within the recommended guidelines for sustainable homes, we are currently only accepting work for projects that do not exceed the following maximum square footage for the first and second floor combined (daylight basements are excluded):

1 bedroom 1700 s.f.
2 bedrooms 2000 s.f.
3 bedrooms 2300 s.f.
4 bedrooms 2600 s.f.
5 bedrooms 2900 s.f.
6 bedrooms 3200 s.f.

If you are interested in a larger home, please contact us for a reference to another passive solar architect.
--- end quote

I thought that was an awesome statement on her part!

I've designed an addition to our small-ish split-level as well, but right now I am toying with ideas for a weekend/vacation home for the 20-acres of land adjacent to a state park that we just inherited. My current design (early, messy) is about 30% Maple Forest 2, 30% Maple Forest 3, 10% Sarah's 2004 Show House, 10% of another house from NSB, and 20% of my own stuff. I've seen scary cost estimates of building Maple Forest homes, so I'm trying to figure out how to drive some of the costs down without losing the charm. I did figure out how to get a first level master suite without messing with the charm (added some IMO) or increasing the square footage..

I am on the same page as you about Sarah's gianormous show-homes. For example, the NSB books say "most new homes have 3 places to eat at (kitchen bar, dinette, dining room) and she gives examples of how to reduce that in her earlier works. The showhomes ... three places to eat. Same thing with 2 entrances, etc. All the same, her showhouses are still smaller than the typical new home being built in our area (~3500sf).