Part 2 – 1800 sqft Bungalow, Louisiana

1800 sqft Bungalow, Louisiana (PDF)
1800 sqft Bungalow, Louisiana (JPEG)

  • BradW

    I know from experience that after the return trip from Asia it is tough to adjust to the time change so I think John deserves a day off.

    It is quite obvious from yesterday’s submissions that most people here are interested in completely redesigning the WWWTH project. That is fine but, IMO, it misses the point of the exercise. Maybe the problem is that most contributors here have seen enough floor plans to know the good and the bad.

    I have always approach this segment like Mike Holmes – what can we do to “make it right”? And I add within reason. I also assume the house exists and someone is living in it. How can I spend 20-30K and improve this house? Maybe I am missing the point….

  • leo

    I think you and I are thinking along the same lines, Brad. (Scary, I know)

    I think that for the people who have been following this site, we have developed our own sense of immediately seeing what we do and do not like in a houseplan.

    However, I think that there are many who might be new to the site and the original purpose of WWWTH still applies and is worthwhile. It is an exercise in learning to look at houseplans. I think what John was trying to achieve is for prospective home buyers to not get caught up in staging and style (or lack thereof) but to learn to see what is right and not right with the “bones” of the house. I think your point of minimal modification is important. If you are buying a home, does it have good bones that could use a minor tweaking, or is it just an irredeemable disaster? The WWWTH segment is really a valuable way of practicing this.

  • Steve

    While it’s true that no one submitted a marked-up plan analyzing this house yesterday, I thought there was some good commentary (thanks to Doug, Louis, Terri, and MJ) that pretty thoroughly described “what’s wrong with this house.” John’s day-two video provided additional, professional insight that I found helpful and interesting. By all means, let’s do a full analysis of what’s wrong (and right) with the given plan.

    So, what then? I often can’t stop myself from taking the next steps – big or small – and developing whatever potential the plan has to becoming a more life-giving space.

    Obviously, there are many delimiting considerations – budget, bylaws, strata rules, architectural style, orientation to sun and street, ethics, lifestyle, etc. Some limitations are given in the brief or assignment, and many more are assumed.

    But for me, the biggest limitation is my imagination. Given my lack of professional design education and experience, I get stuck in the regular ways of seeing problems and the regular ways of fixing them.

    So I’m mining these exercises not just for the stated objectives but for the opportunity to grow my ability to adapt, explore, and invent. Maybe my vision is not always expressed in a clear or persuasive way, and maybe it would take a big, “unreasonable” budget to realize. But I’m good with that … as long as it doesn’t detract from anyone else’s experience of the site. When it does, let me know.

  • Terri

    I’m with you…sometimes we just have to revisit the WWWTH plan as if we were assigned to produce something similar but with an eye to the Slow Home guidelines. I think most of us who regularly submit plans have at one time or another wanted to try and “fix” the plan that’s profiled. I think John doesn’t mind seeing these WWWTH segments morphing into design exercises, as we can all learn from such attempts (eg, sometimes it’s next to impossible to fix the house within reason).

    If no one wants to share in the fun, so be it–they can choose to ignore the plans submitted.

  • James Scott

    My thinking, sorry to be late on this, is why make freehold homes like this in the first place. I can see if the houses were 20 or 30 feet apart and the garage wasn’t such a big feature but here this is not the case. The garage, therefore the car, and convenient access to and from the home and the neighborhood are the most important feature.

    So make them townhouses, a garage in the front with a front door. From the front door you go up the stairs and into the main living area or you stay on the entry level and access the garage and the space behind it. That space can be whatever you need it to be, laundry, recreation, sleeping, storage, anything. At least on the top floor you wouldn’t have a 35 or 40 foot wide garage blocking your sunlight.

    As far as this homes environment, front yards are not important, so don’t waste the material or the space. Bring the houses together and maximize resources such as building materials, and increase population density.

    I suppose if one or more of the residents had accessibility issues than having everything on one floor would be important but from the layout and what we discussed earlier this month this is not one of those cases.