Press "Enter" to skip to content

Now this tiny house looks cool

Not long ago, I rolled my eyes and said the tiny-house movement had jumped the shark. Then this morning, friend G. sent me to this site. And this 192-square-foot house, the Axia.

TechDwellHouse_101214

While there’s a suspicious dearth of info (the link to TechDwell’s pdf brochure is 404), it’s a for-real thing. Portland, Oregon, is building a village of these for the homeless.

If they’re as easy to build (and unbuild) as they say … well, that’s remarkable. On price, on tech, on a number of measures, they’d beat the usual overpriced tiny house hands down. (That is, if somebody doesn’t get carried away and order all their yuppified options.)

Yes, yes, go ahead and tell me you can build something like this yourself out of old pallets, cardboard boxes, and strapping tape for much less than TechDwell’s basic price. That’s true. Joel’s Secret Lair is similar and cost less. But the tech on this is intriguing, as is the ability to tear it down and move it. Also, you can add your own options (solar, rainwater catchment, etc.) for less than they cost from TechDwell.

The look reminds me a bit of the UnitOne cabin. But if the TechDwell Axia is all it appears to be, I’d rather have an Axia.

Gads, what a great artist’s studio. Or guest house. Or pool house. Or vacation cabin.

11 Comments

  1. Joel
    Joel October 12, 2014 3:23 pm

    Huh. I didn’t download the brochure and the website doesn’t have a lot of information, but for what I see it looks like the most practical microcabin kit I’ve seen. Sure wish they had more interior pics, but I like the panels-on-a-steel-frame thing for ease of construction. That’s right at the Lair’s square footage but mine’s probably a lot roomier because I’ve got a fully-functional loft. I’m not sure that one even has as much as a cuddy loft.

    And of course the obligatory sneer: It can be done a lot less expensively.

  2. Jim B.
    Jim B. October 12, 2014 3:42 pm

    That tiny house is obviously meant for 2 people sharing. If it were just me and it was possible, I’d slide that bathroom into one of the corners so I can have a bigger “Great” room for elbow stretching room. And be able to have a feeling of a living room when not sleeping. Desk/bed that could also double as a couch?

    I also like the fact that you could buy more “units” to add on if you like. At least that’s my understanding.

  3. Claire
    Claire October 12, 2014 4:06 pm

    Jim B. — That’s my take on it, too. I’d like to know whether that bathroom could be placed to the side or even eliminated if the unit is to be used as, say, and artist’s studio next to a fully plumbed house. And yes, apparently you can attach more units.

    While good pix of the interior are scarce, run an image search & anybody interested can get a better idea. I still can’t grab the brochure off the techdwell site, but I found a dropbox link. Not very informative, though. I’d love to see other configurations, pricing for multiple units, etc.

  4. Pat
    Pat October 12, 2014 4:33 pm

    I had no trouble with the pdf, but can’t transfer it here. I can send it to you, Claire, if you like, and you can put it on.?

  5. Claire
    Claire October 12, 2014 5:17 pm

    Thanks, Pat. I was able to get it via that dropbox link I found. But it’s not very enlightening, so don’t worry about getting it to me. Maybe someone else who has trouble downloading it will want to take you up on that.

  6. jed
    jed October 12, 2014 5:51 pm

    I would have a hard time adjusting to that. But, it’s better than being homeless. I’m gonna say it can be had in multiple configurations:

    The Axia™ micro-home can be built in countless combinations to provide the exact structure communities require

    You can easily…
    – Adapt Axia™ as offices, schools or clinics
    – Add or remove Axia™ walls as needed

    I’d put the loo in one back corner, and the kitchen front corner same side. Then the projection TV can go in between them, with a big wall opposite. 🙂

    Done more cheaply, I’m sure, particularly if built on-site with no intention of moving it later. Pre-fab, delivered, ready to erect? Hard to say.

  7. Nosmo
    Nosmo October 13, 2014 3:13 am

    I see an opportunity for one of these things as a guest house, and to follow Joel’s line of thought, modular construction could make it more feasible. a 16X16 footprint is 256 sq ft, assembled from sixteen 4ft X 12 ft insulated panels as walls, in three flavors: a window panel, a door panel or a solid panel (wall panels could each have a small window at top for warm weather ventilation). Identical 4X12 panels form the perimeter of the base, leaving an 8X8 square in the center to be filled with two 4X8 panels. Same format for the roof, using the same types of panels, then covered with a membrane as waterproofing. 12 ft height provides room for a small loft. With a little engineering work I’d wager the base and walls could be hinged together allowing for even faster erection. Crane the package of a truck. hinger everything up, crane the roof into place, cover, install stove, etc, done.

    About 3100 cubic feet, so a very small wood or propane stove (doubles as cooking tool) provides heat. Put two together with an 8X16 screened platform between them, one cube is living space, the other sleeping quarters, peaked canvas provides rain protection. Might be possible to assemble 4 units around a 16X16 “community” platform (cube corners overlap to provide outside access to the platform).

    Spray-in 2-part closed cell foam at R of 6.5/inch provides R-16.5 for a 2 1/2 inch thick wall. Electric receptacles are surface mount, oriented correctly there’s 256 sq ft for solar panels, batteries and hardware in a separate insulated box outside.

    Feasible, I think.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp
    Thomas L. Knapp October 13, 2014 3:34 am

    On the one hand, when I build my own “tiny home” I intend to do so for far less than the pricing of this thing with used/found/inexpensive materials.

    On the other hand, for what it seems to come with, the pricing is actually pretty nice.

    You mentioned “jumping the shark.” I got that feeling when I saw a tiny house that the owner built for “only” $32k and that required a “wide load” permit to move (it was a tiny house on wheels). This is $20k less, pretty full-featured, etc.

    Different strokes for different folks.

  9. MJR
    MJR October 13, 2014 8:34 am

    It is a very cool design. I just wonder how much it allows for customization. The placement of the washroom simply sucks. It would make for a great studio or guest house though.

    Reality check…

    The basic cost per sq foot of $65.00 looks good but add on the bells and whistles it goes to $141per sq foot (and I left out a few options). Add in the cost of shipping, the lot you will build on, the cost of water hook up (well or town) and sewage or septic, the building permit, yes I’m up here in the Great White North (Canada) and a 192 sq foot home is big enough to require one. The end result was the cost per sq foot of this home is only $55.00 less than the log home I built so this place really is not that big a bargain. Joel is right, it can be done a lot cheaper.

    Bear if you are out there I hope you can do better than my math, I really like this place.

  10. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau October 15, 2014 8:04 pm

    Once it gets simple enough, one wonders why a kit is needed at all? Just go down to Home Depot and cook one up from scratch with OSB and some 2×6’s. A shed roof, what could be easier? People building their own homes with their own hands was once common in this country, and it was largely because 1) houses were simple and small, and 2) government stayed out of it.

    Or buy some SIPs…

    One of the things I liked about rural Wyoming was no building codes or inspections, other than well and septic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *