5 ms·

Consider: - buying some architectural books. Many (good ones) have plans in them from excellent architects. A sample from a good one is at [0]. If your tastes

Consider: - buying some architectural books. Many (good ones) have plans in them from excellent architects. A sample from a good one is at [0]. If your tastes are not so 'architecture school' there are others. - looking at the development approvals in your local area. Plans are often open to all. And they will (assumedly) be up to code in your area today. Imo the concept of 'open source' doesn't translate to houses as well because regulation, construction approaches and tastes can be so locally specific and also change over time. [0] https://issuu.com/birkhauser.ch/docs/floor_plan_manual_housing_5th_editi https://issuu.com/birkhauser.ch/docs/floor_plan_manual_housi...

hnbad 3y ago
> Imo the concept of 'open source' doesn't translate to houses as well because regulation, construction approaches and tastes can be so locally specific and also change over time. I think that's the biggest problem. You can draw up a house in free apps in a couple of minutes or hours but that doesn't mean it's structurally sound or that the walls will have the right dimensions for the pipes and cables that need to run through them or that they're the right size for the kind of insulation you want or that the windows meet your country's/state's legal regulations or that the house meets the code for where you want to build (which can literally depend on the part of the road the building will be on). We approached our architect with pretty much a full floorplan in hand but it still took us months to pin down something that would get fast-tracked for approval and even then the floor plans had to be modified by the construction company to account for the placement of things like toilets and showers. Even without changing any of these details we couldn't take the floorplans and just submit them for a different part of town as they would likely not match the requirements there.
- wiredfool 3y ago
  Otoh, if your house was built by a developer, the plans on file may have only a vague relation to the as built. My first house was a Seattle skinny, garage off the alley. The plans on file were for a garage in front, different upper floor layout, and a different roof shape.
- 2rsf 3y ago
  Your last sentence is super important, having a sketch of a house is far from enough. Googling "construction detail drawings" will bring up endless drawings of all the small, but critical, things you need to take into account.
- bluGill 3y ago
  A large part of differences between towns is pure corruption! Material strength is physical facts. Water runs down hill. Many other such things. Many towns are in one of a couple national form based codes plans where if you follow the rules as laid out there is no need for approval as the engineering was already done for any generic house. If your town/state is not, or is but provides extras on top it is corruption: either the industry is trying to create a local monopoly via legal means; or your town board is trying to increase their power. Either way it is only making housing more expensive without serving any public good. Not all houses need to meet the form based codes. If you want to do something different then you need a professional engineer to stamp and approve the plans - once stamped the town needs no more input. Apartments and commercial buildings start to get more complex (but even then many meet form based codes as it is cheaper than calculating out all the stresses). However again professional engineer needs to approve the plans not the town.
  - hnbad 3y ago
    My reference in this case is Germany, not the US, so the processes are a bit different but the point stands: it's difficult to use the exact same plans for two different houses in different places, let alone if you want to make any modifications as those may have knock-on effects you're not aware of. To be fair, a lot of those were not in the architect's plans in our case. But you're right that you can basically get a permit for nearly anything if your pockets are deep enough and the restrictions are often arbitrary. That's why I mentioned fast-tracking: the area we built in had fairly strict requirements compared to houses only a few blocks away and any deviation would have required a costly and lengthy approval process (measured in months rather than weeks) so staying within the requirements was primarily a financial decision.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      > lengthy approval process This is corruption. The process of approval should not be lengthy of costly.
      - FinnKuhn 3y ago
- Mvhsz 3y ago
  I would add that an architect’s job is to find the little details that make your big investment better. One thing I associate with off the rack house plans in big developments is having the shades drawn all day because otherwise the sun will shine right in your face. An architect looks at the site and the sun and adjusts window heights and overhangs to suit. Amongst many other details. A house being such a big investment, hiring an architect seems wise.
chewmieser 3y ago
We do have prefabs. They tend to be built in a way that's compatible with a lot of jurisdictions (some would say better than traditional homes because of this).

hnbad 3y ago

> Imo the concept of 'open source' doesn't translate to houses as well because regulation, construction approaches and tastes can be so locally specific and also change over time. I think that's the biggest problem. You can draw up a house in free apps in a couple of minutes or hours but that doesn't mean it's structurally sound or that the walls will have the right dimensions for the pipes and cables that need to run through them or that they're the right size for the kind of insulation you want or that the windows meet your country's/state's legal regulations or that the house meets the code for where you want to build (which can literally depend on the part of the road the building will be on). We approached our architect with pretty much a full floorplan in hand but it still took us months to pin down something that would get fast-tracked for approval and even then the floor plans had to be modified by the construction company to account for the placement of things like toilets and showers. Even without changing any of these details we couldn't take the floorplans and just submit them for a different part of town as they would likely not match the requirements there.

wiredfool 3y ago
Otoh, if your house was built by a developer, the plans on file may have only a vague relation to the as built. My first house was a Seattle skinny, garage off the alley. The plans on file were for a garage in front, different upper floor layout, and a different roof shape.
2rsf 3y ago
Your last sentence is super important, having a sketch of a house is far from enough. Googling "construction detail drawings" will bring up endless drawings of all the small, but critical, things you need to take into account.
bluGill 3y ago
A large part of differences between towns is pure corruption! Material strength is physical facts. Water runs down hill. Many other such things. Many towns are in one of a couple national form based codes plans where if you follow the rules as laid out there is no need for approval as the engineering was already done for any generic house. If your town/state is not, or is but provides extras on top it is corruption: either the industry is trying to create a local monopoly via legal means; or your town board is trying to increase their power. Either way it is only making housing more expensive without serving any public good. Not all houses need to meet the form based codes. If you want to do something different then you need a professional engineer to stamp and approve the plans - once stamped the town needs no more input. Apartments and commercial buildings start to get more complex (but even then many meet form based codes as it is cheaper than calculating out all the stresses). However again professional engineer needs to approve the plans not the town.
- hnbad 3y ago
  My reference in this case is Germany, not the US, so the processes are a bit different but the point stands: it's difficult to use the exact same plans for two different houses in different places, let alone if you want to make any modifications as those may have knock-on effects you're not aware of. To be fair, a lot of those were not in the architect's plans in our case. But you're right that you can basically get a permit for nearly anything if your pockets are deep enough and the restrictions are often arbitrary. That's why I mentioned fast-tracking: the area we built in had fairly strict requirements compared to houses only a few blocks away and any deviation would have required a costly and lengthy approval process (measured in months rather than weeks) so staying within the requirements was primarily a financial decision.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    > lengthy approval process This is corruption. The process of approval should not be lengthy of costly.
    - FinnKuhn 3y ago
Mvhsz 3y ago
I would add that an architect’s job is to find the little details that make your big investment better. One thing I associate with off the rack house plans in big developments is having the shades drawn all day because otherwise the sun will shine right in your face. An architect looks at the site and the sun and adjusts window heights and overhangs to suit. Amongst many other details. A house being such a big investment, hiring an architect seems wise.

chewmieser 3y ago

We do have prefabs. They tend to be built in a way that's compatible with a lot of jurisdictions (some would say better than traditional homes because of this).