Realtor, General Contractor, and Developer · Redding, CA · Member since 2009 · 7k+ posts · 4k+ votes
We are going to be building 2 new condos in San Clemente, CA, and each unit can only be 16' wide. Michael has already designed a 3/3 with under building parking and 2 levels of living space. If we could find 9" more, we could eliminate the lower level garage! But that's not to be.
However; for fun, I've been searching online for other narrow lot plans that others have built. I must say, so far, nothing had beat what we already have.
I was just wondering, what is the smallest plan you have ever built? (Plan not lot)
I also thought some of you from the more populated places like Los Angeles, San Francisco and the bay area might enjoy this site. Innovative Designs
Rental Property Investor · Oakland, CA · Member since 2011 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
11y
I have not walked in or built these, but I'm sure some folks would enjoy taking a peek at these phenomenally thin buildings in Japan. Cheers to @Shane Pearlman for sharing a bit about Japanese real estate with me when we went hiking down in the redwoods in Santa Cruz. I knew exactly what @Arlen Chou was talking about with a new home. And saw an article about some amazingly thin buildings..
Some of them appear to be no more than 5-6 ft across..
@David Krulac We can go for a variance too, but the odds of getting it are slim to none, so we've opted not to waste the time.
We also considered trying to buy a slice off the neighbors property, but that's not an option as then the new code applies which is even more difficult.
They make smaller lots, zone for multi family but then have building codes that don't support the small lots. In Los Angeles they've started a new zoning for small lot subdivisions.
@Alex M. (My @mention wont' work sometimes on Initials maybe someone else can @mention him for me?) Does your plan include a garage? Is the layout similar to what Keith has here?
Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2014 · 178 posts · 64 votes
11y
@Karen Margrave I like your plans! I live in a row style house in Philly, which I just measured and turns out to be 14' in width. Never even occurred to me this was small, because I moved here from a 400 sf condo and here I've got around 1000 sf, plus a basement. So I basically thought it was mansion! :-p
Some questions/ideas for your plans... Is it possible to move the kitchen peninsula so that it is perpendicular to the wall that now has the pantry/storage? That would connect it to the dining area, plus pick up some storage on the other side of the bedroom wall. Possibly even worth it at the expense of a shorter peninsula, putting the stair turn at the bottom, or elongating the stairs to lose the turn.... Unless it's feasible to keep the area under the stair turn open...
Another idea is a floating staircase, possibly even one that runs perpendicular to the long wall, so that the full width of each space can be used, while maintaining the visual openness and picking up the space under the stairs... If not a floating staircase, I'd definitely think about an under the stairs broom/storage closet.
When I worked in Europe, narrow row houses were common - many canal houses in the Netherlands are no more than 2 - 2.5m wide. The big difference is parking ... in the old City centres, there simply is no parking (unless someone has completely rebuilt - adding a 3rd or 4th story and turned the ground floor into parking). In newer housing in smaller centres, it is common to find parking facilities at the end of the row houses.
@Karen Margrave These are great plans, what will be the budget/sqft and SP on these row houses? Just the house. I have a small parcel somewhere and would like to build something like this. They are nice and neat.
Flipper/Rehabber · Jersey City, NJ · Member since 2012 · 204 posts · 109 votes
11y
This thread was a timely find for me! I'm in the midst of my first rehab, and the interior of the home is 12'4" wide. Glad to see I'm not alone!
High ceilings are definitely a game-changer in a narrow house. The footprint provides an obstacle in the way of designing the layout, but it's par for the course in our market. The most helpful resource for me has been perusing local listings for houses of similar construction. While my immediate area has a relative lack of rehabbed inventory, the neighboring areas have plenty, though fewer have remained as single-family dwellings.
16' wide (actually 15'9") is pretty common in modular construction because of shipping issues - not sure but I think they can put that size box on a trailer and just be subject to "Oversize Load" transportation requirements (such as an escort in certain states). Anything wider than that and it gets astronomically expensive to ship.
I'm working on two separate townhouse condo developments (one is three attached units, one is five attached units) with floorplates of roughly 16 x 32. They're tall skinny units, but with some tweaks to the floor plans the layouts aren't bad - parking under; kitchen, 1/2 bath and open living area on the first floor; two beds and a bath on the second floor; master bed and bath on the third floor. 1,400 - 1,500 sf of living area.
I worked on the design team of a resort project with 100 Cavco cabins of different configurations and 16' was the max for regular road transport at the time. The cabins are gorgeous. The 16' width was not a noticeable limitation. My daughter lives in the Bay Area in a studio that is a little less than 300 square feet and just under 16' wide. It has light on 2 sides, so the width isn't a noticeable limitation. Years ago I lived in an adorable 1950s CA stucco 2 story 4plex. The 1BDR apt was about 550 square feet, width was less than 16'. Light on 3 sides made all the difference though. My youngest just signed a lease in Westwood for a studio apt that is definitely less than 16' wide. I must have a thing for narrow properties.