Also from Mesh Architecture http://www.mesh-arc.com/ — really nice renovation. Love the modern and rustic combined. Easy to do, affordable, and great looking.
Anyone else like this as much as I do?
Courtyard House, Williamsburg - USA
Steve Glenn, founder of Living Homes, talk about Prefab, sustainable design, and more. If you’re interested in Prefab or wondering why it matters, he explains it very well.
Curious how a modular home gets built? Check out this video.
Here are two recent slides from the FHFA real estate index recently published. If you care to see the whole report and/or specific areas, check out their site.
This is a classic glass half full or half empty discussion. On one hand the market is clearly sputtering and struggling. On the other it has improved quarter to quarter fairly significantly from the 3rd quarter of 2008. We’re a long way from having to worry about it, but, historically, when improvement is up 10% or more, watch out … a significant fall off isn’t far behind. Ah, that would be a nice thing to have to worry about.
Confessions
This past weekend I finished a book a friend suggested, “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”. In it the author, John Perkins, tells the story - mostly his own - of how the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (and others) worked with and seemingly for Halliburton, MAIN (which is now defunct but was the company he worked for), and many other similar companies to load third world nations with debt that the lenders (The US, IMF, World Bank, etc.) knew would never be repaid. These loans were made on the basis of what the author did for a living - wildly optimistic, some (he) would now argue fraudulent - projections of economic growth based upon the work they were lending for in the first place. It was a very self fulfilling cycle for those involved, and it left messes all over the world.
Indonesia, for instance, would be projected to grow at say 30% a year for 20 years if they accepted the loans to then hire MAIN (or Halliburton or similar engineering firms) to build them infrastructure. Typically this included bridges, roads, a larger electric grid, etc. In almost all cases, according to Perkins, these projections were wildly creative. His quick career advancement was based in large part to his ability to constantly deliver what everyone wanted: “research” to support that Indonesia, Panama, Iraq, _____, could pay back the loans once their nation had the necessary infrastructure in place. In actuality the point wasn’t to build the nations as was claimed but for them to default on loans or at least be highly dependent upon further generosity by the institutions and the US. In exchange the US got oil, political clout, control, access to cheap labor, tremendously large paydays for engineering companies like MAIN and Halliburton, and oil (yes, I know I already mentioned it).
I am not here to debate the validity of all of his points, many of which I missed, but the larger ones I certainly hit on. It is a worthy read, an interesting layer on history, and, at least in my mind, at least partially and disturbingly accurate. It is my personal sense that especially towards the end of the book the book loses steam and he gains it. For me this is where it suffers a bit, but this is not meant as a book review.
Regardless of how much credence you choose to give the book and argument, there are two fundamental points that are hard to miss: oil and debt. In it we (the US) are hunting, among other things, for oil. Our weapon of choice is debt. The name, “Economic Hit Man”, alludes to this. We used fancy titles to load countries up with debt to gain access to oil, the story goes. That this debt led in many cases to civil unrest, a dramatic rise in the disparity between rich and poor word wide, and the rise of religious extremism and its nasty cousin terrorism seems pretty clear, and is argued well.
For all the talk of a green movement now and the need for the US and other nations to be less dependent on oil economically, politically, and certainly environmentally, this book really drives home a point that sometimes gets lost. There are incredibly effective, remarkably profitable, and long embedded forces in the world and especially our country that won’t let this happen. The interdependency of the world’s economies is due to many things, but perhaps nothing as much as oil and debt. Neither is going away anytime soon as I am sure that the tactics people in power are using are far more advanced then described. This book was written mostly about events from the early 1970’s - 1992 or so. Yet it is not dated. Much of what you read about daily has its roots in these events - especially in the Middle East.
In reading the book and considering the implications of massive amounts of debt on people around the world that couldn’t afford it and never benefited from it, I also couldn’t help but think of the situation that the US and many other nations are going through right now. At some level you have to wonder if these tactics that worked so well around the world weren’t applied - knowingly or not - by mortgage bankers and lenders in the US to folks in such remote places as Arizona, Florida, and Detroit.
Perhaps this is a stretch, but, honestly I don’t think it is. The mortgage crisis in the US is a whole other story for another day, but as I read this book it was hard not to think that the EHM’s, as they were called, eventually set their sites closer to home.
In housing there are two fundamental topics these days: green and debt. Everyone wants their home to be more green (they should, US homes consume 40% or more of the US energy needs), and almost everyone is suffering from deflated housing values, foreclosures in their neighborhood or worse, and all of the inherent offshoots of these issues: an inability to move or relocate easily, lack of consumer confidence, high unemployment, etc. ”Confessions of an Economic Hitman” isn’t about houses, and it isn’t about building more sustainable homes, but drawing connections isn’t hard at all. Our country, like Panama, Iraq, Indonesia, and many others got loaded up on way too much debt based upon projections for the future that never came to pass. At the same time, we are as dependent on oil, and in many ways I fear more, than ever. There are a few bright spots in our nation and world’s movement to be less dependent on oil, and awareness is one of them. Awareness, though, doesn’t change much.
The reality is it isn’t all that hard to build very energy efficient homes. People, builders, and architects can do it, if they try. I, for one, am unaware of a more important place for people to make a difference in the environment. As I said above, about 40% of American energy use is from homes. In Germany, and even here in limited cases, Passive Houses are a reality. Passive homes use very, very little energy. They may not be for everyone, but the current standard should not be either. What is the exact number? I don’t know. What I do know is that almost all new houses have close to know real effort spent improving upon this, and that older homes are typically far worse. If the average is 40% of energy use, what are the real energy hogs using? What percentage are McMansions using? How about homes that are 150 years old? Wasted energy costs money, feeds pollution, contributes to the strengths of people and nations that you’d prefer not have it, and generally endangers the world.
Our goal is to eventually get to net-zero energy for our homes. Through proper insulation, solar as appropriate, and geo-thermal it can be done, and we will do it. You don’t have to build new to benefit from this. For renovations of older homes the improvements that can be made are tangible and important, and the resources saved by not building new are significant and worthwhile. If this is something that interests you let’s talk.
Picture of the Robert Hillier duplex in Princeton. Stopped by to check it out today. I actually don’t love it, scale seems a bit aggressive for me, but I just don’t get the many people that claim it “doesn’t fit in”. The homes that were built in 1810 all around it don’t fit in. It’s 2010. They don’t fit a contemporary lifestyle. And besides, variety, not repetition, is the spice of life.
Water World
As a result of recent calculations that take the changes into account, many scientists now say that sea level is likely to rise perhaps three feet by 2100 — an increase that, should it come to pass, would pose a threat to coastal regions the world over.
And the calculations suggest that the rise could conceivably exceed six feet, which would put thousands of square miles of the American coastline under water and would probably displace tens of millions of people in Asia.
Incredible November day.
Greg has been posting on PreFab and the Swedish Style of house construction recently. This is one of the homes he’s highlighted from Sweden. I like it. You?
PreFab is Alive (but housing is on life support)
A few days ago architect Greg LaVardera wrote an interesting blog titled “Prefab is Dead” (it is worth noting that he is specifically discussing modern prefab). You can read it here. In it Greg argues many points that I agree entirely with.
Among them: the cost of modern prefab isn’t as inexpensive as many people hope it to be, many builders are unfamiliar with - and unwilling to learn - modern construction for the site built part of the process, and that the “existing PreFab industry exhibited the same stylistic bias as site builders”. These points are largely true, as are many others Greg makes.
Greg suggests that while prefab offered the hope of making modern design more accessible to anyone that wants it, ultimately, “… we still can’t visit our local home builder and choose our modern house. PreFab has not rushed to the rescue. And now PreFab is dead.” He goes on to argue why the Swedish style of home construction, with wall panels, etc., created in a factory, offers greater hope and opportunity at making modern homes more accessible, affordable, and profitable for the builders. Perhaps he is right, as I suggested at the top, you should read his post and judge for yourself.
Greg and I share a common frustration and goal and philosophy in many ways, and while I disagree with him that prefab is dead, the root of his thesis is one I share. Modern, good, design can and should be more easily accessible to people that want it.
Is this because I like modern design? In part, sure it is. I do prefer modern. Mostly though, I like good, well thought out, inspired design that makes a space feel good to live, work, or play in. Good design can be very traditional or incredibly modern. I can and do like both, but modern is my personal preference for sure. Not the cold rigid modern that gives that style a bad name, but warm, livable, cool, modern design that just feels like the person living in it gets “it”.
Yet it also pure business. Time and again I notice people admiring modern architecture in person or on the cover of magazines. I see them progressively buying more and more consumer products that are nothing if not modern: Apple products, the Mini Cooper, and countless others. I hear people telling me how cool our houses are, and I see friends that live in traditional homes subscribing to Dwell after picking it up on my counter. It is so obvious to me, and I assume to Greg, and many other around the industry, that there is a niche for modern design. We know it to be true.
So, if we are right, if there is a market for modern design, where is it? My personal thesis, and the one that guides the philosophy of our business approach, is that modern design must be made more accessible to people. For most people the only way to get modern is to hire an architect, which is a leap of faith and can be costly, build a home, another leap of faith, and typically pay a premium for construction. This takes time, money, and faith. Most people don’t have all three. Those that do tend to be wealthy. So most good modern design is built for the wealthy. That is fine.
It doesn’t mean that there isn’t a larger market for modern as much as it means the way the industry - especially architects - approaches the consumer is generally intimidating. Where does prefab come in? Why does it matter what Greg or I think?
We are both after the same goal - Greg offers modern house plans are very reasonable prices. Other architects may scoff at this … all while they lament their lack of business and how the public doesn’t understand their designs. SquallCo designs and builds PreFab homes that are modern and sustainable and at least 20% less expensive than stick built modern homes in our area. Some architects and builders scoff at this too. Is ours the perfect solution to design? No, it’s not. It would be great if people building a home took the time and spent the money to design and build custom architecture with a good architect. I know I, and I am sure Greg, would be very happy to work with those clients as well. We have a client now that we are doing custom prefab for, and it is very exciting.
Our approach to PreFab is one of practicality and of frustration. Frustration with the typical stick build process that is slow, inefficient, and wasteful. Practical in its promise to put our more modern homes in a fair competition with stock builders. It is clear that many, many people like modern. It is equally clear that most of them end up in something else. Mostly I view this as a failure of the industry to let the home buyer know how to even get a modern home, and a failure for them to fairly articulate what it costs. With our approach at least, this is not the case. We currently offer two designed modern homes. We are happy to do 100% custom design as well, but at least we offer this: you know what the house looks like, you know what it costs, and you know you can have it in four or five months. Can you say that about any other form of modern construction right now?
The Swedish approach may be better now or in the future, and if so, I’ll be all over it. Yet I’ve heard hundreds of people over the past few months tell me that, unlike many years ago, they have no issue with prefab. Many, in fact, prefer it. Is it perfect? No. What is? Can we and other do better? I hope so. To me though Prefab is alive as anything given the fact that housing is on life support regardless of style or means of construction. It still offers what it once did - the ability for people to get modern (or traditional, by the way) faster and less expensively than a traditional design and build approach; and the ability to remove the mystery of “how do I get that” from the buyer’s mind. For us at least, that part - removing insecurity - is the most promising part.
Great 8 min vid of Buffet. Filled with his killer one liners and business insight. Good stuff. Warren Buffett’s Worst Trade & Biggest Mistake ~ market folly
On a run yesterday I came across this little gem of a rehabbed barn. I love this house. Nice design. I especially love the office on the second floor.
