International Monetary Policy

I am entrhalled with international monetary policy. Since most of my work is international I've been postively and adversely affected by the fluctuations of various currencies. What I've learned over the years is how various countries use a low valuation of their currency relative to the US Dollar as a competitive advantage. Dirty pool, I say.

While a strong dollar policy is great for our debtors, the weakening greenback levels the playing field when competing for contracts internationally. While I certainly won't be cheering the decline of the dollar, it is somewhat satisfying to watch those that have been devaluing their currency to manipulate the market for professional services sweat it out.

Every silver lining has its cloud.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

EX, DX, LX :: Should I Stay or Should I Go

It's been pretty standard for the last couple decades. If you wanted a house you'd buy a starter home that you could afford. When you outgrew the space and your means increased you'd sell the house and move to a better neighborhood. This presumes you'd be able to sell or rent your existing residence. Considering the pace of population growth in the US this was not really a problem.

In recent times, however, there has been a transition. Starter homes designed for young couples are now becoming affordable housing for extended families. The ability to sell the home has become more about price point and less about configuration in this niche of the overall housing market.

During the present market downturn there is a phenomenon exacerbating the slide. People looking to downsize for retirement, or move to a more walkable neighborhood cannot sell their present home. Further, they are in a unit type that doesn't allow them to rent their home at a price point commensurate with the property value. They risk devaluing their property by collecting a low rent yet cannot sell their home.

The above is not a problem if the owner realized that their personal residence is not an investment but actually an expense. Aside form proper maintenance and upgrading finishes there is no other way to add value to the residence. They are therefore locked in to a property that they may have loved, but the world may no longer have a use for.

That will be a bitter pill for many to swallow, but the evidence is all around us. Poorly constructed homes on the fringe of suburbia will depreciate at an accelerated rate once they start requiring major maintenance. Proximity to schools will not convince the lenders to approve a loan on building in decay in a neighborhood of buildings in decay. Case in point are the homes affected by defective wallboard where homeowners risk foreclosure if they cannot pay the difference in lost value to the homes or have the contractor (usually out of business) to remove and replace the drywall.

Those looking to buy a home should therefore be very cautious about the materials of which they are built. Further, the plan of the house should facilitate various types of growth. I reference the starter homes above acknowledging that today's starter may be tomorrow's affordable housing. As such it should be able to allow for growth in a straightforward manner. Thus the owner of the house can expand the market when they are ready to move on, or they can reserve the right to grow in place. This is a key determinant of sustainability and will allow the house and the neighborhood to adapt market changes over time.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Modern Vernacular :: The Haunting

With Halloween approaching I thought it appropriate to post about the one thing that has been haunting me for years.

This beast is responsible for the uglification of millions of houses the world over. It is none other than the ubiquitous sliding glass door. It dominates whatever façade it is forced upon. It is so user unfriendly that a cottage industry has cropped up of stickers to provide a clue reminding people there is a solid piece of glass in their direct path of travel.

For all its ill effects the dreaded sliding glass door is adored by the very people it hurts the most. Why? Because it permits a tremendous amount of natural light, affords expansive views, and costs a fraction of what the equivalent French doors would set you back.

Right now someone is waiting to ruin your design by installing a sliding glass door. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

EX, DX, LX :: Less Taste, More Filling

Do Americans have bad taste? Is good design lost on Americans as pearls cast before swine? I don't think so. I've seen enough of the world, especially Europe and Asia, to know that bad taste is universal. From the atrocious fan gear for sport in Europe and Oceania to the gaudy print pant suits of Asia it is apparent that disposable income and elegance in design do not always intersect the world over. So there are many things that exhibit the presence of bad taste in America, it is not inherent. Actually, it's imported.

While I have found bad taste to be present on every corner of the globe, I have also found the causes to be different. In this post I'll detail some of what I've discovered here in the USA.

I was constantly frustrated by those that would water down designs even though they didn't save any money, and further frustrated by those that would seek to charge more for the better design simply because it looked nicer even though it cost the same. They completely missed the point and therefore missed the market 'in theory'. I finally happened upon a project where they provided good design at a good price and was shocked that they didn't experience wild success.

When I first looked into the subject I was under the mistaken impression that lack of choice was the culprit. If only there were better choices at the same price point then the better design would win. All other things being equal a better design represents better value and therefore a better buy. Yet, for some reason this didn't seem to be operating as expected in the real world. There were other factors at play that I hadn't accounted for.

In the intervening years I have been privy to a number of conversations on mass marketing and understanding the psychology of the consumer. I found the same hobgoblins that I had seen in the past. Underestimating the design intelligence of the American consumer.
The ever present tactic of offering a crappy entry level product to set the stage for the up-sell.
I also picked up on a couple other wrinkles in the marketing world that I wasn't expecting. This opened my eyes and I began to see the bigger game being played across the marketing spectrum. What the recurring themes were and what tactics paid off the best and therefore used most often.

Far from the loud, obnoxious, in your face approach, what has worked best for the largest portion of the market is humble, understated value. This has made certain retailers paranoid about the aesthetic of their stores. They want every facet they present to the public to showcase how they're keeping costs down so they can pass the savings on to the consumer. We NUers have been trying to get the Gas-Backwards model built for ages and have been rebuffed constantly because 'it looks expensive' and therefore 'would turn off their customers'. Since there has been so much success with the 'cheap but clean' buildings, especially the warehouse retailers, it's next to impossible to convince them to do better even if it costs less. Their use of 'ugly', in other words, is part of their marketing strategy. They've managed to train the market over the past several decades that they'll get better prices at an ugly store.

Now that the market has been trained, how do you get them to pay more to buy nice goods? There is a disconnect between what the buildings advertise on the outside and what they sell on the inside. The marketing game here is played in a different arena. While the sale is transacted at the ugly store the selling happens elsewhere directed by the product manufacturers.

What I've learned from print and televised advertising is that I'm a good person for saving money by shopping at Mega-Lo-Mart. The money I save directly benefits my family and is a sacrifice I'm willing to make because I'm not a greedy jerk that is looking to show off or prove that I'm better than anybody else. Because I'm such a good person, and since I've saved all this money, I can spend a little extra on certain products without feeling guilty because --- wait for it --- I'm worth it.

Re-read that last paragraph for therein lies the key to understanding the largest sector of the housing market. Within that meme is the fight between good and bad, the biblical rebuke of greed, a healthy dose of class warfare, and the granting of special dispensation to treat yourself for being good. Armed with this script I can now understand the reactions I see in response to design.

We now live in a Bizarro world where grace and elegance have been construed as greed and arrogance. The recent financial meltdown will have the affect of cementing this philosophy in place for years to come. The question is how to build anything of lasting value under these conditions. There is a lot invested in the selling of ugly, and it will take great effort to overcome market perceptions. By understanding how ugly is sold, with a certain sense of nobility, we can address the specifics and change the discourse.

Simplicity and frugality need not be ugly. Beautiful communities aren't just for rich snobs; hardworking Americans deserve nice places, too. Humble vernacular structures can be embellished over time adding value to the home and to the community. Use these to allay the fears of those who have been sold ugly so long they don't think they deserve good design.

Sent from my iPhone

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

House of ENRON

There's quite a bit of bad financial advice polluting the airwaves. In particular there is far too much noise about the real estate market. I've heard on several nationally syndicated programs that 'now is the time' to purchase distressed property. This advice is never qualified with no caveats or disclaimers warning the listener off of properties that may remain toxic even during a strong recovery. Since these pundits have chosen to shirk their responsibility in this regard I've taken it upon myself to provide the necessary cautions in this post.

Those who have been around the block once or twice might remember that before the current crop of Wall Street hooligans scammed the world of high finance there was Enron. Combined with the Worldcom con confidence in Wall Street was shaken. At the time many talking heads wondered if Wall Street would ever recover.

It did.

Let's not forget, however, that while the stock market recovered Worldcom and Enron did not. In the same manner the construction sector of the economy will indeed recover, but certain business models will no longer be viable. In markets saturated with single family snout houses there will be no need to build more since supply will far outpace demand. In other markets where empty condos dominate the skyline, and with lenders leery of the financial problems inherent in the type, more high-rise condos will simply not be needed.

If a unit type is not bankable, as is the case with many condos, then it will sit on the market unsold as potential buyers will not be able to arrange financing. If there is an oversupply of a specific type, such as suburban snout house in a sea of other empty snout houses, then it won't appreciate in value. They will be the preferred vehicle for slumlords and therefore be a poor choice for investors. 

This gets further complicated with the time value of money and the potential devaluation of the dollar. Suffice it to say these two complications could make a bad situation worse for unwitting investors.*

It may very well be that the snout house becomes the Enron of unit types and the high-rise condo the Worldcom. A recovery may happen without them. Like all hooligans, though, they may rear their ugly head again sometime in the future.

* I call them investors but perhaps should identify the parties at risk as speculators. Those looking to flip properties will get burned as will those looking to rent properties in a market saturated with rental stock. Investors, however, who purchase properties in a strong rental market will benefit from the current low interest rates. The coming devaluation of the dollar will cause interest rates to rise and lower buying power. Paying off a lower interest rate loan with cheaper dollars can be a very lucrative proposition. Just know what you're buying.

Sent from my iPhone

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

The Modern Vernacular :: Heritage

While there may never be a convergence of the traditional vernacular and modern architecture, the study of both provides lessons that can inform a modern vernacular. In this post I will be very charitable to modernism since I'm only looking for the best aspects that will help fulfill the promise of modernism.

---

Modern architecture grappled with several problems of the industrial age. There had to be a way to make an architecture out of the new materials available. The materials opened up new worlds of exploration in design since they were lighter, thinner, and cost effective. Instead of adding cost and space that would be unused in order to mimic the physical depth and character of traditional and classical buildings, the moderns took upon the challenge by seeking new forms of expression with the new materials. As the theory advanced layers of sophistication and nuance were added atop and within the plain white box. This layering gives depth of detail and meaning to the buildings. This richness was only accessible to the trained eye in far too many instances. [Eisenman octagon(?) columns, Graves' early houses, Charles Moore, etc.]

Certain architects embraced the thinness of the materials [Moore, Venturi, Tigerman] while others sought to fool the eye. Some chose to work with materials that had inherent depth and avoided the problem altogether [Corbu, Aalto, Kahn, Botta, et.al.]. By choosing concrete and brick these architects were able to build with a sense of permanence and repose in lieu of the transience typical of the papier maché houses of cards mentioned above.

Therein lies the rub between traditionalists and modernists. While the trad-archers are reviled as those tacking on detail merely as pastiche, the moderns are reviled for their attempts at fooling the eye and proclaiming to be honest to the materials. It is within this crease where the modern and the traditional can meet in order to inform the modern vernacular.

1. Utilize the concepts of open space planning to provide a spacious interior
2. Understand the methods that provide spatial definition to prevent the space from feeling like a cargo container
3. Minimize the number of openings but standardize and increase their size to reduce construction costs
4. Build for permanence and out of solid materials when able to be greener and provide physical depth
5. Proportions should relate to the end user, usually human

I intend to expand upon these principles and show them in practice. I'll also go through the work of the proto-modernists and modernist architects referenced above to show how their work can positively influence the genesis of a modern vernacular.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

EX, DX, LX :: Raising the Bar

Responsible architects and building designers have always incorporated the concepts of adaptable reuse into their work. Commercial buildings have been designed to accommodate multiple uses and residences have been designed so they can grow gracefully in place. Examples of this can be seen in every corner of the globe. Those with a stomach for renovation have even devised business plans to take advantage of this inherent quality. Stories of people buying a 2/1 and adding on making it a 3/2 abound. This practice of intentionally adding value to a property has largely been lost in the recent real estate frenzy. What has also been lost is the ability to improve a structures station [caste?] over time.

The process of renovation rewards the installation of better quality windows, better interior finishes, roofing material, etc., to a point. Once that point has been reached then all further enhancements and improvements will not provide further increases in value. This is to be expected as starter, move-up, and luxury housing markets have been well defined for quite some time.

Yet this upward mobility for existing structures has applied mainly to older neighborhoods. The newer subdivisions do not allow for graceful additions. Part of the problem is that the houses are maxed out on their lots. The only place to add space is typically to the rear of the house or by cannibalizing the garage.

Eliminating the garage in a standard suburban home usually has an adverse impact on the value of a home, and the gained space is typically difficult to condition, is poorly insulated, and lacks enough windows to provide adequate lighting. The loss of the garage usually means reduced parking capacity and/or loss of storage space.

Adding space to the rear of a home in a typical suburban development usually entails blocking of the view and natural light of the main living area of the house. I've seen that happen more times than I care to recall. The net result is a dark house with an awkward floor plan that doesn't live well. The homeowner trying to sell the house then has the nerve to ask for $200 per square foot, or more, for the additional space which will have to be knocked down in order to make the home livable. I will give these misguided individuals credit for actually trying to add value to a home instead of just expecting the house to appreciate magically through the beneficence of the equity fairy.

The net result of both techniques is a compromised plan with compromised aesthetics. This is one of the main factors leading to the disposable house phenomenon where it's easier and more cost effective to sell and move than it is to grow in place.

A combination of urban form and 'disposable house' design has conspired against the suburbs in this regard. Upgrading the interior finishes and enhancing the exterior envelope will have some impact, but only up to the highest level of its perceived market segment. Once that point is reached the homeowner can no longer profitably add value to their investment. They are no longer drivers, but merely passengers riding the wave of market forces. Their neighborhoods will be stuck in time and slowly devalue until such point that the price differential between the derelict structure and the renovated comparable home is enough to attract investors. The business model is then contingent upon the erosion of value as opposed to the addition of value. This business model is not new either, as any slum-lord will tell you.

The net result is blight. This is the fate awaiting much of the unsold housing stock in the US. Those waiting to build new until the unsold stock has been absorbed by the market are misguided. The imperiled units will sit until they rot.

To prevent blight, not only should buildings be able to age in place, they should be able to mature in place. Give it good bones. Take the bare vernacular and raise it to the next level. Add a layer of detail that is more than just make-up. Let the sqaure posts graduate to turned, let the turned give way to proper columns. Turn every maintenance cycle into an upgrade cycle. Let this value be added gradually, over time, by the home owner. They can change the caste of their home incrementally, as it suits their budget, as it suits their time-line. Allow for this to happen along a street and the value proposition of the street changes dramatically. Same for the neighborhood, same again for the town.

Buildings can be designed that meet the budget requirements mandated by the current economic climate. They need not be consigned to that station until they are left to rot and are scraped, per the current model. Every fiber of their being should be imbued with the ability to rise above their current station. Within every stone lies the potential for greatness, it need only be released.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

EX, DX, LX :: Pastiche and Pornography

There is an additive approach to detailing a Classical façade whereby the level of detailing is carefully selected. There is a tremendous range of expression available through this additive approach and therefore a certain amount of decorum is required so the building retains legibility. Factors which affect this detailing include, but are not limited to: budget, availability of materials, availability of construction skill, schedule, appropriateness, and desire. The sum of all the factors, not all of which are noted here, is what leads to a building evoking it's sense of place in the landscape and in history.

The selection and application of detail and ornament are part of the art of composition. An excellent visual summary of this concept is available in Robert Adam's book Classical Architecture.

Not completely unrelated is the modern concept of collage. The layering of detail and meaning of multiple planes was used to great affect by architect Michael Graves. There are excellent essays forming the introduction to Five Architects which partially reveal the concepts underpinning the design intent of not only Graves, but Meier, Gwathmey, Hejduk, and Eisenman. The resulting architecture is intellectually accessible to a relative few, thereby reducing the legibility of the buildings. This does not invalidate the theories, as they have been continually refined over the ensuing decades.

The notion of an additive approach to architectural design and detailing has been handed down from antiquity until today. Yet, those that choose Classical layering over modern collage are decried for using pastiche. There is a certain amount of cognitive dissonance in this charge, to be sure. It must have been pointed out at some point in recent history that collage is its very own brand of pastiche.

Recent architectural efforts in modernism have since focused on shape making in the extreme. Pastiche by collage has been replaced by random forms. The result is an ersatz Rorschach test writ large on the cities of the world. The populace has taken to nick-naming these erections based upon what they see in these new building forms. There is the CCTV Pants, the barbed wire Birds Nest, and of course the charitably labeled London Gherkin. It would seem that those in pursuit of form have dropped the practice of pastiche in favor of an overt pornography. Perhaps, then, collage is only applicable to decorated sheds and not ducks.

Understanding the concept of collage, and ignoring its previous applications for a moment, it reveals itself as a potential tool in the humanizing of the modern aesthetic. Using the minimalist white box as a base layers of collage can be added or subtracted in order to respond to the various criteria which give shape to a building. The key is to pursue legibility and decorum in the application of this technique. Issues of type, use, spatial definition, relationship to human scale and human proportions, as well as urban condition need to be addressed and resolved.

In so doing the building will necessarily take on certain traditional characteristics. This is not due to intent, but in recognition of design solutions that have stood the test of time in the laboratory of history. The net result will be an architecture that is true to its materials, method of construction, and place in time as well as true to its place along the continuum of human settlement.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

The Modern Vernacular :: reForm

Within the realm of traditional and classical architecture there is the classification of buildings from rural to urban and from vernacular to high classical. Within any given segment there is also a range of quality and finish that further differentiate a building from its neighbors. Another tier of differentiation is building type. Domestic, commercial, and civic buildings will respond to their urban condition accordingly. This also establishes a very public pecking order which is anathema to the egalitarian precepts of the early moderns. Thus, baby and bathwater were tossed for the benefit of the revolution. In so doing the movement entered an infinite loop that forces it to ignore the data required to advance and hopefully fulfill the promise of modernism.

To provide the range within which the modern may engage the traditional we must establish the poles of the vernacular and the high classical of the Modern Vernacular. Interestingly, the white architecture of orthodox modernism has served as both. Consider the basic building block of Le Corbusier's Pessac, which could be considered the vernacular base, and the Getty Center by Richard Meier, which is a major civic structure at the top of the spectrum.

Can this white architecture be used as a base to generate the modern vernacular spectrum? I believe it can. The next posts on this topic will take the basic white cube and have it relate to urban condition, typology, and a return to humanistic design principles. By layering, or shall I say collage, it is possible to generate tremendous variety in a narrow range yielding a sense of place.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

A Different Brand of Granola

There are any number of reasons to go green. Some are altruistic, some are Calvinistic, some are opportunistic. For me it comes down to the simple maxim: don't shit where you eat. Many of the environmental ills plaguing the earth can be rectified by adhering to this edict. There is no need for scaremongering, no need for 'do as I say, not as I do' hypocrisy, and no need to purchase indulgences from eco-popes.

There are tremendous benefits to going green beyond reducing your carbon footprint. When I stumbled upon Nature's Gate Shampoo, for instance, I just needed to wash my hair. Turns out that what is healthy for me is actually healthy for the environment, too. Who'd have thunk it.

This holds true for every other aspect of daily life, as well. Eating fresh foods devoid of poisons makes me feel better physically, not just psychologically. Living in a walkable community affords me a better quality of life as I get plenty of exercise walking around town, never have to worry about how I'm getting home, and am not dependent on any form of transportation other than my own two feet to meet my daily needs. It also means that I can choose to have a sports car instead of a family truckster. But I'm hanging on to the XC70 until such time as I can swing a Tesla Roadster.

I intend to espouse the other unheralded benefits of green design. Each strategy employed, every product used will adhere to the favorite maxim and provide measurable benefits to those who make use of these buildings.  Does that make me a granola? You betcha. Just a different brand.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Design Matters in a Recession

In the current economy the smart money is betting against new construction. You've heard or read the pronouncements of those in the industry:

I. There is enough empty housing stock out there that needs to fill up before before demand outpaces supply.
II. With the tighter credit climate the pool of potential homeowners has shrunk considerably.
III. You can buy distressed property for half of what it would cost to build new.

The bad news is that they are right. Considering the construction industry is the largest industry in the USA that does not bode well. While the pessimists are indeed correct in their analysis of the existing situation, there may actually be room for growth in a different direction.

To be perfectly clear I personally don't think the construction industry will come back by building the same product they've been building for the last 40+ years. In that regard the smart money analysis of the real estate market is spot on. I do strongly believe, however, that there is room for innovation.

Let me digress for a minute to prove a point. The Audi A4 saved the company from financial collapse. It was an innovative design that changed the brand's market perception. Similarly, the original iMac saved Apple Computer from oblivion. Again, it was innovative design that attracted buyers. It should be noted that while both designs are modern they were minimalist and not radical.

Where I run into trouble with the metaphor is that when Audi was in trouble the auto industry was actually quite healthy. Same goes for Apple since they were about to go the way of the dodo right when the internet economy was roaring. Whereas now it's not just one or two companies hurting in an otherwise strong economy, it's the whole industry that's in trouble amidst an international economic recession.

This means that design alone won't be able to reawaken the sleeping giant. There needs to be an entire business plan that involves every aspect of the industry from construction, to finance, to maintenance. However, if everything in the industry is reformed except design (per the current path) the effort will fall flat for all the reasons noted above. Reforms in construction and finance won't change the fact that there is an oversupply of single family garage front housing stock. Further, it won't change the desirability, or lack thereof, of those units.

This leads to a couple of important observations. There are a number of units on the market that may never sell at any price since better options may be readily available. Factors such as quality of construction, location, and appearance are now in play whereas before it was all about price. With all the options currently on the market some existing units may never attract those looking for a new home.

Which leads to the next observation. There is a harsh reality that will be entering the real estate market called cannibalization. Since 100% absorption will not happen there will be winners and losers; not only in new construction but existing housing stock, as well. It will be survival of the fittest where the best format wins, much like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD battle.

It is possible, however, to ascertain the eventual winners and losers. Of the existing stock it's apparent that those communities that never reached full build-out, or fully built but half occupied, won't be able to maintain their infrastructure or attract homeowners. The winners will be the bargain homes within established neighborhoods near schools and services.

Similar rules apply for new construction. Those building within or near established neighborhoods will fare better. At present most of the new housing stock on the market falls into the undesirable location category. Most of the old housing stock is in rough neighborhoods with small rooms and no modern conveniences. So the opportunity is to clean up an existing neighborhood by building new units with modern conveniences that use space smarter.

In addition to location and amenities, there are a few other factors that can affect success. It's important to not undermine the values of the existing neighborhood by building the same units cheaper. It's better to use different unit types, or variations of existing types, than to undercut the existing market by low-balling. Further, it's imperative to understand what price point has the most liquidity in the market. Be sure to target that price point since people who are willing to pay more may not be able to borrow more. Look for your premium by building a better mousetrap than by tacking on extras.

Once a price point has been established you might find that your target market has changed. Investigate the other offerings at that price point and take them seriously. Many developers will miss out on the current opportunity because they will expend all their energy to solve the wrong problem. You need to be able to identify the problem, craft a solution, and then market that solution so the intended audience can see that their concerns have been addressed.

The reality of the 'new normal' is such that volume production of housing may constitute tens of units as opposed to  hundreds or thousands. This allows for design solutions that target a smaller audience instead of having a one size fits all solution. This differentiation in the marketplace is critical so the developer isn't competing with short sales and foreclosures. That said, I'll reiterate that it's important to take the competition seriously. Developers don't have to provide the same footprint and room count as suburbia, but they do have to provide the same or better livability.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Build Small, Live Large :: Prognosis

Opposing sides in any debate, as of late, have adopted the tactic of not responding to their opponent's contentions so as not to legitimize their line of reasoning. Instead of reasoned debate were left with gainsay and the simple expedient of demonizing the other side. It's far easier to paint the others as evil than to understand their position and debate point by point. Even then, if the intent is to win an argument rather than to seek truth the ensuing debate will not help advance the cause, whatever it may be.

This lack of an honest truth seeking debate has adversely affected land development. Neither side of the debate can lay claim to the high ground as they've both used hyperbole and invective to characterize those across the aisle. As they've been staking out positions further away from each other they've left the middle wide open.

Make no mistake, the middle road is in  no  way, shape, or form a hybrid of the two positions. It understands and appreciates its market and rejects the condescension that has been heaped upon them. It seeks to understand 'why'. It defines the problem clearly and then goes to work.

While the partisans are busy sifting through the ashes of the last battle it is entirely possible for a charge to be made down the middle by those they've ignored.

This series of posts will now segue into the EX,DX,LX and Eco Deco discussions where I will detail how this research has influenced my designs.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Build Small, Live Large :: Evolution + Extinction

The prototypical home plan of suburbia, the single level split plan, had been continuously refined over time to be perfectly suited to its suburban condition. The attempts to use this plan in a denser urban fabric have failed since the prototype cannot adapt. The corollary is that the traditional types that work best in denser urbanism have a legacy of floor plans that do not easily accommodate current expectations. Modifications may be too costly or time consuming to undertake. This again keeps the home out of reach for the majority of the population. Both plans have problems, but only one can adapt. [Hint: it's not the snouthouse.]

All we must do to start solving the problem is begin with the resilient type and craft a new plan. If we are creative enough we can provide the expected livability in a smaller footprint by using every available square inch. This was the philosophy that guided the design of the 2006 Montgomery Living Idea House. Weighing in at  2,100 square feet it still has three bedrooms, two and a half baths, separate home office, formal foyer, eat-in kitchen, formal dining room, living room, and a sitting room off the master. While this may be only a couple of hundred square feet less than the national average, it actually packs a feature list closer to that of a 3,000 square foot home.

Truth be told, I was actually able to fit almost the same program into a house 300 square feet smaller than my Idea Home. The issue, again, was that the reduction in square footage without the reduction in fixture count only saves on the cheap space, which didn't appreciably reduce acquisition cost.*  What it was capable of, however, is putting a smaller footprint on a smaller lot leaving more room for a yard. The extra space in the rear also allows for future expansion of the home should the need arise.

This proves it's possible to have a home that meets all the checklist requirements and still has enough breathing room. With a smaller footprint it is still possible to have a big yard on a small lot. The inhabitants can look out onto their back yard and kitchen garden instead of being shoved up against their back fence. By extending the view from the interior of the house into the exterior spaces, without violating the neighbor's privacy, the whole home feels larger. These are the techniques that allow you to build small and live large.

*might be a different story today when every dollar counts

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Build Small, Live Large :: Paradigm Shift

The recession in and of itself is a pretty major game changer, but there are other factors, too, that are contributing to a major rethinking of how we live, work, and play. The answer, for some, is density. They can live closer to work and reduce their commute time, or can live out in the country in a place where they can walk to their daily needs when home saving their driving for the commute to work.

Many cities have enjoyed a resurgence, as well. The current price point of these revitalized areas is currently preventing wider acceptance, though. Even after the bubble burst the cost of admission is still beyond the reach of the average American household.

Those looking to be closer to the countryside but still near amenities have found plenty of small towns that offer a different lifestyle and a lower price tag. Some of these micropolitan areas have even outpaced their metropolitan cousins.

There are also many examples of towns being built in lieu of subdivisions throughout the US. The success of these New Towns has attracted the attention of larger developers who have tried to emulate that success. In so doing they have brought with them their same house design mentality and applied it to these denser towns but on significantly smaller lots. Understatement alert: The results have not been entirely successful.

There is a huge disconnect between the houses being dropped on these lots and the lots themselves. These houses were designed for the subdivisions, they are open plans looking out to open spaces. They are then dropped on smaller lots. It becomes painfully clear that instead of being free you are actually under constant surveillance by your neighbors due to proximity. You need to keep the curtains closed for privacy, and the yard is so small that looking out onto it is yet another reminder that you're packed in like sardines. Instead of getting the American dream, instead of getting more freedom, the home owner just dropped three quarters of a million dollars on a large house that, for some reason, feels cramped.

Many operated under the mistaken impression that they were providing the best of both worlds. In fact what they were providing was an object lesson in missed opportunities. The next post will provide an overview of how they missed the mark.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Build Small, Live Large :: Adaptation

The developer community began to see success with their business plan of providing more for less. It is a pretty potent concept, after all. As they strove to provide more, however, they concentrated solely on quantity forgetting quality and livability. Every additional bit of trim, detail, windows, doors, all of that, was weighed against how many square feet they would otherwise be able to build and still be at their target price point. Too many windows adding $5000 to the budget could easily be another 100 square feet of the cheap space. That's practically another bedroom. You can see this mentality play out in the plans and the façades of suburban homes across the country.

Instead of an all brick house you get brick veneer on the front elevation
Instead of rugged properly proportioned windows you get the cheapest available that meet egress
Instead of classical columns with a full entablature you get cylinders that die right into the soffit
Instead of a usable front porch you get a mini tacked-on porchlet

The list goes on and on. I'm sure you can find all these compromises and more when you drive through any subdivision.

The home buying public was told that in order to get the most bang for their buck they should buy a house that offered the most living space for the least dollar per square foot cost. Supposedly the houses that met these criteria would be good investments, as well. This fed into the greater fool theory that saturated the real estate market in recent years. Valuation mainly by square footage ignored the other requirements of a home that establish its intrinsic value.

This trade off between square footage and pretty much every other aspect of home design remains the driving force in the industry. This is the main culprit in preventing a recovery in this sector. To change their philosophy now may mean the builders and developers have to devalue their existing unsold stock. They'd much rather wait it out and hope beyond hope that fools greater than the last will soon show.

There have been many attempts to change this mindset. Plenty of other theories have been offered, some having great success in the marketplace. Despite the success of other models, and in defiance of the numerous warnings of a pending bubble burst, these new models did not receive widespread acceptance from the development community. The problem was that the existing business model had been so consistently successful that it would take a major, earth shattering paradigm shift for it to be derailed. Welcome to the recession.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Build Small, Live Large :: Morphology

It is no surprise that houses have been getting larger. The size of the average American home has risen from 938 square feet in the 1950's to 2,349 square feet today. In that same time frame the size of the American family has shrunk from 3.37 to 2.67. This growth is not necessarily a bad thing. An increase in the standard of living for the average American family is a sign of prosperity. Some may argue that it's also a sign of largesse or environmental irresponsibility. True, nothing can match the ecological performance of poverty. Since that is not a palatable solution to many then we need to adopt smarter patterns of growth.

The house, as we move from 1950 through to today, (d)evolved into a simple box. With efficiencies in construction materials and methods a number of the driving factors pertaining to cost were reined in, especially time. With the post-war manufacturing and production mentality coupled with cul-de-sac subdivisions and a new modern architecture that stripped the detailing off the homes of yesteryear, it was possible to build larger and faster for the same price or less. It allowed the American dream of owning your own home to become a reality for millions.

The early success of those subdivisions naturally encouraged other would-be developers to enter the fray. They needed to find a competitive edge in this new market and found it by understanding what they were really selling: The Dream. The Dream was more about lifestyle than architectural style. It wasn't about columns and cornices, it was about escaping the cramped quarters of the city for the open spaces of the country. It was freedom; a hard won freedom for those returning from WWII.

The developers competed with each other by offering more freedom than the other guy. Room sizes started getting a little bigger. Then new must-have spaces were created for the home. More rooms were added to the list; like the den, then the family room, the breakfast nook, country kitchen, extra bedrooms, and so on until we reach where we are today. Nowadays a home must have a living room, family room, dining room, home office, sitting area off the master bedroom, and even a room for the home theater to complete The Dream.

We also increased the number of bathrooms in the house, as well as the number of fixtures per bathroom. Other than the bathrooms, though, you'll notice the other extra rooms have something in common: no plumbing. The most expensive rooms in the house are the kitchen and the bathrooms because they are the only ones that have fixtures and cabinets. The rest is considered 'cheap space'.

When you look at the average American house you'll notice that it has mostly grown by adding that cheap space. The more cheap space you add the more you can bring down the average cost of construction per square foot. This is the math that home builders competing with each other figured out way back when. So they made you drive a little further for a bigger house. More house = more freedom, or so they thought.

In the next post we'll discuss how this thinking skewed the perceptions of the industry and how the attempt to provide more for less led to less livability.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Teratology

Another in the series of blog posts that will form the basis of a book is Teratology, also known as the study of deformities. The architectural profession has foisted many such deformities on an unassuming public. These structures, usually built at outrageous expense, stand in contempt of sustainability and the wisdom of adaptive reuse. The fetishes and curios of these design gurus stand as monuments to the era of greed and irresponsibility that led to financial collapse.

In the coming years these same architects will attempt to recast themselves as the high priests and priestesses of the green movement. They have a lot of catching up to do as the practice has moved beyond them.

Any catalog of these structures and the affects they have wrought on their surroundings will read as an anthology of woe. While I will do my my best to inject humor, the truth of the subject is no laughing matter. Great swaths of land have been developed in a manner that is not fit for human habitation. Further, the only solution for many of these ghost towns is to bulldoze it all and start over. What a waste.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

EX, DX, LX

In order to properly categorize blog posts I'll be inserting an icon at the top left of certain posts. As this post is an introduction to the EX, DX, LX concept I've attached a mock-up of the digital book cover. The essays tagged with this icon will combine to form the printed edition.

The EX, DX, LX concept owes a debt to Steve Mouzon's Classical to Vernacular Spectrum. Mouzon's description of the range of subtle variation from humble rural structures all the way through high classical civic structures was crucial to understanding how a sense of place is engendered. It is more than just the patina of time that is needed for a place to feel real as opposed to contrived. This great variety within a narrow range is what differentiates the authentic from the fakes.

The Spectrum allows for straightforward categorization and codification of architectural character. In so doing it exposes an interesting paradox. Either due to the availability of materials or the skill set of the local craftsmen, the vernacular constituted the low end of this spectrum graduating to the high classical. At one time the vernacular was also the most cost effective means of construction. With changes in the supply chain allowing for greater distribution of materials and the change in the availability of skilled crafstmen, however, there was an inversion where the authentic vernacular became less cost effective than the mid-range.

The vernacular inversion means that people will actually have to pay more for a building with a humble aesthetic. This is not a criticism. For the purposes of taxonomy the classical to vernacular holds, but for establishing price point within a new community there needs to be another metric. In looking to find this metric it became apparent that within the spectrum was the potential to allow a structure to change its caste over time. If a structure can change its station in life then so, too, can a community of these structures. Transformative and transcendental, a treatise of architecture can be developed around this concept.

The intent of EX, DX, LX is to propose such an operating system that will allow for the design of new structures and renovation of existing structures that not only facilitate adaptive reuse, but also establishes a path where value can be added to the building and the community over time.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

The Promise of Modernism

Modernism is more than just aesthetics, it's a philosophy. Or at least it started out that way. In order to engage the industrialized world and allow society to advance the philosophy advocated a break with tradition. In order to harness the power of mass production, which could bring a better quality of life to a great many people, it was deemed necessary to work with technology and not against it.

The question then arose: how does one make architecture out of the new materials and methods available? In a world made by hand detail abounds, yet in the factory high levels of detail are expensive to make, difficult to produce, and always seem lacking when compared to the real thing. This was the dilemma facing architects at the advent of Modernism.

The resulting designs played the curve and did their best to take advantage of the materials and associated shapes available to them. The clean, crisp lines of early modernist buildings were borne out of necessity. The tooling of the time did not allow for a great amount of design flexibility if they were to remain cost effective. Extrusions were therefore round or rectangular.

This limitation became a badge of honor for the modernists who began to question why ornate detail was needed in the first place. Their aim to provide an architecture for the masses, as opposed to just for the privileged class, led them to align with other popular philosophies of the day in support of the common man. Thus, the ornate detailing typical of classical and vernacular architecture was derided. Adolf Loos quipped "the evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects" in his provocatively titled Ornament and Crime.

From the starting point of engaging new materials and methods the modern movement led to the establishment of a new aesthetic that was then tied to a political belief system. In order to gain acceptance the moderns had to make the case to their clients, choosing to align themselves with the political class that was then on the rise. The populace, as well, had to be convinced that this new architecture was a sign of progress. That its beauty came from what the buildings represent. That it was honest and incorruptible. In making the case for the modern they also were making their case against the traditional. Everything modernism was, ipso facto, traditionalism wasn't. What started out as a political expedient became a rallying cry.

"Less is more."

 

"Form follows function."

The pointed attacks on traditional architecture led to its demonization within the halls of academia. This sentiment still lingers today.

However, time and technology have changed. Today it is entirely possible to build traditional using the very best of modern technology and manufacturing processes. The advances in tooling and machining allow great flexibility to today's architects. Intricate details of traditional and classical architecture can be manufactured cost effectively, if so desired. It is equally possible to create non-standard details that don't have to follow the round or rectangular extrusions of the proto-modernists. In every respect, except for how it looks, the resulting structure would be a thoroughly modern building. Yet this building would be frowned upon by modernists as being regressive. Their only complaint must be based on aesthetic preference as opposed to philosophical differences. Evidently to the adherents it is more important for a building to look Modern than to be modern.

Ironically, the expense of building modern has kept the masses from being able to afford these structures. Save for a few dalliances into the realm of manufactured housing and the epic failures of social housing, modern architecture has become the exclusive realm of the mighty. With the mandate of providing design for the masses now expunged from modern practice the simple forms devoid of ornament have been cast aside. The wild shapes and wilder budgets of today show modernism to have entered its Baroque period. Hence, modernism has devolved from a philosophy to an aesthetic. So, in effect, there may really be no underlying philosophy guiding the current crop of moderns. If that is indeed the case then in truth they cease to be modern.

The promise of the modern philosophy advocating design for the masses is being realized every day in other areas of practice. From tea pots to untensils, autos to iPhones, consumer goods that transcend from the merely utilitarian to the level of art abound. This success has not been shared in the world of architecture. The largest sector of the construction industry has rejected the offerings of the aesthetes. Therefore aestheticism is preventing the philosophy of modernism from gaining more traction in this realm. This does not constitute a rejection of modernism wholesale per the examples listed above, it points to the need to re-form the aesthetic to realize the promise.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Understanding the Current Housing Market Crisis

There is plenty of positive spin out there about a tentative recovery of the real estate market. To be sure, any upward trend is better than the alternative. Yet the reports we are receiving are akin to a movie's claim to be the #1 comedy in America when it may very well be the only comedy playing. While sales may have more momentum than they've had in the last two years, the largest sector of the economy is still in the doldrums.

Just as those of us in the profession knew the bubble would burst years ago, we also know that there will be a recovery. The common theme among those that follow the industry is that once the current empty stock has been absorbed we will again be in need of new housing units. This will in turn jump start the construction industry and we'll then be on the road to recovery. Hardly. That line of thinking is based on an assumed intrinsic value of the empty units that does not exist.

Some of the currently empty units will not sell, or may sell and remain unoccupied, due to the undesirability of the unit. In the heyday of the boom market houses and condos were designed to attract investors not residents. Any number of bargain hunters have found out that the wealth of units currently on the market don't meet their needs.

The other problem is that some units that were prohibitively expensive before due to their price point remain expensive due to insurance and maintenance costs. Where the acquisition cost of the house is now within reason, the monthly maintenance fees and special taxing districts of these communities keep potential buyers at bay. The mortgage itself may be half or less than the previous owner was paying, yet the maintenance fees and assessments have gone up. So, too, have the taxes in numerous areas as the local governments need to make up for revenue shortfalls.

Appealing the taxes may buy a temporary reprieve, but sooner or later the taxes will jump up due to a change in millage, not assessed value. This will mean the amount in maintenance and taxes can equal the monthly mortgage amount. While the prospective buyer may be able to afford the mortgage, the extra $1000 per month in fees and taxes might still keep them out of the house.

For some potential owners the thought of paying that much in fees and taxes on top of the mortgage is a deal breaker, even if they can afford it. Those are sunk costs that don't yield a tax write-off since it is not mortgage interest. The potential buyers would be better off finding a location that had a better property tax policy, in a municipality that wasn't perilously in debt, and where more of their monthly housing expenditure went to build equity in their investment. If that math doesn't pencil out then they may actually come out ahead renting.

There's one last bone of contention. Some potential owners are finding out some hidden costs of owning that they didn't anticipate. Once into their new neighborhood they get nickeled and dimed to death. The Home Owners Association (HOA) is on a rampage to raise revenue and are doling out fines left and right. The HOA also may not allow them to park their work truck, boat, or RV at their house. These need to go into storage somewhere which tacks on another monthly expense that was not accounted for.

The dream home in the dream neighborhood can quickly turn into a nightmare. Some potential buyers will find this out when they review the financials and choose not to buy. Others will find out after they take ownership. The latter group may be leading the second wave of foreclosures as the hidden costs and reduced tax benefits catch up with them.

While housing prices search for their bottom don't forget the other factors affecting sales. It is very likely that a good number of the units in the five states deep in the crisis may never find a buyer for the reasons outlined above. This does not mean there is no demand for housing in those areas, just that what is on offer isn't palatable at any price.

While some may find this depressing, the writing on the wall actually shows a very strong recovery in a different direction. This is where opportunity lurks.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

The Modern Vernacular

There was a short lived discussion group that was a sub-set of the Trad-Arch list serv. It's purpose was to venture past the traditional and classical and propose a New Discourse into the discussion of architectural character. A discussion where the modern was not taboo. It was a contention that modern materials and methods can be adopted in a more humanistic manner. The machine aesthetic nor the tortured blobs of the current spate of starchitects need close the door on advances in technology that can lead to better and more cost effective buildings.

Indeed I find the problems of modernism related more to modernists than to their toolkit. Their intrinsically anti-social plans and shock-and-awe forms have damaged the urban fabric of cities the world over. The steel, glass, and titanium are not to blame.

The challenge is simply this: use the best construction practices of today while making benefit of the wealth of knowledge passed down through the ages. In order to accomplish this, what is required is a thorough and thoughtful analysis of traditional architecture as well as the modern.

In my investigations I've found that the power of the traditional is its continued evolution. This is expressed in the relentless refinement and adaptation of building types as well as construction details. The best solutions are kept and advanced in a pattern reminiscent of natural selection. Simplicity and an austere elegance typify these solutions. The result is a rich body of work that ranges from the humble to the grandiose, rural to urban, and yet still share a common bond of form and proportion. This scalability and adaptability has led to incredible variations within traditional architecture all across the globe. It is the limitless subtle variation possible within the traditional language which allows for each building to be unique yet identifiable as part of a place. You can see this in French villages, Italian villages, Chinese, Japanese, etc., etc., etc..

For all its power of adaptability, however, traditional architecture had a problem contending with the industrial revolution. The needs of the industrialized city were radically different and the slow pace of change which is a hallmark of the vernacular couldn't keep up. New building types came into existence and new building materials and methods were invented as well as conveying systems. The result was the creation of building forms and types that weren't previously feasible. At this point there was a break with tradition and new theories of form were investigated.

In this period of discovery and expansion there were many advancements made in the building arts. Methods of production and construction were devised that improved quality and lowered cost. Yet amidst these advances something was being lost. The language developed to take best advantage of the expressiveness of the new materials allowed for radical variation, but it wasn't as able in allowing for subtle variation. Thus that sense of individuals coming together to form a community, a sense of place, was missing. What took its place was hyper individuality that never found a way to be neighborly.

The dissatisfaction with the troublesome aesthetics of modern architecture gave rise to Post-Modernism. Though you'll be hard pressed today to find an architect willing to admit their work is PoMo, the cartoonish abstractions of classical architecture they created can be seen all over the world. The color palette and out of scale forms of PoMo architecture became faddish and its fifteen minutes of fame were soon up.

After the decline of PoMo there was a resurgence of traditional architecture that bordered on historicism, as well as a return to orthodox modernism. In the intervening years between the decline of traditional architecture and its renaissance much of the original knowledge was lost and had to be rediscovered. While there were plenty of examples to study, knowing what the details were wasn't the same as knowing why and how the details came into existence. Knowing how and why allowed for the further refinement and variation of the details. Not knowing led to a static aesthetic that merely aped previous designs. It was in the search for this knowledge that the key to unlocking a New Discourse was found.

With this key it is possible to bridge the gap between the monotone industrial aesthetic of the moderns and the limitless variation afforded through tradition. It was this missing link that led to the PoMo folly of the 1980's. Misunderstanding of traditional forms as well as a preoccupation with neoplatonism, of course. It is this key that I'll be discussing in future posts that share this title.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect

Understanding the Current Housing Market Crisis

There is plenty of positive spin out there about a tentative recovery of the real estate market. To be sure, any upward trend is better than the alternative. Yet the reports we are receiving are akin to a movie's claim to be the #1 comedy in America when it may very well be the only comedy playing. While sales may have more momentum than they've had in the last two years, the largest sector of the economy is still in the doldrums.

Just as those of us in the profession knew the bubble would burst years ago, we also know that there will be a recovery. The common theme among those that follow the industry is that once the current empty stock has been absorbed we will again be in need of new housing units. This will in turn jump start the construction industry and we'll then be on the road to recovery. Hardly. That line of thinking is based on an assumed intrinsic value of the empty units that does not exist.

Some of the currently empty units will not sell, or may sell and remain unoccupied, due to the undesirability of the unit. In the heyday of the boom market houses and condos were designed to attract investors not residents. Any number of bargain hunters have found out that the wealth of units currently on the market don't meet their needs.

The other problem is that some units that were prohibitively expensive before due to their price point remain expensive due to insurance and maintenance costs. Where the acquisition cost of the house is now within reason, the monthly maintenance fees and special taxing districts of these communities keep potential buyers at bay. The mortgage itself may be half or less than the previous owner was paying, yet the maintenance fees and assessments have gone up. So, too, have the taxes in numerous areas as the local governments need to make up for revenue shortfalls.

Appealing the taxes may buy a temporary reprieve, but sooner or later the taxes will jump up due to a change in millage, not assessed value. This will mean the amount in maintenance and taxes can equal the monthly mortgage amount. While the prospective buyer may be able to afford the mortgage, the extra $1000 per month in fees and taxes might still keep them out of the house.

For some potential owners the thought of paying that much in fees and taxes on top of the mortgage is a deal breaker, even if they can afford it. Those are sunk costs that don't yield a tax write-off since it is not mortgage interest. The potential buyers would be better off finding a location that had a better property tax policy, in a municipality that wasn't perilously in debt, and where more of their monthly housing expenditure went to build equity in their investment. If that math doesn't pencil out then they may actually come out ahead renting.

There's one last bone of contention. Some potential owners are finding out some hidden costs of owning that they didn't anticipate. Once into their new neighborhood they get nickeled and dimed to death. The Home Owners Association (HOA) is on a rampage to raise revenue and are doling out fines left and right. The HOA also may not allow them to park their work truck, boat, or RV at their house. These need to go into storage somewhere which tacks on another monthly expense that was not accounted for.

The dream home in the dream neighborhood can quickly turn into a nightmare. Some potential buyers will find this out when they review the financials and choose not to buy. Others will find out after they take ownership. The latter group may be leading the second wave of foreclosures as the hidden costs and reduced tax benefits catch up with them.

While housing prices search for their bottom don't forget the other factors affecting sales. It is very likely that a good number of the units in the five states deep in the crisis may never find a buyer for the reasons outlined above. This does not mean there is no demand for housing in those areas, just that what is on offer isn't palatable at any price.

While some may find this depressing, the writing on the wall actually shows a very strong recovery in a different direction. This is where opportunity lurks.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens: Architect