Agile Development : The Way Forward

John Anderson of Anderson Kim has a fantastic presentation on what he terms the 'dark arts' of development. In fact what he is really providing is a detailed introduction to development. He offers his opinion from a unique perspective because his practice is "design and develop" as opposed to the normative "design and build". This presentation offers great insight for architects since it reveals what motivates their clients (who are primarily developers). Yet it also proposes a different model for the practice of architecture, a model that I hope will become increasingly common.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

I Like Mike

In honor of Michael Graves' winning the Dreihaus Prize I'm publishing an essay I wrote close to seven years ago. I've made a few edits, but only for readability. 

---

I admit, it’s very hard to take the Architectural works of Michael Graves seriously. He obviously had an excruciatingly happy childhood and is otherwise far too well adjusted to channel the angst and pain of the world we live in today. As proof please note that there are no rotating knives to be found in any of his completed projects. While his disconnect with the environment around him prevents Mr. Graves from garnering the larger public commissions, it has not been as effective in squelching the rest of his surprisingly prolific practice. We must acknowledge that we will be forced to live with his legacy of buildings exhibiting an untamed joie de vivre as well as all that comfy furniture. Is there any greater tragedy in the life of an architect?

That’s the kind of attitude you are likely to encounter when talking about Michael Graves within the halls of academia. Yet, he has engaged the materials and methods of today’s construction, he has sought to address the battle between the figural and the abstract, and has done so in a way that addresses the ultimate goal of architecture: delight. Those of us pursuing a New Discourse would be wise to take a closer look at the ouvre of Mr. Graves and his partners. There are many lessons to be learned from close study of his buildings. This essay is merely a launching point, a survey history to an extent, sampling the techniques and attitudes evident in his work that would pertain directly to the New Discourse. I, for one, intend to dig deeper into Michael’s bag of tricks to see where it can lead. He has surely informed and affected the practice of classical and traditional architecture and he has within his work the power to salvage the legacy of orthodox modernism from the dustbin of history; if only his peers would take him seriously.

While many discuss the importance of building with the materials and methods that we have today, Graves is perhaps the only major player in the constellation of starchitects taking on the challenge. James Stirling and Aldo Rossi appeared to be on similar tracks, but their careers were cut short before they became completely comfortable with the new dialect being formed. These materials include: metal stud walls, drywall partitions, curtain wall glass systems, sonotube columns, expansion joints, lay-in ceiling tile, paint and veneer. Contrast this with the materials used to construct the Guggenheim in Bilbao, titanium and twisted steel columns. Contrast again with the materials used at the Getty Center, enameled metal panels and curving glass walls. These are some of the tamer concoctions offered by the top practicing architects. All the while Mr. Graves is moving forward with the basics. It’s how he puts these pieces together that makes his vision unique.

The devil is in the details, supposedly. I don’t doubt it, since this is one area the world of architecture has been struggling with since Modernism supplanted Traditional Architecture as the dominant theory. There have been many failed attempts at humanizing Modernism. Whether it be a house, office building, or factory, for some reason most modernist buildings give off an antiseptic vibe. One rarely feels welcome in these spaces. There was a disconnect between the edifice and its occupants. Slowly architects started to reintroduce traditional components into their designs, albeit in ways that were ironic. This led to some constructability issues with the materials in use at the time. Exterior Insulation Finishing Systems were all the rage, as well as Fiberglass Reinforced Cement and extruded foam shapes. These items are basically glued onto to the exterior sheathing of the building requiring special weeps, caps, control joints, and internal metal supports to perform properly. They’ll fail otherwise. Therefore, such things as properly aligning the capital of a column with the entablature gave way to waterproofing and budgetary concerns. While the PoMo stars may have successfully navigated those obstacles, the would be imitators were less successful. Since this type of construction became the dominant mode in suburbia, this failure has been spread across the land at a rapid pace. 

Graves struggled with the problem all through the 1980’s, doing his darnedest to reconcile the inherent conflicts of Post-Modernism. The formal and figural aspects of his plans and elevations of this time will be discussed later. For now let us concentrate on the materials at his disposal and how he utilized them. With steel structural systems developed nearly a century prior to the heydays of PoMo wide spans were inexpensive, they just weren’t that inviting. Tall, narrow openings relate better to the human form, but require a fair amount of unneeded faux columns in order to look correct within a long span structure. Graves decided to go neutral, he adopted the circle and the square. Neither shape is wider than it is narrow or narrower than it is wide. Through these shapes he has been able to regularize his plans, elevations, and window openings. It can be argued that he still needs faux columns to reconcile his facades. The facades can also be read as a curtain wall skin over top the structure, however, since Michael cleverly shows off what is structure and what is not.

Let us take a look at the other elements such as windows, columns and beams. Again, the windows tend towards the square. In a more traditional architecture the window surrounds would showcase their structural nature. In the case of a stone lintel, the stone would be sized and shaped to support the load of the masonry above. In the case of a wood structure, the head casing would be sized to cover the header. Thus the beam has prominence and the loads are visually supported down to the ground. In the case of Michael Graves, the header is not performing a structural role, nor is it covering a header that would have been there otherwise. Therefore he thins out the header leaving the jamb casing to be the wider component. Since this happens over a square window the visual effect is legible. It is seen as consistent with the traditional notion that a window must have some form of casing to be weatherproof and with the modern notion of showcasing the structure and being honest with the nature of the materials. As we will see, the details and methodology behind these moves are internally consistent.

Another example is how Graves uses the column. He has experimented with his own variant of the Doric order, steel tube columns, and Dwarves. Michael has shied away from using the Doric in his most recent works and has not found cause to bring back the Dwarves as of yet. His work with the steel tube columns is, however, perhaps the most germane to the New Discourse. One may choose to disagree with Herseth’s assertion that the original Doric columns were representations of a vanquished army forced to bear the load of the monument to their victors, yet these columns definitely show that they are straining against the force of gravity. In contrast Michael’s recent work showcases the narrow round column as pushing upward, not bound by the ground nor in defiance. This, again, is consistent with the notion of being true to the materials and still allowing a visual connection of the structure and how it transfers its weight to the ground. Of course, these columns have no capital and no base which leads to the question of the entablature.

The hardest detail in traditional architecture to get right these days is the column to entablature relationship. It is rarely seen executed properly today, and in those rare instances you can bet it was thanks to the architect being on hand watching closely. Yet even properly executed entablature to column assemblies aren’t entirely weatherproof when using certain materials. In order to keep costs down hollow fiberglass columns have been used in lieu of stone. This requires the top be enclosed somehow, with the most common (and most incorrect) method being to line the edge of the capital with the entablature above. Sometimes the entablature is made to be as wide as the column capital, other times the entablature sits on the outside edge of the capital thereby leaving it visually unsupported. By eliminating the column capital Graves has eliminated this issue. The column sits either centered under the wider entablature or there is no entablature at all and the columns are just pushing up against the plane of the roof structure. In the instances of the latter the roof structure usually takes on a thickness appropriate to what the corresponding entablature would have been according to the system of proportion according to Graves. There is still a rational relationship, the columns are still straight up and down, the weight is still carried to the ground. All the while he is using parts from the modernist toolkit while maintaining respect for architectural traditions.

The skinning of the structure is what ties the various components together into a cohesive whole. He uses curtain walls of glass with squares and rectangles to remain neutral. Control joints in the exterior wall system are laid out in running bond patterns evoking the memory of masonry construction as opposed to the more common cacophony of intersecting grids preferred by most commercial architects. Considering stone temples contain details reminiscent of their wood predecessors this is a legitimate solution to a common problem. Again giving his work a legibility and connection to tradition not seen in the work of other moderns.

All of this is then given a coat of paint from the Tuscan palette that has become the hallmark of his work. Instead of a monotone scheme he uses a wide range of color. In lieu of relying solely on shadow he uses color as an accent. Perhaps drawing inspiration from the original colors of the Greek and Roman temples Michael has humanized his buildings by offering something more than just stainless steel and glass. This is a tremendous achievement in the realm of modernism since the clinical steel and glass structure has been by a most dehumanizing aesthetic.

Perhaps, his work is just a variation on the international style, or more aptly the components of that style. He then rejects the placeless austere boxes and intersecting planes that have been its hallmark. He rejects the ambiguous in favor of the figural, he chooses legibility over abstraction. He manages to avoid the gainsay of everything classical that has passed as modern theory the past few decades. He uses techniques from the Modern toolkit where appropriate, or to fit the site, or to accommodate the client, or just for fun. However, I think Graves has created his own order, not just a style.

Congratulations!

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

The Ballad of Doris & Harry

When I was a child my parents would take us kids up to Vero Beach to visit their friends Doris & Harry. The Petersons were snow birds that would escape the Chicago winters by migrating to Florida after the leaves turned. They had quite a nice little setup in the Sunshine State that by today's standards would be considered a green community. All the residents of this eco-village rode around in electric vehicles, there were plenty of activities within walking distance, all the homes were single level yet there was high density, and the structure of all these homes were made of recyclable materials. This is the future we are striving for today and these pioneers of green had already achieved it in 1976 down in Vero Beach, Florida.

If you're laughing you probably already know the punchline, but you also know I'm telling the absolute truth. Or, considering the habits of our dear friends, I should say Absolut truth. The morning visits always started with a little hair of the dog for the grownups and some apple pie for my sister and me.

For those of you wondering where this hippie commune is and whatever became of it I hate to disappoint you but it was a campground. Doris & Harry had a motorhome, a classic Georgie Boy Cruise Air, they would keep in Florida as their vacation home. They'd put the RV and golf cart in storage when they went back up north thus keeping their expenses low. The campground catered to snowbirds and had a clubhouse with pool and exercise facility, multi-purpose room for parties and games of bridge, as well as a convenience store. Not every daily need was within the commune, but there was enough. What happens in places like these is that a support network forms and as part time residents become permanent residents they support and help each other. There would be scheduled shopping trips and outings for those who needed assistance.

The RVs were made of aluminum or wood frame with aluminum siding. Fiberglass wasn't as prevalent back then. The steel chassis could also be reclaimed and you could always sell your wheels and axles. I seriously doubt the carpet or cabinetry was made of recyclable materials, but they had a pretty good head start on the rest of us. Everybody had a car but preferred to ride around in their golf carts. They were more fun and granted the right-of-way as a courtesy, not because of bylaw. This was clean living.

The materials and technologies have not gone away. The planning techniques and marketing strategies are still valid. If anything there have been marked improvements in all the thinking that afforded Doris & Harry a relaxing, active, and luxurious lifestyle. Their campsite was just a scaled down sideyard lot, their porch was a screen room, their town center was the clubhouse.
Today we're told that manufactured housing will lead to sustainable homes at affordable prices.
It already has.

Today we're told that battery powered vehicles will be used for short trips close to home.
They certainly did.

Today we're told that walkable communities are the wave of the future.
They certainly were.

So let's raise a glass, preferably a Bloody Mary, and toast these pioneers of green.

I miss Doris & Harry, may they rest in peace.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Teratology :: The Sliding Scale of Taste

I grew up in south Florida in the 1970's. Many of the "established" neighborhoods near me were built in the 1950's and the commercial buildings were textbook examples of modernist design. While the residential neighborhoods were maintained and remain desirable locations, the commercial structures fell into disrepair and became blight. These structures were either demolished or abandoned by the mid '80's and those that remained served as totems reminding others of the failed experiment that had taken place not that long ago.

These empty structures also dragged down the surrounding properties. They were quirky, eye catching designs when first built, but weren't suited to adaptation due to their cartoonish forms. This meant the only value for the property was land value and the existing structure would have to be torn down in order to be useful. For the next several decades these ruins rotted in the sunlight waiting for the day they would meet the wrecking ball.

Whereas I grew up in a garden of modernist eyesores whose fifteen minutes faded fast, some of my friends grew up in traditional towns in the northeast or midwest that more closely mirrored the visions of America seen in movies and on TV. I loved the neighborly feel, sense of place, and connectedness that their hometowns offered. Yet they felt repressed claiming that an overbearing orthodoxy and closed cramped spaces that didn't suit their needs. They instead loved the wide open architecture and indoor/outdoor living of my home town. A classic case of the grass being greener on the other side.

While I was intrigued by modernism and the post moderns while I was in college, I returned to more traditional forms in my practice. Perhaps witnessing the failure of so many modern designs affected my subconscious. I did have a tendency to prefer clean and simple designs over the ornate. Don't get me wrong, I quite like the dark, wood paneled parlor with the proper treatment of the wall as an order. Few spaces are more satisfying for quiet contemplation with a single malt and a fine cigar. Yet there is a part of my youth that remains which also enjoys those bright spaces and indoor/outdoor living with clean simple lines. 

I had an opportunity to work in some fairly interesting geographies so far which have provided ample opportunity to test different design directions. Some of these places were stuck in the 1950's and will soon be dealing with the same problem of useless failed structures just like we Floridians did back in the '80's. Others, not understanding the true value proposition of traditional design, have instead decided to sell nostalgia and have completely alienated an entire generation of home buyers by giving them the small cramped spaces they hated as children.

In my travels, however, I did happen to see a glimmer of hope. I've seen many Classically trained architects opening up their floor plans and eliminating muntins providing a truly beautiful modern aesthetic enhanced greatly by their deft use of proportion and refined detailing. I have also noticed many modern architects moving away from the post structuralist nightmares towards more formal plans with color and texture selections that create a warm, inviting interior.

The style wars will rage on, but in the not too distant future I think we will see an architecture that can be thoroughly modern and still sit comfortably next to its neighbors. I've been working on one such design for my family and will be taking the wraps of it hopefully soon.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Keeping The Vision :: The Architect's Lament

Many of us architects chose the profession because we wanted to participate in the act of creation, to give shape and form to the world, to develop our own vision to see it built, and to leave our mark on the world that will outlive us. At least those were the motives initially, sometimes followed by the impulse to develop our own style and create something new and fresh that has never been seen before. As we mature some of us change our vision and turn away from the myopic tendency to see the world as a blank canvas for experimentation and instead become more concerned about the impact we're having on the world. Unfortunately maturity has become a rare quality in an architect.

The devastating affects whimsy and exuberance have had on the functioning of society and world economies has led some of the late bloomers to an epiphany. They have begun to see the interrelationships that abound in our built environment connecting landscape design, urban design, and architecture that can work in harmony to create a better world. These architectural Peter Pans have decided to grow up after spending the last couple decades in Neverland.

At present, and rather unfortunately, this awakening has not led to a deeper study of human settlement, but yet another radical rethink attempting to reinvent the wheel. Caught in the crosshairs of this awakening are the municipal leaders, engineers, and banks who have borne the brunt of disdain for the failed visions of the recent past. These failures are littering the landscape with empty shells waiting in vain for the market that was never there. Perhaps it took this failure on a global scale for the taste makers in the profession to take a look around and see what they had wrought. I feel I'm being too charitable in that assessment because the view from inside the machine was one of moving full speed ahead fully aware of impending collapse but trying to squeeze out every last drop until the party was officially over. Smart Growth was a hard sell in those frothy times and many projects were lost to those promising more, more, more.

Without changing the message I changed my delivery to see if there was a path through the cacophony of shapes and surfaces to achieve a lasting and resilient urbanism that could meet the fashion of the day but offer the flexibility and common sense to stand the test of time. The deciding factor was always the vision and intention of the developer who was placed in the unenviable position of trying to make everybody happy. The municipality, the banker, the community, the politicians, the competition, the customers, the environmentalists, the engineers, and sometimes the designers all had to be in alignment for the project to be realized. Working within that framework I attempted to show how an integrated approach based on the principles of proper urban design could address the concerns of the disparate parties and still afford the flexibility to change course if, as happened, the market goes in a different direction.

It turns out that the message wasn't the problem, nor was the delivery. We were simply sidelined by momentum and the world of development was too busy to stop and take a look around. It required a meltdown to reach the awakening, as is always the case. Now that those responsible for designing the meltdown are awake hopefully they'll take some time to read about what actually works before going back to dreamland and concocting another catastrophe.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

STAR Tour Sizzle Reel!

STAR_Tour_3m.m4v Watch on Posterous

This is the first pass at the promotional video for the tour. This first video introduces the inspiration for the tour which is to shine a light on great examples of American Architecutre and Urbanism. The next video will be about what we hope to accomplish on this tour. Last, but not least, we'll introduce the EM-50 and why we chose that vehicle. Please let me know what you think. We're hoping to publish this on Kickstarter soon!

 

 

Posted via email from STAR Tour

STAR Tour Sizzle Reel!

STAR_Tour_3m.m4v Watch on Posterous

This is the first pass at the promotional video for the tour. This first video introduces the inspiration for the tour which is to shine a light on great examples of American Architecutre and Urbanism. The next video will be about what we hope to accomplish on this tour. Last, but not least, we'll introduce the EM-50 and why we chose that vehicle. Please let me know what you think. We're hoping to publish this on Kickstarter soon!

 

 

Posted via email from STAR Tour

Clean Tech Revolution?

America's small towns could benefit the most from new Clean Tech solutions. For some reason that doesn't appear to be on the RADAR of these companies. Instead of taking a back seat and hoping they take notice, we're going to be in the driver's seat and show them what they're missing. Read more at the COECO Ventures blog.

Posted via email from STAR Tour

Agile Development : Welcome to Hackerton

There is an open source initiative called Form Follows Finance over at the Incremental Sprawl Repair blog. They came up with a mixed-use building prototype that would be ideal for creating a Startup Village. There is commercial space, live-work space, and apartments. The total mix of units would be guided by the market and determined by the developer. There is flexibility in the form so the size and scale of the building can be adjusted to suit infill applications. When you take a look at the financials, available at ISR, it's possible to get the first building out of the ground quite reasonably.

I took the initial prototype and imagined a SoBe variant designed for a Venture Capital firm. The firm will use the village to provide office space and apartments for the startups they're incubating instead of just providing more cash. This can hopefully further reduce the amount of cash required to get a new company off the ground.

Not only will this help control costs, as rents in startup hubs seem to be recession proof, but should also provide a healthy return on investment if developed properly. Building incrementally also allows the project to be sold-off incrementally, building by building, so the investment firm has a viable exit that avoids the all-or-nothing mistake of the ghost tower developers.

Perhaps the most important benefit, however, is the building of a community of entrepreneurs. Coffee shops, corner stores, and other uses can be accommodated in this unit type which allows for the creation of a true place that serves the needs of the residents. By creating a walkable environment that allows and encourages small businesses to hang out their shingle the opportunity for serendipitous meetings increases exponentially. There can be a free exchange of ideas, a place where founders can meet, and places to relax and decompress.

Many tech companies have adopted a campus model to allow for this type of interaction to take place. In their experience the University was the only place where they found this dynamic to exist and replicated it for their use. Yet another model, one that also has less of an impact on the environment, can be found in places like the Left Bank of Paris, SoHo in London, and the Village in New York. There are countless other examples, but one that most people are aware of is South Beach in lovely Miami, Florida. There is a tremendous amount of amazing funky businesses in close proximity to world class shopping, housing that ranges from small efficiencies to waterfront mansions, and some of the best restaurants in the world. Oh yeah, there are also bountiful nightlife options.

Of course, I remember South Beach as a derelict no-mans-land from back when I was an undergrad. If not for the artists who made their home on Lincoln Road it might very well still be like that today. However, they found cheap space to start their studio in close proximity to housing options they could afford. That's right, South Beach was very affordable back in the early '90's. Many of the residents got around town on their bikes thanks to the compact urbanism in which they lived. This obviated the expense of a car for many. From these not quite humble beginnings South Beach became, well, South Beach. 

Those cities looking to jumpstart such a Creative Class rebirth within their borders would do well to replicate those conditions. The Form Follows Finance unit type developed by the ISR is a great place to start.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : Welcome to Hackerton

There is an open source initiative called Form Follows Finance over at the Incremental Sprawl Repair blog. They came up with a mixed-use building prototype that would be ideal for creating a Startup Village. There is commercial space, live-work space, and apartments. The total mix of units would be guided by the market and determined by the developer. There is flexibility in the form so the size and scale of the building can be adjusted to suit infill applications. When you take a look at the financials, available at ISR, it's possible to get the first building out of the ground quite reasonably.

I took the initial prototype and imagined a SoBe variant designed for a Venture Capital firm. The firm will use the village to provide office space and apartments for the startups they're incubating instead of just providing more cash. This can hopefully further reduce the amount of cash required to get a new company off the ground.

Not only will this help control costs, as rents in startup hubs seem to be recession proof, but should also provide a healthy return on investment if developed properly. Building incrementally also allows the project to be sold-off incrementally, building by building, so the investment firm has a viable exit that avoids the all-or-nothing mistake of the ghost tower developers.

Perhaps the most important benefit, however, is the building of a community of entrepreneurs. Coffee shops, corner stores, and other uses can be accommodated in this unit type which allows for the creation of a true place that serves the needs of the residents. By creating a walkable environment that allows and encourages small businesses to hang out their shingle the opportunity for serendipitous meetings increases exponentially. There can be a free exchange of ideas, a place where founders can meet, and places to relax and decompress.

Many tech companies have adopted a campus model to allow for this type of interaction to take place. In their experience the University was the only place where they found this dynamic to exist and replicated it for their use. Yet another model, one that also has less of an impact on the environment, can be found in places like the Left Bank of Paris, SoHo in London, and the Village in New York. There are countless other examples, but one that most people are aware of is South Beach in lovely Miami, Florida. There is a tremendous amount of amazing funky businesses in close proximity to world class shopping, housing that ranges from small efficiencies to waterfront mansions, and some of the best restaurants in the world. Oh yeah, there are also bountiful nightlife options.

Of course, I remember South Beach as a derelict no-mans-land from back when I was an undergrad. If not for the artists who made their home on Lincoln Road it might very well still be like that today. However, they found cheap space to start their studio in close proximity to housing options they could afford. That's right, South Beach was very affordable back in the early '90's. Many of the residents got around town on their bikes thanks to the compact urbanism in which they lived. This obviated the expense of a car for many. From these not quite humble beginnings South Beach became, well, South Beach. 

Those cities looking to jumpstart such a Creative Class rebirth within their borders would do well to replicate those conditions. The Form Follows Finance unit type developed by the ISR is a great place to start.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Tiny House Variations

See the full gallery on Posterous

This is a cross post from my blog, but I've added a couple 3D images to help illustrate the concept.

I drew up this house inspired by the shotgun houses of New Orleans. What I was hoping to do was provide the livability expected in an up market home in a smaller, more affordable package. We have grown accustomed to each kid having their own bedroom, their own bathroom, the master bedroom having a private bath, and having a powder room so everybody's own room remains private. It's practically an apartment building with everybody having their own space. Since the bathrooms and kitchens are the most expensive rooms in the house this tacking on of extra bathrooms is quite expensive.

My solution is a 3 bedroom 2 bath house that lives large. The master bathroom can be used as a powder room by providing another door to the master bedroom so it can remain private during the day. I also provided a split bath upstairs with toilet and vanity on one side and shower room on the other. This allows one kid to be taking a shower while the other is brushing their teeth without increasing fixture count. At the top of the stairs between the bedrooms is a desk to expand the space available. For those families that want their kids to share a computer this is the perfect spot. This would have saved my parents a lot of grief.

The service core including the kitchen has 8' ceilings while the living room and master bedroom have 12' ceilings. This keeps the number of stairs down, reduces the amount of construction materials, and provides gracious ceilings where they are most appreciated. If a larger living room is desired, or a proper dining room required, the plan can be easily expanded by elongating the front room. This house can also be expanded by adding a bay window to the eat-in kitchen creating a larger dining space and replacing the closets in the hall with a bay window creating a small home office.

The central core can be standardized, even premanufactured off site, and contains all the plumbing. The master bedroom and living room, shown in the lovely translucent green in the 3D model, can be adjusted to the needs of the homeowner. Add the porch on the front and you have the completed house. I also have a variant where the core is rotated to face the street which can grow to the front and back, as well. I'll save that for another post.

I hope you like it.

 

Posted via email from I S R Incremental Sprawl Repair Working Group

Small House Sunday

This house was a challenge. It was designed with the other template homes originally for The Waters in Alabama. This design address one of my biggest pet peeves; that many home plans take up the entire lot and leave next to no private outside space. It's what I call the 'Cat In The Bed Syndrome'. There's plenty of room on the lot to fit everything needed to hit the 'sweet spot', but many designs just sit on the lot like a cat in the bed, right in the middle leaving no room for anything else.

So what I did here was make sure the front porch allowed the house to be placed right up to the build-to line. This maximizes the amount of porch area without pushing the main house back which would waste precious building area. It seems simple, but I was surprised how often this happened in the real world. The next step was to keep the house from getting too long because that would eat up all the back yard space, or yield an awkwardly shaped space that is mostly unusable. As a dog lover and grill master I want enough space in the back yard to run around with the pooch and send up some smoke signals with the Weber. I don't need a lot of space, but a postage stamp sized bit of green simply isn't enough.

With those parameters set I then went after the sweet spot in the market. Every house had to have three bedrooms, two baths, powder room, large kitchen, and the holy grail; a five fixture master bath. As a template home I put in some conversation starters in the plan. You quickly learn that the architect is always wrong when it comes to certain things, like washer dryer location. If you put them upstairs it's wrong because the work at home family doesn't want to climb the stairs all day long to do the laundry. If you put them downstairs it's wrong because now all the laundry generated upstairs has to be dragged downstairs. I had the upstairs laundry before and can say without question I prefer it downstairs, but in this plan I've made space for either location. There is my preferred under-counter washer and dryer in the kitchen which affords extra counter space and there is also a closet upstairs which can fit a full sized stacked washer and dryer. 

In this version of the plan I have a double porch. The porch access is at the top of the stairs so everybody can enjoy the space. I also left enough room for a mini-bar up there. The upper porch is a great place for sundowners and I'd hate to have to head downstairs for a refill. Also upstairs there is room in the central hall for a computer desk which can help stave off fights between siblings and frees up space in the kids rooms for other things, like beds. If I were a kid these days I'd want one of those loft beds with a desk below, but that's just me.

I have a couple different kitchen layouts for this plan, but I've shown the one I would build for myself. Lots of counter space, vegetable sink on the island, built-in double door refrigerator near the vegetable sink that has a clear circulation path to the living room. I don't want rowdy sports fans to disrupt the action in the kitchen when grabbing another beverage from the fridge during commercial breaks. There's a walk-through pantry between the kitchen and the dining room that provides extra storage and a place to display the china and keep the flatware.

I've shown a back porch off the living room which I would have screened. Certain times during the year the front porch will be the place to be, other times it might be cooler on the back porch. Having a screened area back there provides a private space for the family free of mosquitos and other pests. This can be as big or as small as needed, but I've drawn it here as a place for mom and dad to stay in the shade and keep an eye on things while the kids and dogs play in the back yard.

Perhaps the hardest part of this design was creating a plan with this much livability while providing a attractive and thrifty façade. Take a look at the window arrangements and alignments. It all works and there are no fake shutters or extra windows to buy to make it work. There are still opportunities to save money, as well as the option of adding more windows if desired. The intent, however, is to provide a design that meets all the demands of a modern family in a smaller envelope without adding expense needlessly. Hopefully the money saved can be put to better use. Maybe some better quality finishes, or some additional detail on the exterior. 

I hope you like it.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Small House Sunday

This house was a challenge. It was designed with the other template homes originally for The Waters in Alabama. This design address one of my biggest pet peeves; that many home plans take up the entire lot and leave next to no private outside space. It's what I call the 'Cat In The Bed Syndrome'. There's plenty of room on the lot to fit everything needed to hit the 'sweet spot', but many designs just sit on the lot like a cat in the bed, right in the middle leaving no room for anything else.

So what I did here was make sure the front porch allowed the house to be placed right up to the build-to line. This maximizes the amount of porch area without pushing the main house back which would waste precious building area. It seems simple, but I was surprised how often this happened in the real world. The next step was to keep the house from getting too long because that would eat up all the back yard space, or yield an awkwardly shaped space that is mostly unusable. As a dog lover and grill master I want enough space in the back yard to run around with the pooch and send up some smoke signals with the Weber. I don't need a lot of space, but a postage stamp sized bit of green simply isn't enough.

With those parameters set I then went after the sweet spot in the market. Every house had to have three bedrooms, two baths, powder room, large kitchen, and the holy grail; a five fixture master bath. As a template home I put in some conversation starters in the plan. You quickly learn that the architect is always wrong when it comes to certain things, like washer dryer location. If you put them upstairs it's wrong because the work at home family doesn't want to climb the stairs all day long to do the laundry. If you put them downstairs it's wrong because now all the laundry generated upstairs has to be dragged downstairs. I had the upstairs laundry before and can say without question I prefer it downstairs, but in this plan I've made space for either location. There is my preferred under-counter washer and dryer in the kitchen which affords extra counter space and there is also a closet upstairs which can fit a full sized stacked washer and dryer. 

In this version of the plan I have a double porch. The porch access is at the top of the stairs so everybody can enjoy the space. I also left enough room for a mini-bar up there. The upper porch is a great place for sundowners and I'd hate to have to head downstairs for a refill. Also upstairs there is room in the central hall for a computer desk which can help stave off fights between siblings and frees up space in the kids rooms for other things, like beds. If I were a kid these days I'd want one of those loft beds with a desk below, but that's just me.

I have a couple different kitchen layouts for this plan, but I've shown the one I would build for myself. Lots of counter space, vegetable sink on the island, built-in double door refrigerator near the vegetable sink that has a clear circulation path to the living room. I don't want rowdy sports fans to disrupt the action in the kitchen when grabbing another beverage from the fridge during commercial breaks. There's a walk-through pantry between the kitchen and the dining room that provides extra storage and a place to display the china and keep the flatware.

I've shown a back porch off the living room which I would have screened. Certain times during the year the front porch will be the place to be, other times it might be cooler on the back porch. Having a screened area back there provides a private space for the family free of mosquitos and other pests. This can be as big or as small as needed, but I've drawn it here as a place for mom and dad to stay in the shade and keep an eye on things while the kids and dogs play in the back yard.

Perhaps the hardest part of this design was creating a plan with this much livability while providing a attractive and thrifty façade. Take a look at the window arrangements and alignments. It all works and there are no fake shutters or extra windows to buy to make it work. There are still opportunities to save money, as well as the option of adding more windows if desired. The intent, however, is to provide a design that meets all the demands of a modern family in a smaller envelope without adding expense needlessly. Hopefully the money saved can be put to better use. Maybe some better quality finishes, or some additional detail on the exterior. 

I hope you like it.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Tiny House Tuesday

This is another house I designed a couple years back. A couple Classical Vernacular versions of this were built at The Waters in Alabama. These two elevations are the French Colonial and Victorian Vernacular versions of the same plan. These plans were part of the original template homes that were meant to fit the various lot conditions typical of a Traditional Neighborhood Development. What we were trying to do was create a main building that could actually act as a main building. What I mean is that the home could be built without the back building and still work as a complete home. All the template homes were designed with a back building and out building that allowed for growth over time. In doing so they weren't breaking new ground, only following the guidance inherent in the Smart Code.

This particular house incorporates some of the Build Small, Live Large concepts I used in the Montgomery Living Idea House. The bay window on the second level provides a sitting area for the master bedroom, and there is room at the top of the stairs for a shared computer desk. How these spaces are used is ultimately up to the homeowner, but within a small footprint you have a house with a large island kitchen with window seat, generous living area, two bedrooms, special area for a home office, and separate sitting room off the master.
My intent would be to cozy a dining room table behind the couch and expand the table on those very rare occasions I need more than four chairs. That's just my preference. For those that prefer a more formal dining experience there are many options. You can expand the envelope by enclosing part of the front porch, you can build the knuckle that extends into the back yard, or you can simply rework the kitchen to be more compact and not have to build any more square footage. Part of the reason there is so much counter space is because in the version I dreamed up for myself I have an under-counter washer and dryer in the kitchen. I had that when I lived in Glasgow and loved it, saw them in Australia, too. These under counter units, nearly two decades later, are now available here in the US and - get this - provide efficient cleaning and a place to fold laundry. What a coup.

Enjoy.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Tiny House Tuesday

This is another house I designed a couple years back. A couple Classical Vernacular versions of this were built at The Waters in Alabama. These two elevations are the French Colonial and Victorian Vernacular versions of the same plan. These plans were part of the original template homes that were meant to fit the various lot conditions typical of a Traditional Neighborhood Development. What we were trying to do was create a main building that could actually act as a main building. What I mean is that the home could be built without the back building and still work as a complete home. All the template homes were designed with a back building and out building that allowed for growth over time. In doing so they weren't breaking new ground, only following the guidance inherent in the Smart Code.

This particular house incorporates some of the Build Small, Live Large concepts I used in the Montgomery Living Idea House. The bay window on the second level provides a sitting area for the master bedroom, and there is room at the top of the stairs for a shared computer desk. How these spaces are used is ultimately up to the homeowner, but within a small footprint you have a house with a large island kitchen with window seat, generous living area, two bedrooms, special area for a home office, and separate sitting room off the master.
My intent would be to cozy a dining room table behind the couch and expand the table on those very rare occasions I need more than four chairs. That's just my preference. For those that prefer a more formal dining experience there are many options. You can expand the envelope by enclosing part of the front porch, you can build the knuckle that extends into the back yard, or you can simply rework the kitchen to be more compact and not have to build any more square footage. Part of the reason there is so much counter space is because in the version I dreamed up for myself I have an under-counter washer and dryer in the kitchen. I had that when I lived in Glasgow and loved it, saw them in Australia, too. These under counter units, nearly two decades later, are now available here in the US and - get this - provide efficient cleaning and a place to fold laundry. What a coup.

Enjoy.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

EX, DX, LX : The Tyranny of the Headboard

See the full gallery on Posterous

Over the years I have developed an increasing distaste for built-in closets. I much prefer an elegant piece of furniture which can be moved to allow for many different furnishing options in the space. I came to this conclusion after living in a modest house in Montgomery, Alabama. I had just moved to Alabama from St. Louis and was changing gears going from a downtown loft to a single family house.

The closets in the house were small, but the rooms were large. This was a three bedroom house of only 1,200 square feet, but it seemed much larger. There was no family room, no den, no five fixture bathrooms, no powder room, and no walk in closets. The living room wasn't designed for a TV to occupy an entire wall and there were no built-in cabinets. Windows were plentiful and the natural light they provided was much appreciated. Through the magic of curtains and blinds I was able to modulate the amount of light and ensure privacy when desired.

One peculiarity was that there was no bed wall in any of the bedrooms. The trade-off for all that natural light and ventilation was that my headboard would obscure one of the windows. Certainly this was an oversight in the design. Yet, there I was, faced with a choice. Which window would I have to put my bed against. I picked a window, and lo, nothing happened. I was still able to use the blinds, enjoyed cross ventilation, loved the natural light, and life went on.

The small closets and omission of unused and unwanted rooms yielded extra space to the living areas. There are so many clever and attractive storage solutions on the market today that I'd rather have the extra space and the flexibility it allows.

Once I was liberated from the tyranny of the headboard and ubiquity of closets I started noticing their contribution to bloating home design and ratcheting up costs. I visited a friend in Toronto and noticed his bed was against a window. When I asked about it he said it was fine as long as they closed the curtains at night during the winter. I visited another friend who was suffering from the same issue, the only difference was they had a proper bed wall. When I pointed out the error of their bedroom arrangement they kindly suggested that the house wasn't designed properly and they preferred to wake up in the morning facing the sun. Fair enough. It was comforting to know I wasn't the only transgressor.

The more attention I gave this topic the more of a disconnect I found between how homes were designed and how people used the spaces in their homes. In larger homes this was a non-issue, there was always plenty of room and a large enough budget to expand the building envelope and add windows or false shutters to balance the design. When spaces and budgets get tight, on the other hand, this need for more can ruin the design. Further, it misses the point of the small house. The idea is to remove what is unnecessary and simplify as much as practical, just enough and no more. Sure, you can add a little here and there, but if you don't need it or want it you shouldn't have to pay for it.

I applied this ethos to my designs and found that it intersected nicely with the EX, DX, LX principles. Build what you need, but design in such a way that allows for growth in multiple directions. The great benefit of this is that you are not locked in and if your needs change the house can adapt and grow as necessary.

This awakening has forever changed how I approach the design of houses, especially my own house. It has also led me to designing my own furniture as I've become dissatisfied with what is currently available on the market. I've become reacquainted with the wisdom of Mackintosh in that regard. Not everything needs to be solved with architecture.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

EX, DX, LX : The Tyranny of the Headboard

See the full gallery on Posterous

Over the years I have developed an increasing distaste for built-in closets. I much prefer an elegant piece of furniture which can be moved to allow for many different furnishing options in the space. I came to this conclusion after living in a modest house in Montgomery, Alabama. I had just moved to Alabama from St. Louis and was changing gears going from a downtown loft to a single family house.

The closets in the house were small, but the rooms were large. This was a three bedroom house of only 1,200 square feet, but it seemed much larger. There was no family room, no den, no five fixture bathrooms, no powder room, and no walk in closets. The living room wasn't designed for a TV to occupy an entire wall and there were no built-in cabinets. Windows were plentiful and the natural light they provided was much appreciated. Through the magic of curtains and blinds I was able to modulate the amount of light and ensure privacy when desired.

One peculiarity was that there was no bed wall in any of the bedrooms. The trade-off for all that natural light and ventilation was that my headboard would obscure one of the windows. Certainly this was an oversight in the design. Yet, there I was, faced with a choice. Which window would I have to put my bed against. I picked a window, and lo, nothing happened. I was still able to use the blinds, enjoyed cross ventilation, loved the natural light, and life went on.

The small closets and omission of unused and unwanted rooms yielded extra space to the living areas. There are so many clever and attractive storage solutions on the market today that I'd rather have the extra space and the flexibility it allows.

Once I was liberated from the tyranny of the headboard and ubiquity of closets I started noticing their contribution to bloating home design and ratcheting up costs. I visited a friend in Toronto and noticed his bed was against a window. When I asked about it he said it was fine as long as they closed the curtains at night during the winter. I visited another friend who was suffering from the same issue, the only difference was they had a proper bed wall. When I pointed out the error of their bedroom arrangement they kindly suggested that the house wasn't designed properly and they preferred to wake up in the morning facing the sun. Fair enough. It was comforting to know I wasn't the only transgressor.

The more attention I gave this topic the more of a disconnect I found between how homes were designed and how people used the spaces in their homes. In larger homes this was a non-issue, there was always plenty of room and a large enough budget to expand the building envelope and add windows or false shutters to balance the design. When spaces and budgets get tight, on the other hand, this need for more can ruin the design. Further, it misses the point of the small house. The idea is to remove what is unnecessary and simplify as much as practical, just enough and no more. Sure, you can add a little here and there, but if you don't need it or want it you shouldn't have to pay for it.

I applied this ethos to my designs and found that it intersected nicely with the EX, DX, LX principles. Build what you need, but design in such a way that allows for growth in multiple directions. The great benefit of this is that you are not locked in and if your needs change the house can adapt and grow as necessary.

This awakening has forever changed how I approach the design of houses, especially my own house. It has also led me to designing my own furniture as I've become dissatisfied with what is currently available on the market. I've become reacquainted with the wisdom of Mackintosh in that regard. Not everything needs to be solved with architecture.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Tiny House Thursday

I drew up this house inspired by the shotgun houses of New Orleans. What I was hoping to do was provide the livability expected in an up market home in a smaller, more affordable package. We have grown accustomed to each kid having their own bedroom, their own bathroom, the master bedroom having a private bath, and having a powder room so everybody's own room remains private. It's practically an apartment building with everybody having their own space. Since the bathrooms and kitchens are the most expensive rooms in the house this tacking on of extra bathrooms is quite expensive.

My solution is a 3 bedroom 2 bath house that lives large. The master bathroom can be used as a powder room by providing another door to the master bedroom so it can remain private during the day. I also provided a split bath upstairs with toilet and vanity on one side and shower room on the other. This allows one kid to be taking a shower while the other is brushing their teeth without increasing fixture count. At the top of the stairs between the bedrooms is a desk to expand the space available. For those families that want their kids to share a computer this is the perfect spot. This would have saved my parents a lot of grief.

The service core including the kitchen has 8' ceilings while the living room and master bedroom have 12' ceilings. 
This keeps the number of stairs down, reduces the amount of construction materials, and provides gracious ceilings where they are most appreciated. If a larger living room is desired, or a proper dining room required, the plan can be easily expanded by elongating the front room. This house can also be expanded by adding a bay window to the eat-in kitchen creating a larger dining space and replacing the closets in the hall with a bay window creating a small home office.

I hope you like it.

Also, check out Eric Moser's Facebook page for some great little houses. They are responding to the New Normal and provide what I think is a great amount of livability.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Tiny House Thursday

I drew up this house inspired by the shotgun houses of New Orleans. What I was hoping to do was provide the livability expected in an up market home in a smaller, more affordable package. We have grown accustomed to each kid having their own bedroom, their own bathroom, the master bedroom having a private bath, and having a powder room so everybody's own room remains private. It's practically an apartment building with everybody having their own space. Since the bathrooms and kitchens are the most expensive rooms in the house this tacking on of extra bathrooms is quite expensive.

My solution is a 3 bedroom 2 bath house that lives large. The master bathroom can be used as a powder room by providing another door to the master bedroom so it can remain private during the day. I also provided a split bath upstairs with toilet and vanity on one side and shower room on the other. This allows one kid to be taking a shower while the other is brushing their teeth without increasing fixture count. At the top of the stairs between the bedrooms is a desk to expand the space available. For those families that want their kids to share a computer this is the perfect spot. This would have saved my parents a lot of grief.

The service core including the kitchen has 8' ceilings while the living room and master bedroom have 12' ceilings. 
This keeps the number of stairs down, reduces the amount of construction materials, and provides gracious ceilings where they are most appreciated. If a larger living room is desired, or a proper dining room required, the plan can be easily expanded by elongating the front room. This house can also be expanded by adding a bay window to the eat-in kitchen creating a larger dining space and replacing the closets in the hall with a bay window creating a small home office.

I hope you like it.

Also, check out Eric Moser's Facebook page for some great little houses. They are responding to the New Normal and provide what I think is a great amount of livability.

See the full gallery on Posterous

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Keeping The Vision : Through Thick and Thin

We all know that walls have varying thicknesses. The evidence is all around us. Concrete walls, brick walls, framed walls, chases and wet walls each have their own thickness depending on what function they're serving. When reviewing plans it's important to verify that these needs have been accounted for.

This review starts with the town plan. Most lot sizes have been set with an intent as to unit type. If the unit type is a side hall or center hall certain assumptions need to be made to ensure the resulting room widths serve the intended use. Sometimes the lot width doesn't accommodate the type when wall thicknesses are taken into account. This is typically, though not exclusively, found in attached units. The lot width often turns out to be the exact wrong size. It's two wide to economically be a side hall but too narrow to be a center hall since two rooms cannot fit in the width provided side by side. This leads many to overbuild on the site and the value proposition of the unit type is undermined.

When reviewing its also important to note if chases or wet walls have been provided where needed. This sometimes isn't found out until the building is under construction. When building small (to live large!) every inch counts. After construction starts the only way to shoehorn in the plumbing and ducting required is to cannibalize space from adjoining rooms. Classicists, being a refined and accommodating lot, have a preference for designing with poché so there is usually ample room to accommodate these services. If extra room cannot be found, then the best time to resolve the issue is before construction starts.

Common conflicts involving wall thicknesses I've found during reviews include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Pocket door with no pocket and/or conflicting with outlets and switches
  
• Washer/dryer with no vent or wet wall for connections
• Exterior walls with no furring for finishes, plumbing, wiring, outlets, or switches
• Windows conflicting with wet walls

These are simple to find and usually easy to correct if found early. This sometimes lead to major surgery if the rooms have been designed so tight that any loss of space makes it unusable. The best way to deal with these issues, of course, is to prevent them from happening in the first place.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Keeping The Vision : Through Thick and Thin

We all know that walls have varying thicknesses. The evidence is all around us. Concrete walls, brick walls, framed walls, chases and wet walls each have their own thickness depending on what function they're serving. When reviewing plans it's important to verify that these needs have been accounted for.

This review starts with the town plan. Most lot sizes have been set with an intent as to unit type. If the unit type is a side hall or center hall certain assumptions need to be made to ensure the resulting room widths serve the intended use. Sometimes the lot width doesn't accommodate the type when wall thicknesses are taken into account. This is typically, though not exclusively, found in attached units. The lot width often turns out to be the exact wrong size. It's two wide to economically be a side hall but too narrow to be a center hall since two rooms cannot fit in the width provided side by side. This leads many to overbuild on the site and the value proposition of the unit type is undermined.

When reviewing its also important to note if chases or wet walls have been provided where needed. This sometimes isn't found out until the building is under construction. When building small (to live large!) every inch counts. After construction starts the only way to shoehorn in the plumbing and ducting required is to cannibalize space from adjoining rooms. Classicists, being a refined and accommodating lot, have a preference for designing with poché so there is usually ample room to accommodate these services. If extra room cannot be found, then the best time to resolve the issue is before construction starts.

Common conflicts involving wall thicknesses I've found during reviews include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Pocket door with no pocket and/or conflicting with outlets and switches
  
• Washer/dryer with no vent or wet wall for connections
• Exterior walls with no furring for finishes, plumbing, wiring, outlets, or switches
• Windows conflicting with wet walls

These are simple to find and usually easy to correct if found early. This sometimes lead to major surgery if the rooms have been designed so tight that any loss of space makes it unusable. The best way to deal with these issues, of course, is to prevent them from happening in the first place.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : Separation of Powers

The present model of development has split the disciplines into separate camps which sets up adversarial roles. Obviously, this is not good. Their motives aren't aligned and how they each turn a profit is also at odds. This varies considerably from web development where each discipline is frightfully aware that the ultimate success of the final product is crucial to their livelihood and the livelihood of their teammates.

I've heard, on more than one occasion, that by having different motives for different professions involved in construction the best result can be achieved. By having to fight for design, you get the best design. By having to fight for the budget, you get the best price. They try to create conflict thinking that artificial strife will get the best out of the disparate disciplines. That theory has been put to the test these last few years and the results are in. Those that sought creative strife artificially, without exception, have been bankrupted. Those that sought to create a harmonious, mutually supportive team have endured a slowdown but are still going concerns.

The cruel reality of the last few years is that the budget always won in the artificial strife scenario. This was based on a value engineering model, which, due to its many failings, has been replaced by value management. The customer was forgotten and the results are empty towers the world over. The developer is left with an empty tower, the architect is placed on a list of creditors knowing they'll never get paid, the builder - depending on their geography - is either on that same list of creditors or has plenty of money in the bank.

The team, and in this case I use the term loosely, was never really cohesive and were shooting for different goals. It's no wonder their efforts fell flat. If, on the other hand, their compensation was tied to the financial success of their venture then their motivations would be completely different. Setting up a development company as if it were a true team with the same end goal in would free the disciplines to share a common vision, share feedback from the intended customers, and bring their considerable resources to craft the best possible solution.

This is how the best vehicles are built. Designers, engineers, and manufacturing work together to create an attractive, fun to drive, high quality and cost effective vehicle.

This is how great tech companies are organized. The web designers work with the web architects and the marketing team to attract customers. Facebook is a huge database that has a user friendly GUI and great interoperability with other sites and technologies. It takes a team of talented people with different skill sets working together toward a common goal to make that happen.

Don't separate the powers, build a talented team. Don't worry about creative strife, that happens naturally.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : Separation of Powers

The present model of development has split the disciplines into separate camps which sets up adversarial roles. Obviously, this is not good. Their motives aren't aligned and how they each turn a profit is also at odds. This varies considerably from web development where each discipline is frightfully aware that the ultimate success of the final product is crucial to their livelihood and the livelihood of their teammates.

I've heard, on more than one occasion, that by having different motives for different professions involved in construction the best result can be achieved. By having to fight for design, you get the best design. By having to fight for the budget, you get the best price. They try to create conflict thinking that artificial strife will get the best out of the disparate disciplines. That theory has been put to the test these last few years and the results are in. Those that sought creative strife artificially, without exception, have been bankrupted. Those that sought to create a harmonious, mutually supportive team have endured a slowdown but are still going concerns.

The cruel reality of the last few years is that the budget always won in the artificial strife scenario. This was based on a value engineering model, which, due to its many failings, has been replaced by value management. The customer was forgotten and the results are empty towers the world over. The developer is left with an empty tower, the architect is placed on a list of creditors knowing they'll never get paid, the builder - depending on their geography - is either on that same list of creditors or has plenty of money in the bank.

The team, and in this case I use the term loosely, was never really cohesive and were shooting for different goals. It's no wonder their efforts fell flat. If, on the other hand, their compensation was tied to the financial success of their venture then their motivations would be completely different. Setting up a development company as if it were a true team with the same end goal in would free the disciplines to share a common vision, share feedback from the intended customers, and bring their considerable resources to craft the best possible solution.

This is how the best vehicles are built. Designers, engineers, and manufacturing work together to create an attractive, fun to drive, high quality and cost effective vehicle.

This is how great tech companies are organized. The web designers work with the web architects and the marketing team to attract customers. Facebook is a huge database that has a user friendly GUI and great interoperability with other sites and technologies. It takes a team of talented people with different skill sets working together toward a common goal to make that happen.

Don't separate the powers, build a talented team. Don't worry about creative strife, that happens naturally.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Keeping The Vision : It's All In The Details

In this series I'll go over some of the details that confound some and yield less than gracious spaces. To some this will seem obvious, yet I have seen the same problems repeated throughout the last fifteen years. This post will focus on the importance of bedroom furniture on the floor plan.

When reviewing plans I see many bedrooms showing mattresses illustrating how the furniture might be arranged and thus the intended circulation through the space. I notice few showing a full bed frame with headboard and footboard. I also notice that few show a space between the nightstands and the wall. It's hard to plug the lamp in if you don't leave some room. For the purpose of graphic convention I think it's fine to keep the drawing clean.  When I get concerned is when I see that the actual sizes and requirements have not been accounted for yet door swings barely miss the proposed furniture, circulation patterns will conflict with night stands, closets become inaccessible, and the livability of the plan is negatively impacted.

At risk of stating the obvious, when designing it is imperative to consider the actual size of objects. The dimensions are readily available online from your favorite furniture stores. By using this information when sizing and shaping rooms you'll be sure that the intended layout will work. Bottom line, don't let expediency ruin your plan.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Keeping The Vision : It's All In The Details

In this series I'll go over some of the details that confound some and yield less than gracious spaces. To some this will seem obvious, yet I have seen the same problems repeated throughout the last fifteen years. This post will focus on the importance of bedroom furniture on the floor plan.

When reviewing plans I see many bedrooms showing mattresses illustrating how the furniture might be arranged and thus the intended circulation through the space. I notice few showing a full bed frame with headboard and footboard. I also notice that few show a space between the nightstands and the wall. It's hard to plug the lamp in if you don't leave some room. For the purpose of graphic convention I think it's fine to keep the drawing clean.  When I get concerned is when I see that the actual sizes and requirements have not been accounted for yet door swings barely miss the proposed furniture, circulation patterns will conflict with night stands, closets become inaccessible, and the livability of the plan is negatively impacted.

At risk of stating the obvious, when designing it is imperative to consider the actual size of objects. The dimensions are readily available online from your favorite furniture stores. By using this information when sizing and shaping rooms you'll be sure that the intended layout will work. Bottom line, don't let expediency ruin your plan.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : Fanatical About Adding Value

For those who have been following the tech start-up funding news it might feel like money indeed grows on trees. Every week there are companies closing multimillion dollar rounds. For those that don't follow tech news it might be worth your while to review the archives of VentureBeat for a couple minutes. As you scroll through take notice of how many companies have dedicated themselves to providing metrics. It would seem the market is crowded, yet the funding is still available for these B2B companies.

Metrics are the key to determining how well you are serving your customers, what their preferences are, how much time they spend on your site, and all manner of other data that can help a company refine their business and improve the experience they provide to their customers. The successful companies are fanatical about the value they provide to their customers and rely on these metrics for real time feedback on how well they're doing.

The above lies in stark contrast from other sectors of the business world where the key has been to find out what the absolute minimum level of value is they can provide to their customers before they jump ship. There is a good discussion of this in How Companies Win. In the book they illustrate how companies fell for the value extraction model and then reinvented themselves by following a demand chain analysis. It's very compelling.

This value extraction method is the model that afflicted the world of real estate development and has helped keep it in the doldrums these past few years. Instead of being fanatical about how they could add value for their customers they sought ways to minimize expenditure and hopefully increase the profitability on each unit sold. This was a process which only concerned itself with customer experience peripherally. Sure, there was a need to have an attractive product, but it only needed to be good enough.

I was told on more than one occasion to think in terms of the savings multiplied times the 'x' number of units they were building. My response was typically to think of the value added, not only multiplied times the number of units, but compounding annually. Building something of lasting quality and beauty, even on a small scale, will pay lasting dividends for decades yet to come.This, however, was not their concern as they would not be around to profit from this increased value. The rest, as they say, is history.

This current market condition is an opportunity to attempt a better way since there are so few developers who have built their business around the concept of continually adding value to their customers and then choosing to stick around long enough to benefit from their efforts. This will entail a major rethink in how development companies are formed and how they execute their business plan. The process may be painful considering the amount of unlearning that needs to be done, but the path has already been cleared. We only need look to the successful business models of the tech sector and how they manage to fanatically add value.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : Fanatical About Adding Value

For those who have been following the tech start-up funding news it might feel like money indeed grows on trees. Every week there are companies closing multimillion dollar rounds. For those that don't follow tech news it might be worth your while to review the archives of VentureBeat for a couple minutes. As you scroll through take notice of how many companies have dedicated themselves to providing metrics. It would seem the market is crowded, yet the funding is still available for these B2B companies.

Metrics are the key to determining how well you are serving your customers, what their preferences are, how much time they spend on your site, and all manner of other data that can help a company refine their business and improve the experience they provide to their customers. The successful companies are fanatical about the value they provide to their customers and rely on these metrics for real time feedback on how well they're doing.

The above lies in stark contrast from other sectors of the business world where the key has been to find out what the absolute minimum level of value is they can provide to their customers before they jump ship. There is a good discussion of this in How Companies Win. In the book they illustrate how companies fell for the value extraction model and then reinvented themselves by following a demand chain analysis. It's very compelling.

This value extraction method is the model that afflicted the world of real estate development and has helped keep it in the doldrums these past few years. Instead of being fanatical about how they could add value for their customers they sought ways to minimize expenditure and hopefully increase the profitability on each unit sold. This was a process which only concerned itself with customer experience peripherally. Sure, there was a need to have an attractive product, but it only needed to be good enough.

I was told on more than one occasion to think in terms of the savings multiplied times the 'x' number of units they were building. My response was typically to think of the value added, not only multiplied times the number of units, but compounding annually. Building something of lasting quality and beauty, even on a small scale, will pay lasting dividends for decades yet to come.This, however, was not their concern as they would not be around to profit from this increased value. The rest, as they say, is history.

This current market condition is an opportunity to attempt a better way since there are so few developers who have built their business around the concept of continually adding value to their customers and then choosing to stick around long enough to benefit from their efforts. This will entail a major rethink in how development companies are formed and how they execute their business plan. The process may be painful considering the amount of unlearning that needs to be done, but the path has already been cleared. We only need look to the successful business models of the tech sector and how they manage to fanatically add value.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

EM-50 Acquired

The EM-50 which will be modified for the Small Town American Renaissance has been acquired and is currently undergoing reconditioning in Texas. Soon it will be transported to Orlando where an interior refit will commence. Upon completion of the STAR Tour the EM-50 will serve as a rolling studio used for charrettes throughout North America. The EM-50 is ideally suited for providing studio space in support of planning initiatives for areas affected by natural disasters.

The selection of a classic GMC motorhome for this endeavor dovetails with our mission of renewal and revitalization. There is a strong community of GMC enthusiasts that have maintained and upgraded their RVs over the years. Not being content to leave well enough alone, they have also developed numerous enhancements for various systems. While we may not re-power the GMC during this stage of the restoration, our plans include replacing the existing V8 with a hybrid engine. It's entirely possible to use this existing shell to create a thoroughly modern and efficient RV.

While RV travel has proven to have a lower carbon footprint than travel by airplane, we will offset our consumption by borrowing an idea from an American legend, Johnny Appleseed. By planting trees at every stop we hope to leave a lasting legacy on the ground and a symbol of growth and renewal wherever we go.

More details will follow as we firm up dates and locations. We look forward to the EM-50 being with us for a long time.

Posted via email from STAR Tour