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

Agile Development : The Unforgiving

Pivot is perhaps one of the most overused terms in discussions about tech startups. It is, however, one of the most important and has valuable lessons to physical development, as well.

As a startup gets ever closer to launch they are refining their business model constantly, seeking as much feedback as possible, and making adjustments to their actual business. In a number of instances the final launched product or service may bear little resemblance to the initial mission. By proving and improving their model before launch they set the stage for success. In order to achieve this they have to build on a flexible framework so they can change direction rapidly without having to start over from scratch. When a startup changes directions based on the information gleaned from their feedback loop it is their pivot.

When looking at previous patterns of physical development it is easy to see which areas chose a flexible infrastructure which allowed them to pivot, and which did not. While not every grid based city or town has been a success but they do have the flexibility to reinvent themselves and adjust as needed to serve a useful purposed. The mechanism for this is a form based code which allows mixed-uses. While the political process required to pivot takes years instead of hours, as is the case with tech companies, the flexibility exists.

Those that chose large parcel conventional suburban patterns are locked in place. When the market changes they cannot adapt. The result is that extremely large parcels will remain underutilized until such time that the land increases in value to the point it is financially viable to demolish the existing building and infrastructure and start over. This is a very unforgiving form of development. If you do not get the market and the timing correct the development will fail. To attempt a zoning change will take years and the market may move yet again. The expense of redesigning the development may be prohibitive and the project funding may have dried up. The only option in many cases is to wait and see.

The tech companies have chosen a framework that allows them to make corrections as they go. They can even be completely wrong about their market and still manage to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. This ability to be wrong yet find success is one of the main reasons that the tech sector is doing well and continues to attract billions in equity investment in these trying times.

The ability to pivot and reinvent are key to long term viability. The evidence can be seen in all of the major financial centers of the world which are based on flexible patterns. Even micropolitan areas based on flexible patterns are surviving and thriving in these tough times. I would suggest that any form of physical development look to patterns that are flexible so that they can change with the times. The alternative is not so forgiving.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens

Agile Development : The Unforgiving

Pivot is perhaps one of the most overused terms in discussions about tech startups. It is, however, one of the most important and has valuable lessons to physical development, as well.

As a startup gets ever closer to launch they are refining their business model constantly, seeking as much feedback as possible, and making adjustments to their actual business. In a number of instances the final launched product or service may bear little resemblance to the initial mission. By proving and improving their model before launch they set the stage for success. In order to achieve this they have to build on a flexible framework so they can change direction rapidly without having to start over from scratch. When a startup changes directions based on the information gleaned from their feedback loop it is their pivot.

When looking at previous patterns of physical development it is easy to see which areas chose a flexible infrastructure which allowed them to pivot, and which did not. While not every grid based city or town has been a success but they do have the flexibility to reinvent themselves and adjust as needed to serve a useful purposed. The mechanism for this is a form based code which allows mixed-uses. While the political process required to pivot takes years instead of hours, as is the case with tech companies, the flexibility exists.

Those that chose large parcel conventional suburban patterns are locked in place. When the market changes they cannot adapt. The result is that extremely large parcels will remain underutilized until such time that the land increases in value to the point it is financially viable to demolish the existing building and infrastructure and start over. This is a very unforgiving form of development. If you do not get the market and the timing correct the development will fail. To attempt a zoning change will take years and the market may move yet again. The expense of redesigning the development may be prohibitive and the project funding may have dried up. The only option in many cases is to wait and see.

The tech companies have chosen a framework that allows them to make corrections as they go. They can even be completely wrong about their market and still manage to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. This ability to be wrong yet find success is one of the main reasons that the tech sector is doing well and continues to attract billions in equity investment in these trying times.

The ability to pivot and reinvent are key to long term viability. The evidence can be seen in all of the major financial centers of the world which are based on flexible patterns. Even micropolitan areas based on flexible patterns are surviving and thriving in these tough times. I would suggest that any form of physical development look to patterns that are flexible so that they can change with the times. The alternative is not so forgiving.

Posted via email from Kenneth Hitchens