the end

One down, still one to go, but you can call me Master.

Final review went well–a discussion of architectural relevance followed by a heated debate between reviewers, at which point I stopped talking altogether as things escalated towards a fist fight. What more could I have asked for?

Only moments later, as euphoria set in and my worldview began to zoom out and regain a focus that included the broader context of my life, I could see my project from an entirely different perspective, as somebody else’s project, to be evaluated and reviewed and perhaps revisited at a later date.

I regret that in the end, I did not end up fully fleshing out a design as I had hoped to do in the beginning of the project. But given my pragmatic, engineering and performance-heavy trajectory of the last couple of years, it would have been a big switch to suddenly do a completely artistic project.

Anyway, that is the barrier that remains between me and calling myself an architect. For now, it’s enough to feel human again after the intense, ridiculous self doubt and gnawing stress of the past three years.

coquet

It’s strange, the way just a mention of a certain name, even ten years after the last time you saw each other, can bring back memories; or rather, transport you to an alternate reality, just for a crazy moment.

Found the f-book page of a friend, a former friend. Saw photos of the past few years, probably a level of privacy this person would not have wanted me to see, because knowledge is power.

Power: our entire relationship was about power. I venture that every relationship this person has ever had is about power, but I digress. Neither of us will ever contact the other, because to do so would be to lose face. So for the moment, I know more, and thus I am in the lead. In the lead! That slipped out, but there it is. Between us, only one can win. And yet, having discovered this person’s page, I find that I must forbid myself from checking back to see whether it has changed. I indulge my curiosity and am rewarded with schadenfreud and a smug feeling of superiority…and yet, obsessed, I cannot resist the urge to click back to my own profile, and again, and once more.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest? Who is winning? Who has more friends? Whose relationship is succeeding? Whose job prospects are better? Who is a better writer? Who betrays their true nature more obviously through innocent postings?

The truth is that superiority is a thin varnish, beneath which insecurity runs rampant. In truth, this person is merely my mirror. And if so, am I the only one who remembers? Do I care more? And by caring at all, is it I, in the end, who loses?

lists and categories

Good meeting today, following last week’s cross-check review debacle. Sometimes you need to fail to start over.

Okay, not quite that bad, but I think it made me let go of a number of assumptions and caveats that I had been hanging onto doggedly, and dogmatically.

So over the weekend I had my Laputa moment (the castle, not the ho), let go of some baggage, and I’m back on track. As of week 13:

1. We have a thesis! Conceptual and schematic design for customizable home eco-retrofit package.

2. Question: What are the barriers to adoption? My project should resolve by addressing the following:
a. Confusion about what’s out there
b. Misconceptions about cost
c. Fear of lack of service and maintenance options
d. Lack of image.

3. Areas of focus: Energy, water, IEQ; broken down into a set of 10 key technologies and recommended homeowner supplements.

Building an image; this is where my design comes in, though what form it shall take exactly, I know not. But it will tie into themes such as the need for live feedback and communication with the user, which serves both as an educational tool, and as marketing; branding in general, taking a basic look at models such as google, apple, and the prius; the role of the architect, combining engineering and industrial design into a product/home addition. My next two weeks will happen in pictures…

summary

Intro
This project is an assessment of suburban and exurban housing characteristics in terms of ecological performance, in order to define more clearly the gap between resource and energy consumption of existing housing stock, and a hypothetically sustainable level of resource and energy consumption.

In response to this performance gap, I propose a series of individual house-scale retrofit options, targeted towards individual homeowners, but with the goal of reducing the overall energy and resource profile of a neighborhood as a whole.

Over the course of my investigation I have come to understand that design is profoundly intertwined with its sister societal constructs, policy and marketing. Any hope for real change must always be approached from all three angles if it is to have any chance of success.

Nevertheless, I think architects and other designers have a role to play in developing and implementing widespread strategies for raising awareness and changing residential housing performance, even in the suburbs where architects have had little influence in the past.

Background
-looked at foreclosure and vacancy as a symptom of poor planning and unhealthy suburban growth
-looked at demographics and poverty rates to get a picture of who is living in the suburbs
-looked at future trends in demographics and settlement patterns to get a picture of who will be living there in coming years, and to know how much money they might be able to invest in improving their home
-looked at energy use to try and figure out what the key area was to fix, found that there is no low-hanging fruit in single family housing of past 20 years
-looked at the resources going into and coming out of existing houses to figure out what the major flows are and look for key areas to influence
-looked at cost versus ROI and ecological benefit to create groupings of strategies

Design
-using this data and info; a building retrofit
-equally important, an interface to give the user real-time feedback - the Prius energy use readout screen equivalent for your house

In particular, this retrofit is designed for a typical suburban single-family home built within the past 20 years. As templates I chose two ubiquitous designs, one by a national builder/developer and one by a state-wide residential builder, both of whom operate locally. The retrofit is tailored to the energy and resource profile of cold-climate housing in the upper Midwest.

Beyond
-looked at real estate development to get a sense of how to market to consumers
-collaborated with landscape architecture student to discuss policy options and the characteristics of a high performance neighborhood

Conclusion
-what might be able to be changed
-the role of the designer
-how the designer might best work with the other parties
-as a hint, I spent a lot of time speaking with people from other disciplines

decision time

I’ve got three ideas for the end of this project.

The first is a kind of flow diagram comparing and clarifying the variety of options for dealing with the major problems of a suburban home. I need some version of this to help me decide what to do to the actual house, so that my decisions are not arbitrary.

The second is an actual redesign of a zero-energy suburban home, its site and surroundings. Just do it. Just draw up the most viable-seeming options, make nicely done annotated sections and plans showing the changes from a normal house. Do an exterior rendering of what this new house looks like, and an interior of its new south face.

The third is a diagram associating the changes made to improve a house, and the resulting impact on the environment. The purpose of this diagram is to visualize the relationship between one person’s investment in an improved home, and the amount of energy, waste, and destruction that is diverted. In a broader sense, this diagram or tool might become an interactive visual cloud/matrix showing the ways in which everything is connected, but that is too big for this project.

The kernal:
1. Assume we are in the upper midwest, and our house type and size are chosen. Essentially, this is a comparison of options based on different target markets. It does not need to be developed into a user-friendly format.

Task: dendritic map

2. Design is informed by choices from (1), with special emphasis on elements that were changed. It shows what got changed, and how it looks now.

Task: determine representation method and style; make plans/sections; exterior rendering with site annotated; interior rendering of new daylighting elements

3. Visualization of consequences; picturing what happens as a result of one’s actions.

Task: annotate drawings with callout boxes; create story and images for each scenario (water not used, food waste not in landfill); diagrammatic representation of quantities (no numbers); link all to a big diagram of how those things are interconnected

Okay.

reorientation

The interim review of the project went well. I argued that, although architects do not like to think about the suburbs, and although this sentiment is in some senses justified by the fact that speculators, not architects, have been in charge of the suburbs from layout and infrastructure to the shape of the houses since the very beginning–despite this, I believe the architectural dismissal of the suburbs on aesthetic grounds is about to become irrelevant.

My critics appreciated my research and the thoroughness of my investigation and explanation of the basis for the project.

They wondered how I planned to move forward, and I realized that I had completely forgotten to talk about this project being an exercise in sustainable re-design. I didn’t even mention sustainability.

So, retrofitting suburban houses–my critics saw this moving forward as a study of demographics, of what people want (or are likely to want) in their homes, taking into consideration the size and makeup of families, and then building a suburb to accommodate them, and building it green.

They suggested that I take into consideration what would draw people to want to re-inhabit abandoned houses; how to sell the worth of the idea of retrofitting an existing structure, make it desirable. How to sell retrofit, in order to avoid greenfield development.

My adviser, on the other hand, saw it in almost the opposite way; instead of basing my design on demographics, he interprets my project as a kind of eco-Frank Gehry exercise, where I do whatever it takes to reach zero-energy, and whatever it looks like is the aesthetic I present. As he put it, “domestic flexibility and energy are driving this thing; if it pushes aesthetics while doing so then so be it.”

For me, this project is about where those two intersect. Or more accurately, it’s about zero-energy, as informed by the variables which in 2010 we now know, including such things as potential demographics, and high performing landscape modifications.

The following are some ideas in order of my interest in them:
1. what does a retrofit home look like
2. what are the systems that go into it
3. if all the houses had these modifications, what kind of energy savings and livability improvements does it add up to
4. how much do they cost the residents
5. could the costs be put on a sliding scale
6. how do the modifications complement the families who live there
7. what kind of infrastructure improvements do they slot into, what the high performance landscape looks like*

Things that would make me happy at the final review would be cool renderings of spaces, and “sweet infographics” illustrating systems at a couple of different levels.

So I guess my first priority is to choose a home and design a retrofit, then diagram how it works, calculate loads and savings, cost, and how this works out for the people likely to live there as the sub/exurbs are re-inhabited.

Design thoughts:
-flexibility of space is useful to a wide variety of inhabitants
-flexibility of space with regard to seasonal use is a feature of zero-energy design
-need a catalogue of moves to apply to a basic plan/section
-uniqueness comes from applying a series of moves, which are oriented according to the cardinal directions, to a series of plans, which are oriented to their cul-de-sacs

Things still bugging me:
-I’m concerned about maintaining a balance between designing for a target market, which can be a powerful driving force and a great design motivator, as evidenced by the Solar D house; and designing a series of modifications that could be widely applied across a lot of suburban cookie-cutter housing. In other words, the balance between specificity and broad applicability.

*Wait a sec, if I’m reusing a neighborhood instead of designing a new neighborhood, then it doesn’t matter what optimal, high-performance neighborhood design looks like…or at least, I don’t need to waste time researching it.

more than energy solutions

Givens:

People like the suburbs, people want to move there, and people don’t have a problem with the iconic image of a house, gables, siding and garages.

But just because they tend not to be at war with the basic form of the suburban home (in the way that architects and the design-minded often are after prolonged exposure to modern lines and the industrial aesthetic) — just because the average homeowner is at peace with the typology, doesn’t mean that there aren’t some major features in suburban housing that they might well be willing to modify or sacrifice.

A number of real estate trend websites indicate that affordability and flexible living spaces are the foremost desires of homebuyers. The living room is almost extinct, in favor of the family room with entertainment systems, and the number one home remodel is kitchens–bigger, more livable, more beautiful, better lit, more accommodating to a variety of activities, and with more work space. Kitchens and family rooms are blending and mushing, with a preference for open lines of sight, or even a completely open plan between those two spaces.

However, concurrent with the desire for an open layout, spaces that can become home offices and “bonus” rooms are also in demand. A master suite with a large bathroom is expected in new homes, and popular features include walk-in closets, separate bathtubs (preferably with whirlpool) and roomy showers. Laundry features near the bedroom or kitchen (no longer in the basement) are also much in demand.

Finally, ever-escalating allergy and illness problems make indoor environmental quality issues a top priority, paving the way for low VOC finishes and natural materials, or reused materials cured by age.

In my opinion, three things become clear:

1. There is room for improvement in the design of the suburban home from the point of view of providing flexible and useful space to the homeowner–

2. Which makes energy-efficient renovation an easier sell; not only are homeowners more interested in so-called “green” products and design than ever before, but good passive and energy efficient design is completely grounded in improved livability, and thus–

3. Maybe it all adds up to a new way of thinking about the layout of a house. Instead of pre-labled bedroom, living room, bonus room, and all the other lingo, why not just the family room/kitchen, surrounded by enough rooms, to be slept in or otherwise used as each family sees fit? As long as a room has good sound insulation, light and some storage space, it is truly flexible. A family of four might need five or so rooms of varying sizes, for bedrooms, office space, convertible guest space or play space.

Need:
-to figure out modifications to a North, South, East or West facing wall to meet performance needs
-to figure out how an N/S/E/W modification would work depending on the room it intrudes upon

going nowhere fast

Here’s where I’m at: Have been trying to narrow potential sites by looking at census data and housing prices and potential transit lines to figure out what might be a suburb that is both a) in danger of failing, indicating that houses might be in need of work and b) in a promising location to be worth retrofitting. This is proving to be difficult, and inconclusive.

So, I randomly picked a suburb, and looked at a couple of streets that are in the past 10 year bracket. The thing is, after talking to a landscape architecture student, I’m finding that this particular suburb may actually be an example of [relatively] progressive planning, in terms of land use anyway, and it seems to be doing pretty well. Obviously, this is the opposite of a good argument for retrofit.

Two other things to note:

This other student is currently doing a thesis involving the calculation of payback and financial benefits from utilizing LEED ND in planning. He’s actually writing a consulting manual for a nearby county which is expecting growth in the next decade. It’s not retrofitting but I wonder if something there could be useful.

Also, my chain of thought, in case you want to poke holes in it, goes something like this: A series of houses built with less attention to craft (the infamous shoddy construction we hear about in development housing) will be extremely energy inefficient, which in combination with driving distance will make it undesirable, which will cause blight as homes are unable to be sold, and meanwhile people who own them will go broke trying to pay for the energy which will lead to foreclosures. These neighborhoods cannot be salvaged without a couple of key adjustments: 1) public transit (urban planning solution), 2) greater density of residents, as well as some walkable amenities (urban planning/architecture solution) and 3) energy efficient, site responsive structural adjustments (architectural solution). I want to focus on number 3, with intelligent dabbling in 1 and 2.

What am I doing wrong??? Seriously, I’m swimming up Niagara Falls here. Not getting anywhere, spinning in too much information, but not finding an intelligent basis for this project, or any local data backing it up, despite all of the generalized articles out there in the media that seem to support the thesis concept.

Either a) it’s not happening here, which is why I’m not finding anything, or b) it is but I don’t have the statistical/data sleuthing skills to know what to look for (extremely likely), or c) it doesn’t matter to the scope of my project and I shouldn’t even worry about it. But if c is true, then what on earth is the point of my project? Is it just that “sometime in an energy-scarce future people are going to want to retrofit their suburban homes, here are some ideas?”

Maybe I should start there, and just do a completely visual analysis, using other people’s data to guide my design, and come up with 100 design solutions.

stress manifest

I like to eat. I have a bad habit of indulging in a slightly tastier dinner with a couple more little side-bites of somethings during times of low-level ongoing stress, particularly when I need to do some serious, down-to-business procrastinating, like right now for example, in school.

It’s not a good thing, stress-eating, and what makes it so insidious is that it’s not a 100% bad habit. Unlike smoking or drinking or gambling, you have to eat. But if you don’t want to get fat, and if your idea of being in good shape is that you can still propel yourself from the couch in one relatively smooth motion, then you have to be somewhat mindful of eating reasonably.

It’s not that I don’t eat well–I’m vegetarian, I don’t keep snacks around, I don’t even like most sugary treats and never have them in the house, and I rarely indulge the juices, sodas, or any kind of dessert. My weakness is creamy things, like avocado, butter, cheese, mayonnaise, half & half, and the very occasional taste of Bailey’s. My great love on this earth is pasta in all its forms, especially when combined with cheese, butter, or cream. You get the idea.

There’s no way to say no to these things, and saying no isn’t really the point anyway because even if I tried for awhile, I would have to eat something, and most likely I would plunge back into my favorites with redoubled zest. Besides, all addicts know that self-denial never works.

Calorie and point-counting doesn’t work either. It may help, in order to figure out how much you should reasonably consume, and therefore how much you need to NOT eat, but it doesn’t offer very good motivation besides the usual self-scolding and willpower, see what I did? See how much I lost? See how I’m keeping it off? Yeah, right, do you really think I’m stupid enough to be tricked? And for that matter, do I really want to work within a system that’s based on deluding myself into thinking there is a simple fix?

There is no simple fix.

For many women, who are the biggest demographic of emotional eaters, at least a couple of times per week they find themselves standing in front of the stove at dinner thinking, what the heck, I’ll just throw in an extra bit of this, and one more of those tonight–I’m hungry, I’m tired, I just want it, etc.

Here’s the question: Why do you want it? Is it your body craving sustenance, or your emotions making you want something to chew on? Choose a or b.

If you chose b (you chose b, the answer is always b), the next step is to analyze those emotions, and this part is hard. You might decide; work is what’s bothering me. In that case, what about work? A variety of things? Write them down, write a rant, really stew about it, but write it all down.

Now refine what you’ve written into a sentence. Then craft a haiku. This is the problem. This is what is making you want to consume a little more comfort, above and beyond your body’s hunger.

Here’s what I think: the key to managing the amount you consume is to understand why you are eating, and the thing you are trying to understand is the emotional construct which has built up inside of your mind, manifesting in your body’s desires, like a swelling wave, causing you to run for higher ground at the top of a taller pile of dinner.

Are you still craving extras? If not, don’t eat them. If so, then eat the extra and enjoy, but understand why you are eating. Know thyself, said Socrates. This is not a program for denying yourself, this is, quite simply, a reminder to be fully aware of the reasons. And by the way, everything changes, so remember that tomorrow you’re going to have to know thyself all over again.

It doesn’t end; there is no stasis or balance point or quitting. This is what makes food unlike other addictions. People’s relationship to their bodily fuel is necessarily dynamic, changing with location, seasons, age, pregnancy, illness, and state of mind. You can’t hope to separate food from emotions, for the two are entwined, and to dull the emotional aspect would inevitably dull the enjoyment of beloved tastes and associations as well. This is why even the most carefully calculated formula of points will forever remain an artificial illustration of an idealized relationship, a set of restrictions imposed from outside. It is doomed to fail because few people can maintain such a loveless relationship with food for long.

You don’t have to set goals, or stop, or do less, or be better. You just have to understand and accept, and then change will come.

the question at hand

Let’s pretend, for a moment, that we’re doing a project about the suburbs. What’s going on, in 2010, post housing-market crash? Are poorer people moving out there? Are the people out there just seeming poorer by virtue of lost jobs? Are the houses losing value?

What’s going to happen when the energy for heating, cooling, and commuting gets to be expensive? Really expensive?

My theory is that those houses will be abandoned, or possibly filled with the disenfranchised, living off the grid post-apocalypse style, see California Love. Can. You. Dig it?! In a way, this isn’t a totally disagreeable image. There must be a thousand post-apocalypse stories which essentially boil down to a dream of a simpler life, where choices are clearer and there are only two ways to be, a kick-ass survivor or dead. Where the urban landscape, embodying the money and the master plan of people richer and more powerful than you, has become merely a surface to navigate, a derelict playground divested of rules, conventions and the need to share space with a million other people.

An emptier place.

Unfortunately, most of these stories seem to be predicated on one particularly flawed premise, which is that the world will be an emptier place when all of those resources run out. In fact, it’s likely to be a more crowded place, with an ever-increasing need for housing. So while we might not have the resources to maintain all of those suburban homes, chances are they will be occupied anyway. Sound like a recipe for horrible things like rampant violence, disease, injury and fear?

The ability of an elected governing body to create a semblance of order is inextricably tied to its ability to guarantee a degree of safety and consistency, and equally important, resources such as water, food, and power to its constituents. I don’t love the idea of a big unwieldy bureaucracy, with attendant corruption and costs. But in light of the fact that I’m not alone in the world, it seems like a not-unreasonable sacrifice to give up the illusion of being sole master of my destiny, in favor of being able to access the information, the creativity, the tools and ingenuity and systems that are a product of organized human networks.

With that in mind, it seems to me that something has to be done about the suburbs before they are beyond repair, and beyond the reach of a city’s, a society’s, resources.

It has to be systematic, an intervention at every level, and one of those levels is the individual house. The split-level McMansion cookie cutter snout-house: I think maybe I might have some ideas for what to do about them.

  • Search