Cost-Saving Design Tips for Your New Home or Remodel

The economy from 2007 to now (2011) and probably beyond has caused/will cause us all to more thoroughly analyze our expenses and what we're getting for them. Especially hard-hit has obviously been the residential market. The combination of sub-prime mortgages and unrealistic lending practices, along with the McMansion craze and HUGELY over-inflated values could lead to nothing else but a meltdown. The good that might be coming out of this is that people are appreciating that life is not about how big and how much $$, but rather what is the overall quality for the buck. In other words, a lot of us are going "back to basics".

In terms of designing and building your new house or remodeling your existing, "back to basics" can actually be a prudent and exciting design strategy. The size of the average home is actually decreasing by 10-20%. This is a positive trend in my opinion because it becomes more affordable, more livable and easier to maintain for clients, and easier on the environment. Clients want more involvement in the reasoning and logic behind design decisions and how the associated costs enhance the quality of their lives. They, along with their architect, can then make informed decisions in relation to their budget.

That being said, and after much research, experience, and just plain thinking, I've come up with many design tips (up to about 60 now!) to help you manage your home design/construction budget. Here are 10 of those tips:

1.   Size: Focus on what you absolutely need 1st, then, if budget allows, go to those "wouldn't that be cool" extras. Remember, everybody talks in terms of cost/square foot, so less square feet can help control cost.

2.   Materials: 20' ceilings add a lot of extra material cost as well as associated labor.

3.  Shape: I've seen SO MANY new home plans with 48 corners, angles, curves, turrets, etc. A complicated floor plan means a complicated, more expensive facade and roof. Simplify.

4.   Plumbing: Group/combine/stack plumbing to save on piping lengths.

5.   Lot: Flat lots are typically less expensive to build on than sloping or "rocky" lots.

6.  Cabinetry: Cabinets are usually expensive items, so be careful to use wisely. IKEA may be a good option, too. Cherry or Mahogany built-ins everywhere are going to be costly.

7.  A/C-Heat: Passive solar design can help reduce the amount of heating and A/C you might need. Orient the house taking advantage of breezes, shade and block cold winter winds.

8.  Lighting: Built-in, specialty lighting can get expensive, especially if they are from overseas. Use table/floor lamps with bulbs that you can get anywhere. Again, orient the home & use windows to take advantage of natural light.

9.  Landscaping: Maybe plant younger, smaller trees/shrubs, use xeriscaping & reduce irrigation needed. Maybe use pavers instead of concrete.

10. Walls/Doors: Try to reduce the number of walls/doors that compartmentalize the space. Open it up! Define space/needs instead of confining them.

I hope this helps. I'm always interested in designing appropriately-sized, high quality custom houses that don't break the bank. Please feel free to contact me at http://www.colinslais.com/ for your new home. I have 50 more ways to save cost and help you realize your dream!

Updating Frank Lloyd Wright

Frank Lloyd Wright has been my inspiration for many years. Having visited nearly 200 of his buildings (even renting a few) along with extensive reading & conversations w/ homeowners, I consider myself somewhat of a Wright expert. His Usonian homes w/ their simple, clean lines, expressed floor grid, overall orderliness, and of course, connection to nature excite me the most.

Wright taught that an architect should develop his/her own individual nature from within. We should learn & grow from looking INTO, not AT. So, as an architect w/ an inquisitive mind and "countenance of principle", I intend to blaze my own trail of a new Organic architecture for the 21st century. With this said, there are some "shortcomings" I've personally experienced (at 6'-2" tall) and been informed of by homeowners that we can address & update for the future. Let's briefly review these and strategize more acceptable alternatives to quell some criticism of Wright's work:

1.) Leaks (Walls/Roofs) - Wright's Usonian homes gave the blessings of architecture at extremely low cost ($5K at one point). We can now properly flash, seal & provide better water-resistive barriers w/ new products complying w/ code.

2.) Sagging Cantilevers (Roofs) - Materials/Technologies weren't ready for Wright's inventiveness like they are now. Stronger, lighter engineered woods & proper use of steel will mitigate this issue. Again, for Wright, cost imposed many material limitations.

3.) Heating/Cooling - When Wright's underfloor radiant heating worked, it was wonderful, but an expensive headache when it didn't. Many Usonians didn't have A/C when originally built (save cost & rely on shading, natural breezes). Homes today typically need both, & the design should accommodate (see #9 Insulation). However, passive solar design should still be used to reduce utility cost & lower carbon footprint.

4.) Low Ceilings - Wright definitely owns the idea of horizontality & human scale. But, we know we've gotten bigger (and taller?). Current code now sets minimum ceiling height anyway (which are still comfortable for me at 6'-2" tall). Any ceiling above 8' (drywall/plywood standard size) except in large rooms is a waste of material/$. Breadth of space can do more than height.

5.) Dark Rooms - I thought the bedrooms in the Tracy Residence (Washington State) were dark due to small clerestory windows (lots of shade outside) & dark wood wall paneling. The wood paneling in the Usonians tended to be darker than walls that can be painted, say, a light color. Lighter colors reflect light & make space feel bigger/more open.

6.) Small Bedrooms/Kitchens/Doorways/Hallways - Wright was saving cost & maintaining human scale. However, today human scale needs adjusting. Also, we now live more in our Kitchens & Bedrooms than maybe we did in the 50's. Sizes need to increase, but not any bigger than necessary to function.

7.) Monotony (Too Much Wood, No Variety in Color) - Wright's Usonian houses were thoroughbreds reduced to a minimum of materials for cost, but also for design continuity & a sense of repose. My wife's comment on the Palmer House http://www.vrbo.com/246204 (which we loved) was that there was a lot of same-colored wood walls/ceilings throughout. I can appreciate the observation, but also the sense of continuity. Nice thing about paint is variety & the ability to change.



8.) Architect Control, Inflexibility, Built-Ins - Wright undoubtedly controlled the built environment through design. When you hired him, you knew what you were getting. To that end, he tried to minimize "poor taste" by building in tables, seats, shelves, etc. Though this provides continuity again, it's inflexible for today's ever-changing needs. I believe in designing or purchasing things that look a part of the whole, but be movable and transportable when moving to a new city, thus allowing more freedom.

9.) Poor Insulation, Single-Pane Glass - Again, saving cost, Wright had to minimize material quantity. He didn't use studs for walls, thus decreasing insulation space. Roofs were minimally insulated as well, and double-pane glass not available yet. Today, especially w/ new "green" building techniques, double-pane Low-E insulated glass is becoming typical, along w/ foam insulation & exterior polystyrene board. Much better R-values (insulation values) are attainable.

10.) Enclosed Kitchens - Wright invented the open plan common today. Ironically, his Kitchens (he named "Workspaces") were still closed off from the Living area. We've already done a good job of opening up the Kitchen these days to become an attractive, integral, and even desired part of the Living space. The barstool island (becoming way overdone) is the only separation now. I think Mr. Wright would approve of this development, but who knows.



The Architect and Public Perception

Having been an architect for quite some time, I continue to get the same questions from people, namely, "Do you do residential or commercial?" and "What type of style do you do?", or here in Arizona, "Do you do Santa Barbara, Tuscany, Spanish Colonial, _________?" It occurred to me that the public's perception of an architect is that he/she does whatever the client wants.

While it's true the architect must design to meet client needs while also considering site conditions, building codes, etc., what the public does not perceive is the architect as, in some part, an artist. Why? We architects might not be doing well enough in educating the public on not only what an architect does, but who an architect is. Though it seems most architects will do just about whatever the client says, thus perpetuating the perception, there are some who live and work by their own principles or beliefs. They have a distinct "signature" or direction from which they won't stray too far because they believe strongly in the benefits to the quality of the work and to life itself.

In other words, clients might unknowingly be telling a "Picasso" to paint them a "Renoir". I think we all know that no artist of merit would paint like another. So, how can we inform the public that architects can still be artists with very different approaches? It's up to the profession itself through more public speaking, more community engagement, more writing, more school involvement, etc. And just maybe, architects could show more of their own work and ideas in public exhibits and finally taste some of that wine and cheese.

Skyscraper Idea

I had to purge my brain of this skyscraper idea I've had for years! The idea is to honestly express the true nature of all skyscrapers, which is that they are all a series of stacked, horizontal floor plates. So, why not express the horizontal?! Most if not all skyscrapers try to accentuate the vertical. But, the building is already vertical by it's very height in relation to everything else around it. Maybe they're expressing the vertical circulation (elevators, stairs)?

 I like the idea and look of the floors expressed as "trays", with the glass line recessed, thus the floors creating shading (we do still need to solve the pigeon issue!). The building could be "planted" like a tree, operating with "green", sustainable ammenities and beautifying its site. And why are most skyscrapers the same drab colors (silver, gray, or just inane glass boxes)? Michael Graves' Portland Building is full of color and an amazing relief from the buildings around it (http://www.michaelgraves.com/). I imagine my building with very light cream color concrete floors and dark bronze-colored window mullions.

The Lobby level of this skyscraper could house a coffee/snack bar or other small retail shop. Maybe it could transform into a small art gallery or reception space for the public's use! The 1st floor above the Lobby could be a restaurant/cafe'/conference level open to the public, with access to a balcony provided with trees/planters, etc. as shown. Toward the top of the tower there could maybe be a penthouse level or more private conference areas with access to a balcony and more trees. At the top could be an observation deck (more shade trees) for the building's occupants and the public, with the service core expressively protruding out the top, capped by a communications tower! The building could be multi-functional for a variety of uses by many different people - office, conference, reception, tourism, dining, retail, gallery/exhibition, etc. This would help keep the occupancy rate high and increase it's popularity! Anyway, had to get it out there. If interested, please contact me. On to other ideas/projects/musing!





Beyond the Box - Time for a New Architecture

A new design/building idea has been simmering in my head for years, and I'm excited to finally present it, at least in model form. This idea is to free us from living in small boxes within bigger boxes, thus liberating us from running like mice inside labryinths we call "houses" or "office buildings".

We have essentially been designing/building boxes to live inside of since just after the caveman days. So, to demonstrate or represent this, I built a rather crude study model literally using a shoebox (photo 1). The metaphor is quite appropriate since I've actually heard the term used to describe many buildings. We move around all day from box to box (we call "rooms") looking for the cheese but never finding it. These "room" boxes are then all crammed inside bigger boxes (we call "buildings"), which are then crammed next to each other to form cities or "developments". We then "plunk" the shoebox anywhere on every last acre, not caring where because the box isn't site-specific (photos 2-4). Next, we "punch" holes in the box sides and doll them up with trim and decoration, wrapping the whole with ribbons (photo 5). Lastly, if it's a sloping roof we call it a "house", and if it's flat roof we call it a "commercial building". Signage has to be added to remind us which box we're in (photo 6).

The new idea is to break down the box (photo 7) and instead build screens that define space/function instead of confine it. This idea certainly has precedent with Frank Lloyd Wright's "destruction of the box" principle, as well as Mies Van Der Rohe's sliding planes of the Barcelona Pavilion. But I'm for pushing that envelope to an almost more literal interpretation. I'm for a more dynamic site engagement, unlike the indifferent generic box.

Imagine solid screens where necessary reaching out into the landscape and up to the sky , with glass "voids" in between to let space, light, views, and breezes flow entirely through the building (photos 8-?). Maybe some screens extend out from within to become planters, fountains or private terraces (photos ?-?). Even the roof "opens" up with clerestory windows for light, ventilation and views. This is an Organic Modernism (a term I invented that best describes it) freed from the creatively stifling shackles of fixed styles (Tuscany, Spanish Colonial, Santa Barbara, "Old World"??). This closer relationship with the environment will help us reconnect with and appreciate all the beauty of nature we are trying to protect. This new building can better "attach" itself to features/conditions specific to its site, leading to more "sustainable" or "green" solutions.

We've been detached from the landscape far too long, trying to conquer it instead of living integrally with it. It's time for a free architecture that better represents the spirit of Democracy for which this nation was born!





Frank Lloyd Wright's David Wright House

I and members of the Contemporary Forum, an art-aficionado group, had the distinct pleasure of touring Frank Lloyd Wright's David Wright House in Phoenix, Arizona. David Wright was FLlW's son from the first marriage, and both he and his wife, Gladys, lived very long lives. David was in the concrete block business, so the house is, of course, concrete block. However, it's odd that the house was first conceived in wood -- probably because of it's unique circular shape.

The house spirals up a wide ramp to the main floor which "floats" above the hot desert floor and allows breezes to flow underneath. There is a small pool by the ramp with a central garden that the house surrounds. All of the walls are block inside and out with Mr. Wright's trademark red concrete floors. The wood cabinetry is built in, of course, and the wood board ceilings are some of the most intricate and beautiful I've seen. The finish carpentry in this house is incredible!

The house has been shrouded in mystery for years, and as I have understsood, no strangers had been allowed to see it for decades. I remember visiting in 1995 with a friend of mine. We stood at the driveway by the mailbox that simply read "Wright". There were tarps over the windows facing the street. It was very eerie.

Unfortunately, David and Gladys passed on in the house, and last I knew, it was for sale. It was an honor to be able to walk through it's graceful, flowing space -- to imagine living in it day by day, enjoying both fireplaces on cold desert evenings. Once again, Wright was able to build an idea, based on the organic principles he maintained all his life. It's not merely another house, but instead a free, creative, thoughtful response to Client, site, and human imagination in the hands of a master! Enjoy the photos below.

Frank Lloyd Wright's Penfield House

We had the thrilling pleasure of staying a few days at Frank Lloyd Wright's Penfield House in Willoughby Hills, Ohio (visit http://www.penfieldhouse.com/ to book reservations!). It was early November and the crisp autumn air happily required a glowing fire in the large centrally-located fireplace. The house is on acres of land with trees and clearings for walks and views of the Chagrin River. Nature sets the stage as you (the audience) watch through floor-to-ceiling windows/doors from the comfort of the built-in Living Room bench. You are surrounded by various fall colors visible through the many windows in every room. The view of trees from the 2nd story bedroom invokes a treehouse feel -- that you're a part of the landscape, not separate from it. You "float" up to the 2nd floor by wood stair treads with open risers so as not to obstruct views (see photos below).

Louis Penfield was 6'-8" and so the house has taller ceilings and is more vertical than the infamous low-ceilinged horizontality of Wright's other work. When asked if he could design a house for someone so tall, Wright replied, "Yes, but we'll have to design a machine to tip you sideways first." The wood post supports harmonize with the verticality of the multiple tree trunks around the house. This consistent structural system is clearly expressed throughout the house, with solid or glass infill panels as screens defining space.

Overall the house is a pure joy to experience. It's like nothing else, and you never want to leave its serenity and beauty. It allows you to slow down and relax into your natural, biological rhythm. I encourage everyone to visit, but beware, you'll miss it, and you will never look at your current home the same way.

See my February 11, 2011 blog on "Frank Lloyd Wright's Palmer House" for another truly unique experience!