A Sustainable Approach to Beautiful Space

Welcome!

this blog is to share some thoughts and observations–primarily–on the practice of sustainable design and building. But these thoughts may range widely, beyond the obvious…because…

…this field–green building–is all about synergy–about the relationship between science and nature, tradition and innovation, methodology and art. The goal is transcendence, where the result is comfortable, healthy, durable, beautiful space.

be prepared to take your time here…so take off your shoes, relax, and read on…

-Alan Abrams

Abrams Design Build

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

bang-head-on-table time

The banking industry’s reaction to The Great Meltdown is as irrational as its joy ride through the Bubble Days. It’s tempting to regard this as more evidence of cultural stagnation…

From The Washington Post, Saturday, November 6, 2010

Rejected for a mortgage because of a house’s shape
By Mae M. Ngai and John G. New
Saturday, November 6, 2010;

We found our dream house.

We found it just 15 miles outside the District, in southern Prince George’s County. A stunning three-bedroom, two-bath contemporary on six acres of wooded land with a stream running through it, a huge deck and a swimming pool. A wall of windows brings the surrounding woods into the house. Strongly built and energy-efficient, it sailed through inspection. It was perfect for us, a commuting couple with jobs in New York and Washington. And the price? Less than a Manhattan studio.

But our efforts to buy the house revealed a dimension of the housing market many people probably don’t see. Much of the recent news about the housing market has concerned massive foreclosures. But banks are scrutinizing much more than would-be buyers’ financial shape. They’re worried about other shapes, too.

We were pre-qualified for a loan; with two professional incomes, good credit and enough cash for a 20 percent down payment, that would not be our problem. Yet two mortgage companies turned us down. The first did so after its investors – big banks with household names – rejected our application. The second mortgage company’s internal underwriters also rejected us. Their reasons were the same: The home, a customized modular house of internationally acclaimed design, built in 1989, is . . . round.

Being “unusual” or “unique,” it was deemed “not marketable.” Despite its evident worth and multiple independent appraisals, the lenders said they could not assign a value to the house because there were no comparable properties. And, with no “value,” there was insufficient collateral for a loan.

In fact, round is what we loved about this house. There are hundreds of colonials, ramblers and McMansions on the market, many of them short sales and foreclosures. We wanted something different. The mortgage industry apparently only wants us to buy what everyone else has (or had).

The two mortgage lenders didn’t consider us a risk; rather, the risk was the design of the house itself. They believe that if we defaulted on our payments, they would not be able to resell the house. There is a certain perversity about making a house unbuyable, even to two eager would-be purchasers, for fear of it being unsellable in the future.

This is how far the pendulum has swung. Two years ago, banks were approving balloon mortgages for people who made little or no down payment and whose ability to pay was questionable. Now they have gone beyond being more cautious about borrowers’ income and assets to being skittish about even the shape of a house.

We’re disappointed. But we also are struck by the irony, during a recession and in an area with a depressed housing market and a shrinking property-tax base, of financially well-qualified and willing buyers being turned away simply because a property is “unique.” Lenders are making overly conservative decisions based on fuzzy logic and blinkered, formulaic reasoning. In so doing, they discourage the market from recovery. And the house sits unsold, our dreams denied.

Mae M. Ngai is a professor of history in New York. John G. New is an attorney in Washington.

Posted in Things that make you go "hmmmm..." | 1 Comment

I’m Saving The Planet Enough Thankyouverymuch… I think…

awesomely beautiful landfill

Are you doing your part to live sustainably?

Think about it for a minute.

You recycle your bottles, cans and newspaper.  You turn the water off while brushing your teeth.  You don’t leave lights on in rooms you’re not in.  Maybe you even drive a hybrid vehicle.

Whatever you oil-sucking, plastic-using, landfill-filling jerk!  It’s not enough!   It never will be enough!  Feel bad!  Right now!  I want you to feel like the terrible jerk you are!  Now go outside and eat worms.  They’re organic you know….

I read once on a blog making fun of a certain celebrity that she “lives green” and one of the “green” things that she does is to brush her teeth in the shower.  The blog writer went on to make fun of her by saying that what she is doing is far more wasteful than brushing her teeth at the sink because you can turn the water off while you are in front of the sink and blah, blah, high and mighty fishcakes.  My mental response:  “Leave her alone.  How do you know that she’s not putting conditioner on her hair that has to be left on for two minutes?  How do you know she’s NOT turning the water off during this?  Whiny brat.”

There are probably a hundred decisions that the average person (who considers themselves a person who cares about the environment – and I’d say that is probably a good percentage of people) makes that are environmentally irresponsible.  Or, the things that we do that are “good” that are offset by things that are “bad”.

shameless plug

Take me for example.  I recycle.  Heck!  50% of my artwork (I’m a jewelry maker) is made from silver recycled from industrial processes (the company that processes it uses sustainable practices as well)!  ::tooting my own horn::  root-a-toot-wait a minute…  the stones I use in my jewelry are mined… do I know where they are coming from?  Do I know if they are sustainably mined?  Can I even FIND sustainably mined gemstones at a non-prohibitive price?  ACK!  How about the fact that I recycle bottles and cans – but I buy bottled water?  And I drive to work when I could take the metro.  And I’m the first person to turn up the heat or the air-conditioning in the house.  And – I’m a terrible person!

I work at a sustainable design build company.  We’re all about sustainability!  We love saving the planet one house at a time!  We are very careful about what is considered the “demo” phase of a project – painstakingly “deconstructing” so that materials can be re-used.  We build projects that are Net Zero energy.  We have a dual flush water saving toilet in the bathroom!  We recycle in the office – oh yeah, you better believe it!  But our recycling bins are in an alley that is sometimes frequented by less savory types who think nothing of throwing their wine bottles in the trash bin and the bag in which their wine bottle came in the recycling bin.  We have locks for the bins but they are rusted and we should buy new ones but yaddah, yaddah, yaddah.  When we get thirsty we might go to the store and buy a bottle of water.  Oh God.  We’re terrible people.

ruining the planet

Take several people (who by most normal standards – even by normal, average, person who does green things like recycle and driving a hybrid) who are pretty extreme “green” recently interviewed for an article in the New York Times.  One person has furniture made from recycled barn wood, another upcycles trash to make useful items, yet another helps others to green their homes.  Yet two of these people shunned the use of cloth diapers in favor of the plastic ones that go straight to a landfill.  Another one drives an SUV and owns two homes in the same town – 20 minutes apart.

Horrible people.

…and yet…

The last person interviewed, Frank Sliney, 75, former marine and chief executive of the 25-year-old Franmar Chemical (motto: “solutions from soybeans”), in Bloomington, Ill., which originally manufactured nontoxic soy-based cleaning products for industrial workers and has now expanded into green cleaning products for home use, replies: “My house is 4,800 square feet. I’m a rich guy. We lived in a little apartment, I worked for 20-plus years building this company. I drive a Lexus 460. I worked like hell all my life and paid my bills and never was on public aid.”

Horrible guy, his house is way too big.

His reply?  “Why don’t we go out and bring in a family of 12 and adopt them? There are those who would prefer to plow golf courses under because of the water and chemicals they use. There’s no end to it. On a daily basis, I do more to save the earth than 10 people — I replace 32 tanker cars of mineral spirit with one tanker of soy. The soy will biodegrade in 28 days, the mineral spirits will go on a long time.”

I like this guy.

Sliney goes on to say:  “You know what I think? If you wake up in the morning and your biggest concern is trash cans or what kind of window sprays you’re using, you are having it good. There are people who wake up and their biggest concern is getting fed.”

"Plastic diapers are easy and time saving!" vs. "Cloth diapers will save the planet!"

The fact is you can only do so much and you can always do more and what you do is never enough.  You have to do what you feel you can do and live with on a daily basis.  What is reasonable and realistic for you with your lifestyle?  Could I take the metro to work?  Sure.  But it would take me twice as long and cost more money.  Could I turn the heat down in the winter?  Sure, but then I wouldn’t be able to feel my toes.

I say, he who is without guilt can throw the first plastic diaper.

Posted in Things that make you go "hmmmm...", Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Collateral Damage

If you plan a remodeling project are you jeopardizing your marriage?

Below are some comments by Alan, and a few of his colleagues, taken from a list serve discussion:

got a call from a client I worked close to ten years ago–an addition and extensive remodel.  it was a challenging project, with serious limitations on what could be added, and how existing space could be adapted to new uses.

what’s more is that the husband and wife each had different sensibilities, tastes, desires, and so on.  During the design meetings, I felt like Paul from “In Treatment.”  Somehow I came up with a program and design that they both were happy with and could afford.

the long and short of it is that the guy calls to see if he could turn the basement into a rental unit.

you guessed it–the couple had broken up after 20 some years of marriage and he needed the revenue to be able to keep the house.

I went over there to scope out his proposal–but mostly just to look at how the original project had worked out.  Usually, when I return to a home like that all the flaws and missed opportunities come flying out and smack me in the face, but I must say, for its scope, this was one of the better jobs I have ever done.

But it got me thinking about several other complex projects I had done over the past decade or so–and how many marriages went bust after the work was completed.  All projects I was pleased with, too.

Trying to make sense out of this, I reviewed a summary list of clients, and as far as I know, the majority of couples I’ve worked for are still together–probably at a better rate than the national average for marriages.  Still, I wonder to what extent the couples that split were affected by the projects.

No question about it–the process cannot be more stressful.  One of these took close to two years to design; they all took 6-9 months to build.  But I think there is more to it than just the process itself.

I’m sure everyone has some sort of similar tale to tell.  I’m half seriously thinking about making clients sign a waiver, to hold me harmless in the event of a domestic rupture.  Wouldn’t it be great if there were a questionnaire to give prospects, to identify a tendency to divorce?

So I thought I’d throw all this out there, to see if any others have any insights into the subject…

***

Many years ago a couple was referred to me by a builder I’d worked with before. His father, also a builder, had known the couple for some time and he would be their builder. This couple had hired an architect to design their home and were displeased both with the design and the projected construction costs. Apparently the architect wasn’t really listening, or if he was, he disregarded what they told him. I met with them for my usual thorough (and lengthy) programming session. Most of the time, I come away from that meeting with a very good idea what the clients want and where they are going. Not this time. The wife had a good number of very specific requirements and seemed to know just what she wanted. The husband was not at all enthusiastic and seemed to oppose everything she wanted to do. I wondered if he was even on board with the very idea of them having a home designed and built. I called my builder friend’s father and told him what had transpired in the meeting and expressed my dismay at not being able to get a read on them.  Was I heading into trouble working with them? He laughed and said that was just their dynamic. She was forceful and did know exactly what she wanted, he like to complain. So the project went forward. He complained through the entire design and construction process and was happy as a clam. He loved the house when it was done. Go figure.

***

If there were any clients that I would bet were headed for a split at least partly due to their house project it would be this one particular couple. I never met her. Bad sign to begin with. He was an engineer. He knew down to the fraction of an inch how he wanted some of the detailing done. He’d done the space planning and structural design and basically wanted a drafter. The house was ugly as sh**. The kitchen was horrible – another very bad sign. There was no front entry as such, it was off on the side with no focal point -  it looked like anybody else’s ‘back door’. I was astounded it even passed the ARC. He would accept no input from me as a designer. It seemed obvious that this guy completely dominated the marriage and either she was so lacking in strength or self-respect or whatever that she would put up with it, even to the point of having no input into her own home, or their marriage was already in trouble and this might be the deal breaker. I hate to say it, but I hope it was the latter. I can’t imagine putting up with this a**hole.

***

Goodness.  If I have to hang out a shingle and be a psychologist to the homeowner or builder too, my rates are going UP.  Recession or not.

Seriously.  I don’t think we can be held responsible for the state of a relationship that choses to go through the building process.  I’ve met clients like [she] describes and I doubt it was the house that laid the foundation for the dissolution of the marriage.  But based on the description of his demeanor, I would be proud to say that I had a hand in pushing it over the edge.

***

Over the years I’ve had several clients build a house to save their marriage (kind of like having kids).
It doesn’t work. Never been threatened with any kind of legal action

Posted in Things that make you go "hmmmm..." | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Brighter Shade of Green

At last, some validation.  I got excited about Passive House five years ago, put in months into training and research on the subject, and earned certification in passive house design–but when I introduced the subject to people thinking about building or remodeling–I would only get a shrug.

So it was gratifying to see the Sunday NY Times feature article about a home built to the Passive-House standard.  It’s significant as well that the article appeared in the business section–including a serious discussion on the cost benefits of this approach, as well as the intrinsic benefits. -AA

Passive-House (Passivhaus) is still catching on here in the US but it has been the standard in parts of Europe now for many years.  The cost of building to the standard, along with misconceptions regarding size, aesthetic, and comfort have caused some foot-dragging in the construction industry and among clients looking to build a new home.  These concerns are slowly but surely being assuaged and there are about a dozen homes to be built to the standard in the planning stage in the US.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are Building Codes Effective at Saving Energy?

Evidence from Residential Billing Data in Florida, NBER Working Paper, July, 2010:

In response to the 1973 oil embargo, many states began passing building energy codes in order to promote energy efficiency. While the vast majority of states have energy codes in place, policymakers are now attempting to legislate energy codes at the federal level to help address more recent concerns about energy efficiency and climate change. Nevertheless, surprisingly little is known about whether energy codes are an effective way to reduce energy consumption in practice. This paper provides the first evaluation of an energy-code change that uses residential billing data on both electricity and natural gas, combined with data on observable characteristics of each residence. The study takes place in Gainesville, Florida, and the empirical strategy is based on comparisons between residences constructed just before and just after Florida increased the stringency of its energy code in 2002. We find that the increased stringency of the energy code is associated with a 4-percent decrease in electricity consumption and a 6-percent decrease in natural-gas consumption. The pattern of savings is consistent with reduced consumption of electricity for air-conditioning and reduced consumption of natural gas for heating. We also estimate economic costs and benefits and find that the private payback period for the average residence is 6.4 years. The social payback period, which accounts for the avoided costs of air-pollution emissions, ranges between 3.5 and 5.3 years.

Posted in Energy Code | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Green Traveler

I recently had the pleasure of vacationing in San Francisco, CA, a city of many delights.  What could be greener, you might ask, than traveling to a city that is most conveniently navigated by foot and public transportation?

Staying at a hotel that was the third in the U.S., and the fourth in the world, to earn LEED® (“Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design”) certification.

The Orchard Garden Hotel (and its sister hotel, The Orchard) is certified by the Green Seal Environmental Standard for U.S. Lodging Properties for waste minimization, water and energy efficiency, hazardous substances handling, and environmentally responsible purchasing.  Also, both hotels are certified ‘green’ businesses by the San Francisco Department of the Environment.

A double room at the hotel

The hotel has all the amenities of a boutique hotel but one thing that is different about staying there is an innovative key-card system. Guests activate the room’s lighting and mechanical systems by inserting the card into a box near the door.  When they leave the room, they remove the card from the box, turning off all systems except for one outlet, which can be used to charge laptops or cell phones. The system, which cost about $37,000 to install, was anticipated to save nearly 20% in energy costs, paying for itself in two years.

The Orchard Garden Hotel is situated in a vibrant area

Dragon Gate at Chinatown's entrance

Located right next to the Chinatown gate and on the fringes of the Financial District and Union Square.  There are zillions of wonderful restaurants within walking distance (did I mention it was right next to Chinatown?) and a hop, skip and a jump from multiple sources of public transit.



The Embarcadero and Ferry Building

I made my husband take a photo of these beautiful peppers

The Embarcadero and Ferry Building with it’s not to be missed restaurants, shops, Farmer’s Market and adjacent artist’s market are within a healthy but pleasant walking distance, as is South Beach and Little Italy. Right across the street from where my husband and I dined on pasta with brandied cream sauce lies the historic City Lights bookstore, where Howl and Other Poems by Allen Ginsberg was published.

Food, Glorious Food!

I had a beautiful meal here

San Francisco is well known for its cuisine and local produce and I can assure you that any direction your legs will take you, you will find a wonderful meal.  In fact, if you stay at the Orchard Garden Hotel, you need only take the elevator (or the stairs!) to the lobby and the hotel restaurant, Roots, for meals prepared with seasonal local produce, naturally raised meats and sustainable seafood.  I ate there my second night and it was exactly what I wanted and needed.

The best part of my trip

Wild vegetation along the coastal cliffs

was drive up The Coast to Bodega Bay and then east to Sonoma Valley.  I saw beauty beyond compare and it was a reminder to me why we practice building and designing sustainably, with a sensitivity to how our actions affect the environment and all the creatures in it.

Posted in In experience | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

In Action – Bare Bones

Here are some photos taken after demolition of the interior of the house in Takoma Park.  This shows a view of the dining room from the vantage point of the living room.

This photo shows the view from the dining room looking past the original stair-well, which will be moved to the back of the house.


Here is a view of the floor to the basement near the original stair area.  Other than moving the stairs to the back of the house, the footprint will not change.  The removal of the original stairs opens the house up and makes it perfect for modern living.

This photo shows the back entry.  Note the blue tarp, serving as a temporary covering while the roof is being raised on the second floor.

Another vantage point of the back entry

A view of the second floor

Upstairs looking into a closet to the first floor below

The upstairs and temporary roof.  The back half of the roof is being raised up.

The basement foundation has been dug out in preparation for a new one.  We were surprised by the results of a blower door test that showed that the basement was shockingly leaky.  Using our Passive House energy modeling software we have devised a system to seal the leaks, a sealer was applied to the walls and studs will be added so that insulation may be blown into the cavity of the new wall.  This will have a huge impact on energy usage.

In addition to the modifications to the shell and the new foundation, the plumbing will be replaced.

After all of our modifications the house will be a beautifully polished gem, energy efficient beyond new building codes, and a warm and happy place for the family that lives there.

Posted in In Action | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Call It What You Will

Red tape or gray caulk – its all bureaucracy.

Stimulus funds for weatherization of homes in Michigan have been slow to be infused into the local government due to a variety of hurdles.

One major hurdle was specifying the precise wages that contractors would have to pay, and posting the advertisement on a specific website.  The problem with this was was a provision in the stimulus bill to apply the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires that workers be paid the local “prevailing wage,” as determined by the Department of Labor.  Since Federally subsidized weatherization work had never been subject to Davis-Bacon before, no wage rates existed and without the correct rate, advertising for workers couldn’t begin.  An official rate was finally decided upon and contracts eventually awarded… well over a year after the funds had originally been issued.

Another hurdle to clear was the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires states to review federally funded work on historically significant buildings.  The White House Office of Management and Budget had notified all recipients of stimulus funds that they had to comply with this.  Michigan’s historic preservation office then said it would have to review all work being considered for houses that were more than 50 years old.  Which meant that paperwork needed to be filled out for every home slated for weatherization.  It then took the two-person state historic-preservation office between two weeks and three weeks to approve the plans for each home.  A few months later state officials decided that the historic preservation office didn’t need to review plans for most types of weatherization work, including most wall insulation, and heating and cooling equipment replacement.  The state office hired two more employees and began accepting electronic submissions of the forms.  The Jackson group said it started getting its approvals back in a few days.  Again, nearly a year after funds were released.

Another hurdle:  contract workers must be paid weekly.  However, reimbursements are still being delayed, even after a new online reimbursement system was put in place, and many contractors haven’t been able to get credit to tide them over so they aren’t able afford to pay workers weekly.

Perhaps it would’ve been wiser to disperse funds directly to the state for them to use for programs that are already up and running.  Many states already have weatherization programs in place that are badly in need of funding.

Or we could always just wrap ourselves up in red tape to keep us warm.

Read more about this issue

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Sustainable Approach In Action

Beginning to dig foundation

Here are some process photos of a new addition and entire home remodel that we are doing of a vintage Takoma Park home.

moving earth

I took these photos last week on a perfect weather day.  I climbed up on the Bobcat to get a quick lesson in how it operates.

There is a setting that may be activated that allows for digging at a very specific grade.  Its all very fascinating but the most thrilling thing is watching the sheer volume of earth being moved so carefully.

And with a smile!

Posted in In Action | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Passive Approach

Plans are in order to certify a house being built in Bethesda, Maryland as the Greater Washington DC area’s first Passive House (Passivhaus).

David Peabody of Peabody Architects partnered with Brendan O’Neill Sr. of O’Neill Development to design and build “The New American Foursquare”, those homes sold originally as late 19th century mail-order kits from Sears, Roebuck and Co. catalog.  It looks just like other area foursquares but is missing something the other houses have:  a furnace.  Like other houses built according to Passive House principals, this one doesn’t have a conventional heating system.  Little is required to heat the home other than the warmth of the bodies inside because of careful, tight construction and superinsulation.  An energy recovery ventilator (ERV) will extract heat from the outgoing stale are and trasfer it to the fresh air continually circulating into the house.

This system will cost roughly 10% of what it costs to heat and cool a normal home of the same size (estimates for $700 vs. $7000 for the year).  This is without any of the “traditional” “green” bells and whistles such as solar panels and geothermal and other green systems, which are pricier and require more maintenance.

Peabody says “We just see these houses as the future,”.  Indeed, the Passivhaus principals are entering the European building codes, much as many US cities have adopted green building codes.  It is only a matter of time before Passive Houses become more widespread in the US.  As of now there are only 13 certified Passive Houses in the US but many are in the planning stages.

You can read updates about the house on the Peabody Architects blog.

For more on Passive House please see our website.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment