When you've been around as long as I have you know that the architecture economy waxes and wanes dramatically...
I have a full time job but more freelance inquiries than I can handle right now, and every architect I know is looking to hire. Is everyone else this busy too? Are things going too fast for our own good right now?
geezertect
Mar 25, 16 2:29 pm
Carerra,
Interesting article but my gut says it wouldn't really work for the intended buyers. To architects those houses may have a certain charm, but to most people they look way too much like rural tarpaper shacks, including the way they are sitting on concrete block piers. If somebody is genuinely poor (not just in the kid-just-starting-out sense), they want a house that doesn't look like a poor person's house. Brick, shutters, coach lights, etc. People try to imitate those above them on the pecking order, not below. Poor people look for symbols of what they perceive as middle class respectability.
You need a certain arty, upper middle class sensibility to appreciate the aesthetic, which architects may have but most poor people don't.
This is probably a subject for a different thread.
bowling_ball
Mar 25, 16 4:56 pm
The director of Rural Studio has stated that those houses actually cost around $150k + land + site services +++. Some may say that's misleading and I think that's a fair comment.
Carrera
Mar 25, 16 9:51 pm
^^ & ^, the concept of designing homes that can grow over time with attachments or multiple structures and get real with square footage just appeals to my senses, think geezer is right about mindsets…everybody thinks they are one of the Kardashian’s….we’ve had this discussion on here before…zoning mandates “big” to get more taxes, banks push “big” to get more interest, and everyone wants to be a Kardashian.
I guess these things will never change, but that shouldn’t stop architects from proving otherwise….even if it’s just to people who wear tin foil hats.
Mar 25, 16 11:29 pm
Geezer,
The siding can be a number of materials and color so it wouldn't have to be vertical siding. They can be horizontal siding as well. The cost would not be changed in any significant way.
HOWEVER, in seismic zone D2, I would be surprised if pier foundations like that is even possible to pass seismic code requirements and continuous foundation or footing requirements and necessary shear wall resistance.
The foundation needed to implement in seismic zone D2 would likely require additional costs. If you must use a continuous exterior foundation, the cost can probably be significant for a continuous wall foundation. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of the foundation along being $10,000-$15,000 taking labor & material. Without counting labor cost and just material costs and we are looking at $7,000 to $10,000. You could conceivably shave a little cost and get to about 80% of the price above and maybe a little less 2/3 if you can maximize design. That's just for doing a continuous foundation for one that had a black-ish vertical siding. This is ballparking without doing a precise calculation for poured concrete footing. After all, I'm just shooting from the hip.
Partly based on 2013 National Concrete & Masonry Estimator: Page 153 - per linear foot of wall and estimate wall height and some padding for inflation cost since 2013.
There is probably plenty of stuff not accounted for in ball park and I wouldn't be surprised if it would still exceed my ballpark estimate. without doing a detail material list and doing the number crunching and material price research, I would add probably 30%-50% contingency to my figures.
That would mean $10,000-$15,000 would be $15,000 to $22,500 with 50% contingency.
$7000-$10,000 would be $10,500 to $15,000. Either way, you are looking at a fairly significant cost just in making the foundation let alone the house itself. Therefore, that house would likely be a bit more. Lets not forget the cost of water and sewer and even basic electrical (pole to breaker stage installation), those costs are pretty much the same as it would be a full size house. This is why houses below 1000 sq.ft. tends to actually have a higher cost per sq.ft. Especially when you go below 750 sq.ft.
This is because certain costs you face up front that are more or less fixed or near fixed cost in that they don't scale with size of building. While the internal plumbing and electrical may scale somewhat as well as mechanical if much of any. However, there is the cost of bringing it from the right of way to the building that doesn't change much if at all. These will effect the total PROJECT COST.
The problem with these little article and the costs given is it is deceptive in some way. It doesn't account for the total project cost.
If one does a pro forma and project cost per sq.ft., it is significantly higher than average size homes and it is with these things that don't scale down proportionally with the size of the homes that makes the barriers to entry in affordable housing. I just point to some and what others have said including the article talks about such is Regions Bank refer to.
greenlander1
Jul 27, 16 4:49 pm
Anyone have any thoughts on the architecture/ construction economy? I have a friend who works in downtown LA who said they made some small layoffs. Right now, most of my colleagues in real estate investment/development are in sell mode or just developing land they already bought.
Volunteer
Jul 27, 16 6:56 pm
I have heard the uber rich New York market is getting soft. Heard the same thing about San Francisco several days go. And apparently the 'Silicon Valley' area had gotten so insanely expensive people are just passing on jobs there if they have an alternative place to go
Apparently in San Francisco as the cost of living there has exploded the quality of life there, with the homeless and related crime, has been dramatically reduced.
It doesn't take too many shocks to seriously damage an urban fabric, as Paris and Nice demonstrate all too sadly.
urbanity
Jul 27, 16 9:05 pm
multifamily in california is in full swing. lots of building and lots of selling. new production housing market has softened a bit. existing housing sales seem to be stronger.
hearing that the multifamily market may be good for another 18-24 months, but who really knows. it's all guesswork.
some mf developers are thinking that southern california still has room for rental increases. rents are astronomical now, although salaries have yet to increase in the same proportions as the rental market increases.
everything is getting more expensive, except for gas.
When you've been around as long as I have you know that the architecture economy waxes and wanes dramatically...
I have a full time job but more freelance inquiries than I can handle right now, and every architect I know is looking to hire. Is everyone else this busy too? Are things going too fast for our own good right now?
Carerra,
Interesting article but my gut says it wouldn't really work for the intended buyers. To architects those houses may have a certain charm, but to most people they look way too much like rural tarpaper shacks, including the way they are sitting on concrete block piers. If somebody is genuinely poor (not just in the kid-just-starting-out sense), they want a house that doesn't look like a poor person's house. Brick, shutters, coach lights, etc. People try to imitate those above them on the pecking order, not below. Poor people look for symbols of what they perceive as middle class respectability.
You need a certain arty, upper middle class sensibility to appreciate the aesthetic, which architects may have but most poor people don't.
This is probably a subject for a different thread.
The director of Rural Studio has stated that those houses actually cost around $150k + land + site services +++. Some may say that's misleading and I think that's a fair comment.
^^ & ^, the concept of designing homes that can grow over time with attachments or multiple structures and get real with square footage just appeals to my senses, think geezer is right about mindsets…everybody thinks they are one of the Kardashian’s….we’ve had this discussion on here before…zoning mandates “big” to get more taxes, banks push “big” to get more interest, and everyone wants to be a Kardashian.
I guess these things will never change, but that shouldn’t stop architects from proving otherwise….even if it’s just to people who wear tin foil hats.
Geezer,
The siding can be a number of materials and color so it wouldn't have to be vertical siding. They can be horizontal siding as well. The cost would not be changed in any significant way.
HOWEVER, in seismic zone D2, I would be surprised if pier foundations like that is even possible to pass seismic code requirements and continuous foundation or footing requirements and necessary shear wall resistance.
The foundation needed to implement in seismic zone D2 would likely require additional costs. If you must use a continuous exterior foundation, the cost can probably be significant for a continuous wall foundation. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of the foundation along being $10,000-$15,000 taking labor & material. Without counting labor cost and just material costs and we are looking at $7,000 to $10,000. You could conceivably shave a little cost and get to about 80% of the price above and maybe a little less 2/3 if you can maximize design. That's just for doing a continuous foundation for one that had a black-ish vertical siding. This is ballparking without doing a precise calculation for poured concrete footing. After all, I'm just shooting from the hip.
Partly based on 2013 National Concrete & Masonry Estimator: Page 153 - per linear foot of wall and estimate wall height and some padding for inflation cost since 2013.
http://www.get-a-quote.net/QuoteEngine/costbook.asp?WCI=CostSectionFrameSet&SectionId=5641672&ShowWholePage=Y
There is probably plenty of stuff not accounted for in ball park and I wouldn't be surprised if it would still exceed my ballpark estimate. without doing a detail material list and doing the number crunching and material price research, I would add probably 30%-50% contingency to my figures.
That would mean $10,000-$15,000 would be $15,000 to $22,500 with 50% contingency.
$7000-$10,000 would be $10,500 to $15,000. Either way, you are looking at a fairly significant cost just in making the foundation let alone the house itself. Therefore, that house would likely be a bit more. Lets not forget the cost of water and sewer and even basic electrical (pole to breaker stage installation), those costs are pretty much the same as it would be a full size house. This is why houses below 1000 sq.ft. tends to actually have a higher cost per sq.ft. Especially when you go below 750 sq.ft.
This is because certain costs you face up front that are more or less fixed or near fixed cost in that they don't scale with size of building. While the internal plumbing and electrical may scale somewhat as well as mechanical if much of any. However, there is the cost of bringing it from the right of way to the building that doesn't change much if at all. These will effect the total PROJECT COST.
The problem with these little article and the costs given is it is deceptive in some way. It doesn't account for the total project cost.
If one does a pro forma and project cost per sq.ft., it is significantly higher than average size homes and it is with these things that don't scale down proportionally with the size of the homes that makes the barriers to entry in affordable housing. I just point to some and what others have said including the article talks about such is Regions Bank refer to.
Anyone have any thoughts on the architecture/ construction economy? I have a friend who works in downtown LA who said they made some small layoffs. Right now, most of my colleagues in real estate investment/development are in sell mode or just developing land they already bought.
I have heard the uber rich New York market is getting soft. Heard the same thing about San Francisco several days go. And apparently the 'Silicon Valley' area had gotten so insanely expensive people are just passing on jobs there if they have an alternative place to go
Apparently in San Francisco as the cost of living there has exploded the quality of life there, with the homeless and related crime, has been dramatically reduced.
It doesn't take too many shocks to seriously damage an urban fabric, as Paris and Nice demonstrate all too sadly.
multifamily in california is in full swing. lots of building and lots of selling. new production housing market has softened a bit. existing housing sales seem to be stronger.
hearing that the multifamily market may be good for another 18-24 months, but who really knows. it's all guesswork.
some mf developers are thinking that southern california still has room for rental increases. rents are astronomical now, although salaries have yet to increase in the same proportions as the rental market increases.
everything is getting more expensive, except for gas.