See article here:
See article here:
Last fall the Seattle City Council put a moratorium on the creation of small lots in single-family neighborhoods. Now they’re revisiting the issue, to develop permanent legislation regulating houses on small lots. In their words the City “supports infill development in single family neighborhoods, including on legally established undersized lots. However, these lots should be clearly and legally delineated, and neighbors should be aware of the potential for new houses to be built. In addition, new houses on undersized lots should be modest enough to be proportional to the size of the lot”.
The DPD (Department of Planning and Development) offered preliminary recommendations, which the Council is reviewing: http://buildingconnections.seattle.gov/2013/03/20/preliminary-recommendations-for-developing-small-single-family-lots/
The local CORA group (Congress Of Residential Architects) developed our own response to this pending legislation. An important part of this proposes to replace the Mid Block, as the small lot development area of choice, with Corner Lots. If the City allows outright for corner lots to contain two houses, it would at the same time provide the additional development potential Seattle needs, in a way that actually IMPROVES those neighborhoods. As noted in the Walkable Livable Communities presentation I developed with some NW Ecobuilding colleagues, double houses on corner lots take those qualities we love about single-family neighborhoods – i.e. the opportunity for social engagement with neighbors (while doing yard work, taking a stroll, sitting on the front porch watching passersby, kids playing on the sidewalk, even just getting in and out of your car), the benefit of eyes on the street/added security, the architectural/aesthetic benefit of front facade/front porch facing the street, etc. – and extends these qualities to the side streets. The before and after sketches below illustrate this:
David Neiman, who’s led CORA’s efforts to critique the City’s proposal, argued our case on KUOW’s The Conversation (he calls in around 20:00).
Early last year I decided I couldn’t hold off any longer getting on the Social Media train. My Queen Anne House had been the AIA/Northwest Home Magazine Home of the Month the previous November, and I was about to give up hope of ever getting any work out of it. Which seemed strange at the time, since in the past it was published projects and recognition such as this which was the source of most of my work. It finally dawned on me that the old-school style of marketing I’d always counted on just wasn’t working anymore.
So, about this time last year I contacted Rory Martin, whom I’d worked with before in re-designing my website, to bring me up to speed with social networking. He developed a multi-step plan, involving setting up a Facebook page for my company, setting up a blog, optimizing my LinkedIn profile, and doing some search engine optimization. In addition, I created a profile for my business on the Houzz website (http://www.houzz.com/pro/jim-burton/jim-burton-architects).
For a few months I didn’t notice any improvement, although Rory showed me the analytics of how many people were seeing my website etc. Finally though, starting about four or five months after I’d started working with him (which was as long as he told me it would take) I started to see some real results. I began getting potential clients calling again. And interestingly, it seemed like I got actual jobs from these more often than in the past. In other words, I think some of this social media gives potential clients a deeper, more genuine sense of who I am, what I do and how I work, than an article in a design mag ever could. I also found that when someone did contact me after, for example, seeing my blog, I was the only architect they were talking to, whereas more often than not in the past I would be one of several architects that potential clients were interviewing.
And I’m getting some new recognition, which is really surprising me. I’ve been told by LinkedIn that I had one of the top 5% most viewed LinkedIn profiles in 2012. I was featured in a Houzz Ideabook (online article) about how design in Seattle responds to the environment (http://www.houzz.com/ideabooks/4184745/list/City-View–Seattle-Design-Reveals-Natural-Wonders). And Jim Burton Architects was chosen as a Houzz Best of 2013 winner, in the Customer Satisfaction category!
Passive House, or passivhaus, is sometimes confused with passive solar, and although the latter is an important component in Passive House design, the terms are not interchangeable.
Passive solar refers to the strategy of using the building itself – the windows, walls, floors – without added equipment, to collect, store, and distribute solar energy as heat. A part of passive solar design is also the control of unwanted solar energy in the summer, through the use of overhangs etc. The idea of passive solar contrasts with active solar, which uses equipment (e.g. photo-voltaic panels, or solar hot water collectors) to do the same.
Passive solar requires thoughtful consideration of the local climate, solar access, building siting and orientation, landscaping etc.
There are several types of Passive Solar. The first, and most basic, is Direct Gain, where the interior space is heated directly through south-facing windows (of course this assumes the building is located in the northern hemisphere).
In Indirect Gain, a thermal mass, for example a “trombe wall”, is located between the south-facing windows and the space to be heated. The advantage in this method is that the transfer of heat to the interior is delayed, so a thermal mass heated during the day may release its heat to the interior at night.
The third type is Isolated Gain, using a separate Sunspace, or Greenhouse, to borrow heat from as needed.
Some Passive Solar Fundamentals:
Some Passive Solar Challenges:
That being said, an existing house can be remodeled to incorporate passive solar strategies, e.g. adding more windows on the south side, adding awnings over south facing windows, or adding thermal mass on the interior.
Without going into detail, I’ll list a few innovative ideas relating to passive solar design:
The heat-gain benefits of passive solar design should always be complemented by strategies to minimize heat-loss, such as adding insulation (beyond code), using high-performance windows, making the building super air-tight, using an HRV, using high-efficiency lighting, plumbing fixtures, appliances and systems, etc. This meshes with the goals of Passive House (you knew I was going to circle back to that, didn’t you?) – to equalize, as much as possible, the heat loss through the envelope of the building, with the heat gains, both external (solar) and internal (peoples bodies, appliances, lighting, etc.).
In my last post I showed two recent projects – one a medium size addition, and the other a new backyard cottage. Here I’ll focus on a very small project, a bathroom remodel in the Queen Anne neighborhood.
The existing bathroom was functional, but just barely so. The built-in tub was tucked into a niche, under a vaulted ceiling that required the homeowners to crouch down to take a shower. The toilet was located behind a too-big vanity, which protruded into the doorway (the door actually had to open out into the hallway). The goal in the project was to improve the configuration and functionality, introduce some more refined finishes, and do so in a cost-effective fashion.
The door opening was moved away from the sink, and the door was re-used as a custom (i.e. substantial) pocket door. The toilet was moved into the vaulted space, because its function allowed it to work well with the lower ceiling there. The tub was moved around the corner, to give it more headroom and bring it more natural light. The new clawfoot tub allows the tile floor to run underneath, and makes the room feel more spacious. Its ring curtain allows the window to be open to the room, but provide privacy when in use. The pedestal sink is set away from the door, and allows easier access into the room. A pedestal was chosen to, again, let the tile floor run underneath and keep the room feeling bigger.
There’s an interesting mix of traditional (the clawfoot tub) and modern (the pedestal sink and toilet) fixtures, which are tied together by similar colors and hardware, and complement each other nicely.
A painted beadboard wainscot wraps the room and connects everything together. Its cap aligns with the window sill, and extends out at the sink wall to provide shallow shelf space, for toiletries, display items etc. A new mirrored medicine cabinet adds more storage, and is worked into the design of the sink and shelf.
We also took the opportunity, once the walls were opened up, to add insulation, do some air-sealing, upgrade the existing plumbing and electrical, and make some structural improvements.
I’d like to take this opportunity to show a couple of recently completed projects. The first is a Backyard Cottage, my second completed since Seattle’s Backyard Cottage Ordinance was approved 3 years ago (I have two more in the planning stage). The second project is a modern addition to an old Tudor style house.
Green Lake Backyard Cottage
This project is a new Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (DADU) in the backyard of a house in the Green Lake neighborhood of Seattle. Driven by the program, this cottage had to completely max out the allowable square footage (800 s.f.), and the maximum roof heights (16′ on the low side, 20′ on the high side). Spatially, the building was shoe-horned into the allowable building envelope, and just barely allowed comfortable ceiling height at the top of the stairs. In the end, what was created was an efficient but comfortable open living space, with gracious bedrooms and baths.
The cottage includes 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, a kitchen and family/dining room. It can be re-configured as needed to provide a separate one-bedroom rental for a tenant, and an extra bedroom for the main residence. The project had a modest budget, but because of the small size allowed the owners to splurge on the bathroom and kitchen finishes, and exterior elements such as the galvanized steel canopies.
The siding is a mix of cedar, and cement-board siding, installed in a rain-screen fashion over rigid exterior insulation, which acts as a thermal break. The outdoor court is technically a parking spot (accessed from the alley), but is not used as such for the current tenant. A mechanized sliding gate can close off the court from the alley.
The main floor bedroom includes a space-saving Murphy bed, with a fold-down table to make the space even more versatile.
This project was a rear yard addition to an existing 1920′s era house in the Ravenna neighborhood. The addition included a master suite downstairs, and a family room off the existing kitchen and dining areas upstairs. The existing kitchen was remodeled too. A roof terrace was added off the family room. The work to the existing portions of the house was kept to a minimum to help stay within a limited budget.
The homeowners wanted their addition to be in the modern style, but did not want to change the appearance of the house from the street. On the interior too there is a striking change in style between the old and new portions, delineated by the new beam separating the two.
A frosted glass railing helps diffuse the light, both natural (during the day) and artificial (at night – a pendant light is centered in the stair well behind), throughout the space.
The stair wall consists of a cabinet that provides dense storage on all sides – at the main floor, on the stairwell side, and at the bedroom below.
The basement floor is a heated concrete slab. A sliding barn door shuts off the bedroom from the stairway.
It’s been a few weeks since my last post, due to a combination of a flurry of new work, and some technical glitches I’ve had to work through. I apologize – it won’t happen again!
If you’re considering doing a design project, either a new house, or a remodel or addition to your existing house, I’d like to try to describe the architectural design process for you. I’ll present it in a linear, orderly fashion, but keep in mind that not all projects are simple – often the project becomes more clearly understood as it develops, and/or the owner decides to proceed in a different direction, so previous phases may be revisited to some extent.
A typical residential design project consists of five discrete phases. These are: Pre-design, Schematic Design, Design Development, Contract Documents, and Construction Administration. Depending on the scope of the project, the desires of the owner(s), and how quickly decisions are made, some of these phases may be abbreviated, or extra lengthy, or not required at all.
Pre-design involves any work required which occurs before design begins. Typically it includes discussion with the clients about their goals for the project, including their functional requirements, aesthetic preferences, etc., as well as budget, schedule, and quality goals. For a remodel or addition, measurements are taken of the existing house, and ‘as-built’ drawings are created from these (if you have existing drawings these can save time and expense). These as-built drawings form the base for subsequent design work. Other pre-design work may involve photo documentation of the existing structure and site, code research, review of neighborhood covenants etc.
In this phase the information collected in the pre-design phase is used to generate design ideas. This work starts very conceptually, taking the site configuration into account (including potential passive solar strategies), orientation, exploring adjacencies, circulation, etc. As schematic design progresses, the design begins to gel. Several options are studied, reviewed, and then one is chosen to develop further. 3D studies are done, to visualize the different options. At the end of this phase a definite design direction has evolved, and the scope of work is fairly well established.
In this phase the preferred Schematic Design scheme is – you guessed it – developed. Often the scale of design drawings jumps from 1/8” to 1/4” per foot. The design becomes more detailed, and systems (e.g. structural and mechanical) are reviewed and incorporated. An Outline Specification is developed to accompany the drawings, and includes written information (i.e. flooring materials, door hardware, appliances etc.) that cannot be contained in the drawings.
In this phase the drawings required for Permit and Construction are created. Usually by the end of Design Development there is not much work required for Permit submittal. The drawings are refined, dimensions are added, special conditions are detailed. The Specifications are finalized, and become part of the Construction Documents.
In this phase the design becomes reality. The architect’s work here involves assuring that the design intent is being met in the construction. There may be weekly site meetings with the owner and contractor, and clarifications and details may be requested from the contractor for items not included in the drawings.
There can be additional phases – for example Feasibility Study (if someone wants to determine if a project they’re considering is even possible, or if a house they’re considering buying would lend itself to a remodel they’re envisioning), Post-Construction Services, etc., but the ones laid out above are typical to most projects.
How a Contractor is selected varies from project to project – sometimes the owner brings a contractor to the project, sometimes one is selected in the course of the design, and sometimes one is selected through a bidding process. I often recommend a contractor to owners, based on the type of project, and what the owners are looking for.
In a future post I’ll talk about How to Work with an Architect, with tips on how to ensure your project is a successful one.
With a few simple improvements, a drab old house can become beautiful. Often clients come to me looking to upgrade an older home, not just aesthetically, but also functionally and structurally. I won’t get into the structural aspects here, and functional improvements usually involve turning a compartmentalized, inefficient floor plan into an open, well flowing layout through the opening up of walls, improving relationships between spaces etc. Or adding on to an existing house to gain square footage, and at the same time making improvements to the existing spaces.
Aesthetic upgrades are the subject of this post. These can range from a major second story addition, which completely changes the look of the house both inside and out, to a very simple and cost-effective “facelift”. Following are some examples, which show before and after photos, and describe the scope.
This project took a boring flat roof box and dramatically updated it. The only addition was a 70 s.f. penthouse, to access the new roof deck. The interior was completely reconfigured, and the exterior was re-designed to draw attention to the new solar array on top. The siding was installed in a rainscreen fashion:
This very small remodel was strictly an exterior facelift. The owners felt the front façade lacked character, and wanted to cue visitors how to find the side entry. Through the addition of some corner windows, and wrapping the wood siding down and around to the front door, the design successfully improves the entry sequence, in a very cost-effective manner:
This late 70’s house, which was comprised of several shed roof volumes competing for attention, was simplified by eliminating all but the main shed. The other elements were reconfigured to become either exterior terraces, or “flat” roofs, and three new siding materials (cedar, cement-board and metal) were introduced to differentiate the parts: