with the unprecedented migration of the
world’s population into cities we have
the opportunity to rethink a variety of
urban issues among the most pressing of
these is the provision of affordable
housing
now communities around the world have
responded with both inventive topologies
and inspiring public action but what
continues to be proven as the most
critical factor is the way in which
these two interact
now housing or the home is a cultural
concept and it’s one that differs
greatly from place to place in the
United States property ownership or the
asset that is one’s home carries with it
immense historical significance the
house and the land that it sits on is a
primary symbol of the American Dream and
the obtaining of it is the most
prominent rite of passage into the
middle class for the better part of a
century this has represented the
majority of American households while
various forms of subsidized means have
been used to house the less fortunate
the gap in between these two initially
intended to be quite modest and occupied
by things like market rent was to
operate as a bridge allowing movement
from one side to the other but as home
prices have risen on one side and the
means available for subsidy have
decreased on the other that gap has
grown far too large and any opportunity
for lateral movement has all but
disappeared what exactly do we mean when
to provide a little context this is
Jeffrey he makes thirty thirty two
thousand dollars a year which places him
roughly right in the middle of the
second quintile for decades housing the
least affluent forty percent of
Americans like Jeffrey has primarily
been the responsibility of government
agencies such as municipal housing
organizations these groups generally
speaking defined affordability as
spending less than thirty percent of a
household’s income on accommodations
this is often surprising because by that
definition that’s a lot of people not
just the poorest of the poor so further
dependent on income spending more than
this can qualify a family for any number
of programs whether it be subsidized
rents tax credits housing vouchers all
of which are administered by these
groups now the physical infrastructure
that a system like this can afford is
often quite poor for on top of
allocating and distributing these
subsidies they have to act as real
estate agents developers landlords and
all the other roles that go into mass
housing on the other hand the
overwhelming majority of owner-occupied
housing in the United States has been
produced by merchant builders who by way
of consolidating all aspects of
development and simple economies of
scale are able to produce a lot of
housing very efficiently not
surprisingly with the onset of the home
as an asset the bulk of innovation
that’s available in the industry has
been concentrated on the production and
marketing of housing to those that can
afford it inexpensive housing is simply
not as lucrative as luxury apartments
and housing built for sale even at its
cheapest it’s still far too expensive
for people like Jeffrey but what if it
wasn’t what if we could develop
affordable housing models that take
advantage of the commodification of the
home in ways that not only generate
wealth but
produce healthier cities I think this is
possible and I think at the root of it
is building design in its capacity to
respond to both the social and economic
realities of the 21st century home in
other words rather than continuing to
value engineer buildings that reflect an
increasingly antiquated view of
domesticity we could begin leveraging
contemporary lifestyles and tailoring
our buildings to the new emerging more
affordable ways of living so what would
this actually look like I’d like to
suggest three levels at which changes
could be made first policy public
efforts have gradually recognized the
advantages of the private sector and we
need to continue to promote affordable
housing as a developer friendly endeavor
not just an obligatory afterthought this
means rather than simply helping Jeffrey
pay his rent we incentivize the building
of homes that target a price that he can
afford but we also need to be open to
new potentially more accessible forms of
this rather established method for
example collective private commissioning
is an embraced and encouraged project
delivery model in other parts of the
world
it sees the bypassing of many of the
development related costs by way of the
direct funding and building of housing
buys future residents so in other words
Jeffrey and his friends while they may
not be able to afford the building of
their individual homes can pool their
resources and develop their own building
it’s a model that’s seen tremendous
success in other countries not only by
way of cost savings but also with
respect to certain social benefits
things like having a say in who your
neighbors are
second planning unlocking land into and
its value is potentially the most
significant way to create affordability
current development trends heavily favor
two ends of a spectrum on one side you
have a house built on a parcel of land
that goes largely unused and on the
other a unit within a build
with no individual parcel simply
shrinking the parcel significantly
reduces costs and in suburban context
where the developer is producing a
higher building footprint to land ratio
the added revenue can be passed on to
Jeffrey a savings in their proven ways
of consolidating the what would be
private open space into public parks and
amenities that have the same
compensatory qualities with respect to
residential density but municipalities
need to be promoting the same type of
thinking within existing urban fabrics
because as cities grow and layers are
added a host of leftover earth in
between pockets of land appear there
often oddly shaped or considered too
small for traditional topologies and go
largely unused for any number of reasons
for example it’s often very
time-consuming and expensive to harvest
these valuable urban resources making
their development exclusive to designer
or bespoke custom homes but if we
eliminated the red tape and lift lifted
the fees and municipalities began
incentivizing this type of incremental
urbanism people like Jeffrey could use
them as a means to affordability but
it’s also common that these increasingly
rare urban sites
despite their proximity to urban centers
have some sort of undesirable
characteristic to them whether if their
shape is simply too weird or they have a
noisy neighbor or any number of things
that keep them from being developed
however these seemingly negative
qualities can almost always be mitigated
by way of building design and we need to
realize that the connectivity that these
sites often offer is far more important
in terms of the long term health of any
housing development especially those
that target lower earning households so
by prioritizing access to food education
employment we can significantly increase
the success of not only a
durable housing but our cities in
general in thirdly building design not
surprisingly the most significant
expense when it comes to the production
of mass housing is construction this
creates a tremendous opportunity for
designers everywhere to explore cost
saving strategies through critically
examining that house home relationship
this can be really simple things like
using standardized materials in sizes
this 2,000 square foot home for example
uses 205 for buy sheets of plywood for
its schita and this 2,000 square foot
home uses 132 but the cost of
construction can be thought of as half
materials in half labor so while there’s
a reduction in materials here there’s an
even bigger savings from the fact that
on that first house 44 percent of those
pieces of plywood need to be cut on site
and on the second just 13 percent when
this reasoning is applied throughout the
construction process that savings is
compounded in the use of generic
components doesn’t need to imply generic
assemblies but can in fact produce more
exciting results based on the thoughtful
invention that’s required
or how about typological considerations
the back to back row house is an
extremely cost effective way to build
housing it’s got a relatively small
footprint plenty of shared walls and a
single foundation however it’s a fairly
unpleasant arrangement in terms of
exposure to light and air being a single
orientation unit but by simple simply
swapping one of those levels you get the
same unit on the same parcel but with
two orientations and that much desired
cross ventilation
this produces a far more comfortable in
quality living environment within a very
inexpensive building type and can also
reduce costs associated with energy
consumption or perhaps we can design
flexible homes that reflect the changing
nature of the standard household an
increasingly popular strategy that’s
used as a means to affordability is
multi-generational living
typically speaking people have a very
similar trajectory in terms of what
stages of life are for owning and what
stages of life are for renting during
those times of ownership there is
usually just one generation contributing
to the cost of living but if we can
consolidate some of those stages that
cost can be spread out so Geoffrey’s now
young adult son or daughter fresh out of
college rather than renting an apartment
could be helping out with the mortgage
payment or Geoffrey’s parents rather
than moving into a retirement community
or an assisted living facility they
could pitch in – the problem is Jeffrey
like most of us doesn’t want live with
his parents but by reconfiguring the
basic programs of the home we can create
a hierarchy of accessibility and more
importantly autonomy
amongst the private spaces of the basic
house this creates a far more
accommodating environment for more than
one contributing generation or perhaps
we could reconsider the degree to which
new homes are finished new home owners
spend four times more than established
established residents on related
products and services we usually fit out
new homes as a means to marketing them
just to have them immediately modified
but what if we could design and build
homes to a degree of only what is
essential to utility the resident can
then move in and fit them out at their
own pace into their own desires this not
only has the potential to drastically
reduce entry-level costs but also to
create more diverse and eclectic
neighborhoods in combat the homogeneity
that plagues so many traditional
affordable housing models now this is
far from an exhaustive list but it’s
just meant to demonstrate the role that
design can have in promoting
affordability and while there’s clear
social and economic implications here I
believe the real benefit to such
strategies is that it’s good urban ISM
creating access to affordable housing is
absolutely critical for generating
healthy community
reducing financial strain as it relates
to housing costs allows residents to
establish a genuine stake in the
neighborhood
the benefits range from better health
and school outcomes increased civic
engagement and volunteerism reduced
crime and a higher lifetime law the key
is tapping into design as not something
to be afforded but as a means to
affordability thank you
you [Music]