Built-Ins are Bankable

Built-ins are Bankable:

You enter the dwelling space and you immediately sense that the owners have overreached. It isn't a matter of the size or the cost of the housing. The sparse furnishings suggest that the owners simply haven't the money to fit out their new digs.
The fact is that the cost of furnishing a new home is rarely factored into the total cost of housing. Typically new starts begin with a hand me down or two, play out a shabby chic style, or worse, go into more debt, at outrageous interest costs, to furnish a space. "Rent to own", credit cards, or furniture store credit is usually exorbitant.
If we are to develop affordable housing options we have to be mindful of the total livability cost of any space. So here are a couple of thoughts and strategies we might employ.

When I say that "built-ins are bankable" what I mean is that if the builder has included the banquette pictured at the top for example, it is included in the cost of the house and is wrapped into the mortgage. It is financed at the same time as the home and at the same interest rate as the structure. It is part of the structure and therefore considered "real estate". In today's market that means the cost of the money for the kitchen seating group was 5%. As long as we continue to provide tax reductions for interest payments on real estate, the interest is deductible.
Strategy number one has us influencing builders to include as many built-ins as we can imagine.. The pic above is from a book currently on Google Books. The cover itself is filled with possibilities.

Strategy number two involves people about to buy a new space and before they agree to purchase they develop plans for additional built-ins that they want included in their new home. If the builder is still on site it is probable he will welcome the opportunity to increase his return on the structure. If the original builder is not available then the buyer can contact an aftermarket retro-fitter and work out a building plan that is formalized and thus can be brought to the table with their lender. This movie shows a typical retrofit.

A third strategy has a person in their space and considering a refinance, or executing a part of a home equity loan. In both cases a set of plans and contracts for built-ins will be accepted as a bankable home improvement. At times like these, "cheap money" suggests the time is right to increase your "relatively cheap" home line of credit rather than getting killed by your credit card rates. So consider beds, closets, book cases, entertainment centers, cupboards, storage chests, shop benches, the list goes on. Built-ins are also the key to maximizing small spaces and making them functional. THINK BOAT.

Granny Flats and why you want them

The best definition of an ADU comes from an issue of New Urban News, Dec 2001:

"Granny flats add flexibility and affordability. 
In several new urban communities, accessory dwelling units are strong sellers and offer benefits to both home owners and developers.
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) appear under many aliases — granny flats, garage apartments, carriage houses, ancillary units — and they almost invariably show up on a checklist of what sets new urban communities apart from conventional subdivisions. They are by no means ubiquitous, but developers from diverse projects report that granny flats have become a popular amenity and an important selling point.
For some home owners, the most attractive aspect of ADUs is the potential for extra income from renting out the unit. Other home owners view the extra space as a flexible addition that can be used as a home office, as lodging for teenage children or elderly family members, or as a guest room with great privacy.
From a developer’s perspective, ADUs provide an extra tier of housing options — affordable units that can attract people from diverse age and income groups. Another benefit is safer and more lively alleys. With more “eyes on the street,” children and adults are more likely to use the alley for play and socialization".

The article goes on to discuss great examples of win-win opportunities where the concept is implemented, and though describing new housing, it establishes the concept. It could be applied to existing stock through smart adaptation. Some companies are starting to build portable structures to be moved into back yards as needed.

This idea however is very controversial. One story jumped out at me, This from Binghamton NY:
Profs use Facebook info to evict BU students
Originally Published 2007-12-07
By Erika Neddenien
Six Binghamton University students face eviction after their neighbors — two BU professors — used Facebook to determine that they were in violation of the West Side’s R-1 zoning law, Binghamton’s Mayor Matt Ryan said.

The R-1 zoning law, which restricts a chunk of Binghamton’s West Side to “factual and functional families,” is typically only enforced when reports are made about a violation. The issue made headlines in 2000 when two dozen students were evicted from their homes.

To try to get a grip on this "problem" The city commissioned "A Report of the Mayor’s Commission on Housing and Home Ownership"
The result was to suggest the creation of an "overlay district" in which "student housing" was encouraged.
BUT: Within their summary the planners identified the following strategy to limit:"Rebuttable presumption / presumptive limit approach: This approach is a somewhat complex concept. What it amounts to is setting a numerical occupancy limit, which can be waived under specified circumstances, based on the number of unrelated tenants who can live together in a dwelling unit. The limit is waived if the landlord (or tenants) can demonstrate that the tenants are the “functional equivalent” of a traditional family—based on criteria set forth in the Zoning Code. (Most municipalities throughout the U.S. employ this functional family equivalent approach, as a result of Constitutional rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court and the highest courts of most states.) The presumptive limit approach is further complicated by the need to decide whether to apply the same presumptive limit to dwelling units in R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts- -and, if not, how to draw principled distinctions. It also creates endless debates about the rationality of applying the same presumptive limit to large versus small houses, and to houses with many versus few bedrooms " Students considered this a ghetto that limited their choices.
The city in an attempt to quell student outrage at what they conceive of as restrictive zoning addressed them with respect citing they were only interested in their safety. Too many persons in a home is a fire hazard.

There you have it. This isn't the first time the issue of non traditional families living together caused a ruckus. "Exclusionary rules" have been challenged around the country with varying degrees of success. The Fair Housing Act is a response to handicapped persons wanting to live together and having been rebuked. Same sex marriage prohibitions run right into this issue of what constitutes a family or the "head of a household".

In 1985 the following abstract appeared:
CHALLENGING THE EXCLUSIONARY IMPACT OF FAMILY DEFINITIONS IN AMERICAN MUNICIPAL ZONING ORDINANCES
MARSHA RITZDORF Iowa State University
Copyright 1985 Urban Affairs Association

Although not often included in the literature devoted to exclusionary zoning practices, an examination of the use and abuse of family definitions in American municipal zoning ordinances is important to those who are concerned with the revitalization of American cities and suburbs. Many of the ideas suggested for innovative reuse of existing housing are linked to the family definition. Accessory units in single-family dwellings and shared housing are two examples. This paper briefly examines the history of family definitions in municipal zoning ordinances, reviews the major court decisions concerning their use and discusses the relevance of the continued use of family definitions when current demographic changes are taken into consideration.

Since then the issue keeps bubbling up. New Urbanists, trying to increase density and walkability in their planned communities meet resistance. Whereas the article at the top sites eyes on the street as a positive. The following article in Reason Magazine argues against it:
"Crime-Friendly Neighborhoods
How "New Urbanist" planners sacrifice safety in the name of "openness" and "accessibility"


ADUs marketed with seniors in mind are doing better. ECHO is a program that is gaining traction. In some cases it pays to be old.

Here are other examples of places struggling with the concept. Denver,
Boston, Provo, and here is a great story from Santa Cruz.

For our purposes it is safe to say that those of us looking for creative ways to solve the housing crisis the idea of ADUs makes sense. Were this to be a widely adopted housing pattern, you can imagine a set of dwellings which enhance "family values". Owners could shift the footprint of their homes as their family composition changes without having to uproot. Homes could expand and contract as needs determined. New homeowners offset mortgage costs. If their family grows they move into the ancillary spaces. When family members move on, the now empty nester has space to rent again. This is an idea whose time has come. Be vigilant and attend those dull zoning hearings. Your life depends on it.

Headroom

Several times a year a major city paper publishes a story about the coolest small space in the city. The latest entry is too cute to boot. The article leaves some questions unanswered. Where, for instance, is her storage? How does she entertain? Does the small space make her feel claustrophobic in foul weather.


Ms. Biosic's small space is typical in that it enjoys a high ceiling and as the picture reveals she sleeps in a loft space. In this case, and to be fair, we ought to calculate cubic feet as she lives within a volume. The sleeping loft is a design that appreciates the fact that the occupant doesn't need headroom when she occupies it and makes her space livable.

I am going to guess that the most important piece of furniture in her space is the table. It serves a multitude of uses. It is a dining table when she eats, a desk when she works, a prep surface when she cooks, and a board when she irons. Her satisfaction with her space is dependent on maximizing the surfaces she has by putting them to multiple use.

I believe that the key to the success of this and other small spaces is that the occupant offloads to her surroundings the support systems that round out her needs. Typically she does her laundry at the Laundromat, picks up a variety of meals at anyone of hundreds of new venues catering to her, works out at the health club, keeps her excess stuff in a rental storage space, uses public transportation, and arranges her Thanksgiving Day guests overnight accommodations at a nearby hotel. She gets her reading material at the library, maintains a very basic wardrobe which she can update regularly, and the art she views hangs on the walls of nearby galleries.

This life style is served up like a bauble, fun to read about, and reserved for the "bohemians" that exist like curios in a gallery. The facts are that most of us continue to move to the suburbs and house scale continues to grow. But the current housing crisis might give that momentum pause and allow many to consider the lessons learned in descriptions of small spaces to be more generally applicable.

The primary factor in determining housing cost is scale. Builders build and price on a per square foot basis. If we calculate the "value added" that Ms. Biosic enjoys by living in a dense urban area, she can more than offset the higher per square foot cost that she pays to live there. The smaller house movement is most relevant within an urban context. If we apply the additional environmental benefit of having a smarter, more efficient dwelling, then small spaces become less an art object and more a critical piece in solving our global problems.