As most of you know, this blog was originally created to document the 100k House Project in all it’s intricate details. Over the course of that project we covered design, product research, mechanical systems, zoning process and much, much more. We tried to live up to our goal of transparency as much as possible and hoped that our openness was helpful and perhaps, at times, even inspiring.

Since the end of that project this blog has grown into something less defined, but we hope, nearly as interesting. We kept up coverage of the subsequent projects which sprung from the 100k idea and added posts on our philosophy, marketing approach, objects of admiration and a whole mess of other miscellany. Over the years this has led to incredible conversation, valuable relationships, flattering PR and great opportunities for continuing our own education in this field of what we will loosely call green building.

Through this process of blogging, our actual company, Postgreen Homes, found itself slightly obscured. While not a terrible concern, we did think that the Postgreen Homes brand offered a better long-term definition of what we hoped to accomplish than the 100k House. So, when we launched our home customization tool at PostgreenHomes.com, we began to talk about bringing it more to the forefront. To that end, we moved some coverage to a new Postgreen Homes Blog (which some of you have visited). At first these were largely construction related posts specific to individual projects, but in recent days we have chosen to move everything over. That’s right . . . everything.

We have decided that the 100k Blog has run it’s course. It is simply too much to concentrate on two different outlets for our ideas while trying to juggle our actual job of developing real life buildings, and we think that, of the two, Postgreen Homes offers a more appropriate venue for our updates and musings. We understand that in terms of SEO and market exposure this seems, perhaps, a little foolish, but we hope that over time we can make the Postgreen Homes blog into what the 100k has been and even improve upon it.

So, this will be the last new post on 100khouse.com. The archives will remain intact and fully searchable but we intend to simplify the site and leave it as a monument of sorts. This is not, however, the end of the 100k Team or our writing on green building, urban planning, design and all the rest. It is also not the end of the 100k idea of modern, healthy, energy efficient homes at an affordable price. We ask that those of you who have been such an important part of the conversations on the 100k Blog stick with us as we change venues. In fact, we might go so far as to beg . . .

Please read our ongoing writing.

Please sign up for the new RSS Feed or Email Feed.

Please visit ISA, our esteemed 100k partner, for design services.

And please tell people about the change. We know this is a big move and we will need all the help we can get to keep momentum through it.

Before we go, we want to thank all of our readers, especially those of you who have taken the time to share our work and join the conversation on our posts. We have learned a great deal from the process of writing and maintaining this blog, and we have learned a great deal from all of you.  We hope to continue creating useful content and generating powerful conversation as we move this operation to a new home.

This is 100k signing off. We will see you over at Postgreen Homes soon.

It’s a bittersweet time for the owners of the 100K House project homes. Both homes are being put back on the market for the first time since they were built as both families move on to the next phase in their journey through life.

My wife, Courtney, and I are expecting our second child (Mr. Ryker J. Ludeman) in the month of May and desire a division of space in our next house to minimize night time crying battles as much as possible.  Our neighbors in the 120K are moving into a rental as they contemplate a move to the West Coast as they are both finishing up their Masters Degrees in Sustainability. While we’d both love to own these homes forever, we just can’t make it work at this time in our lives.

Yes, many of you commented that a larger family could not work in the 100K. You are right to a degree. We could make it work for a year or so, but there’s something about not being able to close a door to our bedroom for a bit of privacy as the boys get older that just doesn’t sit quite right with us. This house was never intended for a family of four. It has been perfect for us to date and hopefully it will be perfect for the next owner. We think it will.

The 100K will be listed next week most likely for $299K. The 120K is already listed for $319K. The 120K is the one with the orange door on the corner if you are driving by. It has more windows, is 2′ wider than the 100K, has an awesomely wide floating staircase, has a ridiculously huge backyard (by Philly standards) and a fully custom kitchen by Pappajohn Woodworking. This is why it is listed for slightly more than ours on the inside with the green door.

While you’ve come to know these homes well here, some new folks may not know everything about them. They aren’t the largest homes in Philly, but we think they may be the most heavily decorated homes in the city in some key categories. Some of their accolades are listed below:

1. LEED Platinum Certified by the USGBC
2. Energy Star Certified and 50% more efficient than a new code home (utilities bills less than $100 per month on average)
3. LEED for Homes Project of the Year in 2010 awarded by the USGBC (this is a bid deal they tell us)
4. AIA Philadelphia Award Winner (ISA tells us this is a big deal)
5. AIA Pennsylvania Award Winner (ISA tells us this is a bigger deal)
6. National AIA Housing Award
7. Multiple magazine features including Metropolis Mag, Dwell Mag, GRID and GOOD Mag
8. Newsprint mentions including the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Business Journal and many more
9. Numerous articles and posts on the top green building blogs and architecture sites around the world

Here are some of the better pics and videos on the project to complete this post. While we are both sad to leave the project, we are also excited to see who the new owners will be and how they will live in the homes.

100K House Postgreen Homes Flickr Set

-- SimpleFlickr Content --
(Please visit the original post page to view the details.)

Inspired by Design: New Gen, Next Gen by Babelgum

I know I owe everyone a redesign of our Performance Sticker and some talk of the various available home energy use metrics, but that is tall order, and I have been a bit short on time. So, instead I’m going to buy a little more time with a discussion of one of the lesser points that arose in the Sticker post comments . . . how involved does government get in the process of making performance stickers a requirement of the building industry?

Comparative energy use performance information has long been a staple of the auto industry. EPA estimates, for better or worse, have given us a means of comparing the fuel use of cars. They also give those of us obsessed with energy efficiency an open invitation to a dark pit of depression when watching car commercials. Seriously, they’re bragging about 24mpg? Pass me a pint of ice cream, a bottle of rye and my blanky . . . isn’t that how everyone deals with depression?

This testing is, as I understand it, carried out by the car manufacturers and reported to the EPA. The EPA then audits 15% or so of them to keep the manufacturers relatively honest. These tests are only performed on new cars and certain large models are exempt. For instance, GM is not required to provide Hummer data to the EPA. Presumably the 10mpg results would just be too embarrassing for everyone.

Car manufacturers test only a single representative of a given model for mileage as each is expected to be nearly identical. While the results are not always particularly accurate when compared with real life performance, they do provide a fairly reasonable means of comparing different models. For instance, I may not know what the exact, real-life mileage of my Accord will be, but I can be fairly certain it is going to be  15 to 20 mpg better than what I would get from that Dodge Ram.

All of this originated with a “Gas Guzzler” tax intended to encourage the production and purchase of more efficient private automobiles. Larger vehicles like trucks and vans were left out because they were seldom owned for private use. The law assumed if you had a truck or van, you had a legitimate use for it. How surprised those lawmakers would be today when a 6,000 lb truck is considered a perfectly reasonable vehicle for running your 80lb child to soccer practice.

Legally we can't call this a "Gas Guzzler"

So, how might this system apply to homes? Basically, we have a government mandated test for new products tied to a tax. Could that work in the housing market? With what changes? Believe it or not, I have an opinion.

Let’s start with the idea of a tax. We have an established habit of taxing things that have a negative effect on individuals and/or those around them. We tax liquor, tobacco, gas guzzlers, etc. We also tend to be more comfortable with taxes on non-necessities. At a NY grocery store there isn’t a tax on milk, but you’ll be paying one for the cookies to go with it. I think we can agree that low-performance homes fall in one if not both of these categories. So, a tax would not be outside  our historical inclination.

Let’s say we impose a graduated tax based on the projected energy use of new buildings. This tax would be levied either on new construction builders or buyers. I would argue builders as the buyers are going to be paying it either way. Leaving the exact metric out of this for the moment, let’s imagine that we base this tax on the results of some basic standard test and analysis. Results of this test must be sent to the appropriate agency. The agency would then levy the tax and provide an official document to be used in the sale or resale of the home in question.

There are, of course, some challenges. In this plan, each individual home would need to be analyzed. Solar orientation is the biggest reason for this individual attention, though variation in construction quality can certainly not be discounted. This could be conceived as an unreasonable burden on the builder. However, one could also argue that builders have been unreasonably unburdened in this respect for too long. Home performance, unlike performance in nearly every other consumer product, has remained relatively unchanged for a long, long time. This burden could also be reduced by providing a baseline rating based on code requirements. Homes would receive this rating without the necessity for more elaborate testing and be taxed accordingly. Builders would still be required to share the rating with potential buyers.

Another challenge could be oversight. If left to their own devices there is little doubt that some builders would be less than honest in reporting certain specifications. Insulation values, for instance, are an excellent opportunity for subterfuge. The oversight agency would have trouble auditing any of the reported homes for  those things, like insulation, which are difficult to inspect once a home is complete. This could be solved by third party inspection and oversight, but again we start to see the system become cumbersome.

A little drywall and this looks perfectly fine.

Lastly, energy use in a home is difficult to predict as so much relies on the habits of the homeowner. Any predicted usage is likely to be way off. However, this is a similar problem in our car example and rather than dissuade universal enforced use of some sort of metric, this unpredictability of behavior encourages it. The more universal the adoption of a metric like this, the more useful it is. This is because such metrics only provide truly useful information in comparison. Sure, the family that leaves the heat set to 85 and doesn’t believe in an off switch is going to use far more energy than the amount on their home’s  performance sticker. However, they can be reasonably sure that they would be using even more energy if they had bought the home with the lower performance rating.

So, to make a long post short, I propose a required analysis provided by a third party for all new homes. This would likely include a blower door test and a detailed analysis of all specs (orientation, insulation, mechanicals, etc.) including an inspection. In a perfect world, this test could be part of the municipal permitting process with the tax revenue from inefficient homes providing the necessary funding. The result would be an easy to understand comparative metric that would inform buyers and determine the gas guzzler style tax on the property. Of course, there is nothing perfect about this world, and my idea is, without a doubt, too simple to work.

To answer a valid concern in the comments of the original performance sticker post, I don’t think a program like this should be mandatory for older homes, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect some required energy oversight for new or fully rehabbed houses. Older homes could choose to use the system as it becomes something buyers expect to see, but as was mentioned in the comments, there is certainly no need to waste money  to tell me a 100 year old Philly row home is inefficient. I expect it’s use in older homes to become a voluntary but eventually expected practice.

Well, I appear to have used this blog post to demonstrate something of the nature of inefficiency. My apologies. It is as Mark Twain once said, “I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.”

If you made it through, tell me what you think. Should we mandate the use of a particular metric to value the energy performance of new homes? Does an accompanying tax for poorly performing homes make sense? What other strategies are there for insuring consistent use of a single standard?

Use the comments to provide your own insights or to chastise me for my long, lazy and confusing writing.

We just settled on the Two Point Five Beta yesterday marking the completion of Postgreen’s eighth house. We don’t have final photography or LEED results yet, so this is just a quick celebratory post with a more comprehensive one to follow.

This house is the first to feature our new 1two5 Cabinets in the kitchen. The Sepviva Line, designed with matte laminates, aluminum edge banding and clean, simple lines was created for this house in Matte White and Terril. It features the Frigidaire slide in hybrid induction range and the Whirlpool/Bosch combo of fridge and dishwasher. The dishwasher blends in with a custom door panel. The final piece is a 2cm Ceaserstone countertop. We snapped some quick scouting pictures of this kitchen the other day with young Teague in the role of professional model. We felt his former work as an unhappy hipster qualified him for the work. Here’s a sample. More will follow when we take the actual professional shots.

In addition to the 1two5 kitchen the Two Point Five is home to another first. It is the first time we have beat the Passive House air sealing requirement of .6 ACH (Air Changes per Hour) at 50 Pa. Our final blower door came in at .54 ACH as you might have guessed from the cryptic title of this post. We will have more discussion of that in the coming week including how we got there and how it effects our final HERS rating.

Well, it’s a somewhat brief and unsatisfying post, but I promise more very soon. For now, feel free to put any appropriate unhappy hipster captions for the above picture in the comments. Check out the real site for inspiration.

We have talked about simple, mileage-style window stickers for homes before, but for some reason all that talk never led to action. We never actually created one for our own homes. Well, it’s time that oversight was addressed.

I put together a draft version of a window sticker based loosely on the specs from the recent Skinny Project. This is intended to be displayed in the windows of our homes as they are being built. Hopefully, combined with some of our other marketing tools, these signs will help teach people about the most basic differences between our homes and the rest of the market.

The sticker is based largely on the HERS (Home Energy Rating System) Index which provides a means of comparing relative home performance and offers an estimation of energy bills. The numbers presented are obviously just rough estimates subject to the actual behavior of the occupants, but I think they could have value in a comparative environment. Since these numbers are based on a third party standard, they should provide a useful reference when looking at performance across a variety of different homes.

I tried to keep the sticker relatively simple and display the most useful information as prominently as possible. Energy bills get prime placement with the HERS scale coming in second. I also used a bit of space to provide key specs related to performance. The bottom leaves a room for a disclaimer and logos for LEED and Energy Star. The numbers and specs above are just for demonstration purposes, but we hope to give this sticker an actual first run in the upcoming Avant Garage project.

So, what do you think? Could a sticker like this provide a useful resource to potential home buyers? Am I missing any key information? Is the effectiveness of this sign limited by the fact that no other homes will be sporting it?

Let’s talk it over in the comments.

Most of us have probably heard the term “rental grade” in reference to the finishes in an apartment or rental house. Finishes referred to in this way are usually chosen largely for low cost and/or high durability. Things like occupant health or design aesthetic tend to be secondary at best in a “rental grade” unit. This marginalization of the more complex needs of the occupant (beyond simple shelter) is usually carried over into the actual structure of the house as well. Many rental units feature low insulation, sub-par windows, cheap mechanical systems and little to no attention to air sealing. They are inefficient which means they are expensive to the occupant and costly to the environment.

Over 30% of our homes in the US are occupied by renters. This number is likely even higher in major cities. Some of these renters have plenty of choice in the market (from high rise condos that haven’t sold to converted warehouse lofts), but even these privileged renters have very limited options when it comes to performance. For the majority of  less well-funded renters the options are even slimmer. Sure, there are still cool warehouse conversions and old row homes, but if you are hoping for something healthy and efficient, you are likely out of luck. It is also tough to find modern architectural design in anything but the most expensive buildings.

Of course, there is a reason for this, particularly in Philadelphia where we have one of the worst build cost to rental rate ratios in the country. Rental grade is inexpensive. It is cheaper and easier to build drafty, under-insulated units. Material costs are lower if one is unconcerned about air quality. The margins are tight in the Philadelphia rental market, and often, to give people the space they want at a price they can afford, one has to cut corners.

This is a contest where one wants to avoid the top five.

So, how do we upgrade rental grade? How do we improve performance, design and health without pricing everyone out of the units?

To be honest, I’m not sure it’s possible. At least, I think it might be unrealistic to imagine that every rental can perform to the kinds of standards we expect from our homes. Rental grade finishes, in all their unpleasant glory, will remain a consistent part of the landscape. I certainly think there can be improvements in all rentals, but to expect radical change across the entire market is a bit niave. So, the question is, where can we effect change and what kind of change can it be?

I think that there is a market niche in rental much like the one we have identified in homeownership. This is a group of people with a price point somewhere in between the bottom of the rental market where mere location is the driving factor of choice and the top end where money presents broad opportunity. Much like in housing, I think there is an opening to provide a better product at a similar price, but it requires compromise from both the renter and the owner.

The owner needs to be willing to spend the time, energy and money (though hopefully not too much more) up front to create a better building. The design process has to be thoughtful and involved so that performance can improve without ballooning the budget and finish can become more “high end” without high-end products. This upfront investment may mean a slightly less intense focus on pure profit with an eye for the long term benefits of the building strategy on the bottom line. Energy rate increases, growing consumer education and potential incentive structures will add long term value to a building with potentially lower opening margins.

The renter needs to understand that a better designed space can be smaller and still comfortable. They need to embrace urban living so that the city becomes an extension of their home. There may be a slight premium to the spaces but if they can grasp the energy savings and learn to use the building to their advantage that premium evaporates in the face of other savings. There shouldn’t be a sacrifice involved in a well design building. Quite the opposite in fact. But there needs to be a change in perception, especially when it comes to unit size.

Naturally, there will be a finish value difference to be understood as well. This is where design comes in. The expectation of things like granite countertops and other supposedly high-end specifications needs to be challenged by design that redefines affordable materials and creates a new understanding of value. Healthy finish options, artfully assembled can create a better space than all of the sexiest interior design in the most expensive downtown loft. I truly believe that good design can work it’s way around cost.

Lastly, the renter needs some flexibility when it comes to location. This is, however, not a one way street. While the renter should be prepared to find themselves slightly on the edge of their search area, owners need to provide locations that are well connected via transit and in neighborhoods growing in vibrancy and amenities. Location is the key consideration of many renters and owners need to help those renters understand new areas of the city that are not only viable alternatives but in many ways better ones.

This is, as usual, just a rambling account of my own opinions. It is light on details, but that is something we will remedy soon as we begin to develop our own rental units. In fact, we have already sent a couple investor proposals to that end, and if you are interested in getting involved, you need only let us know. We will be talking quite a bit about our specific strategies as those projects get under way.

As always, this post is intended as more of a conversation starter, albiet a long one. So, what do you think? What is the niche market where energy efficient rentals are possible? How much do health, efficiency and design matter to renters? Even if renters aren’t necessarily willing or able to pay much more for a rental are they willing to rethink space requirements, finishes and location in exchange for these things?

Let’s knock this about in the comments.

If you consult for us we will post your picture on the web.

James Bedell (@jamesbedell) has been a follower of the 100K project from the beginning. He also happens to be a young and talented professional lighting designer in NYC working for firms such as Tirshchwell Architectural Lighting. He founded Build2Sustain in 2008, a consulting firm with the mission of bringing sustainable design to commercial environments.

Over the past few years James has teased me a bit in the most friendliest of ways about our exposed CFL lighting and urged us to consider more pleasant alternatives. Well we finally took him up on his offers and have engaged him to help us design more professional lighting options for our Postgreen Homes. In true 100K fashion, James has wholeheartedly agreed to sharing the design process and considerations here on both the 100K blog and his own blog.

Below is an excerpt from our email exchange when we were setting up this consultation listing the many areas we need lighting design advice:

General residential lighting tips for new construction on a budget.

Good sources for residential lighting design for DIY and budget new construction projects.

Kitchen lighting

LED under cabinet lighting on a reasonable budget (we are looking at IKEA options now)

More interesting kitchen lighting like hidden LED lights under the bottom cabs that light the floor and/or LED lights above the top cabs to illuminate the ceiling.

LED vs CFL vs Halogen – I know halogen is preferred for light quality, bit it’s not really an option for us as one of our key goals and differentiators is to have 100% energy efficient lighting in our homes where most others only go 50-75%…

Reducing number of base lights in our homes for cost while maintaining decent light in each room. We’ve actually been told that we have a lot more lights in our base model than most typical builders in Philly which drives up our electric cost.

Attractive (not bulky) track or wire lighting that could illuminate art with multiple lights plugged into one source (see #5 above).

Reasonably priced adjustable recessed lighting that could be used for illuminating artwork or closets.

Budget and modular exterior lighting systems/strategies for small urban back yards and roof decks (our back yard is 13′ x 18′).

James will be focusing on our highest priority items like kitchen lighting and affordable configurations for artwork illumination on the many surfaces in our homes that offer prime real estate for showcasing one’s art, whether it be a collection of pieces from local starving artists or your vintage collection of KISS posters.

An example of Bedell's lighting design

Stay tuned for more on this project in the coming weeks and check out James’s intro post on his own blog. If you have some time, take a look through his past posts for a designer’s perspective on everyday lighting design. One of my personal favorites from last year were his tips on lighting a Christmas tree like a pro.

Our business model to date has identified itself with home ownership, but we are also big fans of rentals. Rental units are a key part of an urban housing mix providing density, incubation for future homeowners and variety for those who just don’t want to be nailed down. If ownership offers a neighborhood a stable base then rentals are the energy that keeps it from stagnating. Rental units are also an important part of our ongoing business goals as we look toward offering people a variety of ways to buy into the Postgreen idea.

We believe there is a big opportunity to introduce healthy, energy efficient options into the rental market. Much like “for sale” housing, rentals seem to have a huge void in the area of reasonably priced, design-centric, sustainable units. Too many renters are paying too much for utilities and living with sub-par air quality, and we think we are in a position to do something about it . . . for a few of them anyway. We will be talking about this extensively here and over at the Postgreen Homes Blog as we get started, so stay tuned.

We are looking to start construction on our first rental units in the next couple of months. To that end, we have sent out an investment proposal for the project to those on our Qualified Investor List. If you think you are on that list and didn’t get a proposal, or if you would like to be on that list, let us know. We are on a tight deadline for our first couple rental properties, so if you want in, speak up soon.

A short and somewhat unsatisfying post, I know, but think of it as a preview of more exciting things to come. Thoughts are welcome in the comments.

We have been playing around with some new ways to post video to our MLS listings and thought you might like to see where it led. As most of you know, we are on the verge of building four homes in the Fishtown neighborhood of Philadelphia under the moniker Avant Garage. These homes, which will feature our coolest interiors to date, are currently available for customization and purchase. Run through the customization tool and tell us what you think. We have made a lot of changes and could use some opinions other than our own.

The video we made, using a service called Animoto is almost like a glorified slide show, but boy is it glorified. I like the initial results, and I think it is a tool we will keep working with in the future. It’s easy to use and there is more flexibility than I originally thought. Feel free to go full screen with it. The high res version looks pretty good.

Don’t worry, this style of video won’t replace our more ridiculous on camera antics, but we think it might play a role in sharing aspects of our projects. I still intend to do a lot of work on the overall format and hopefully will have an update to show you soon, but for now tell us what you think in the comments.

I have a topic for discussion that has been brewing in my head for some time. It is illustrated below in an educatedguessographic about the New Construction Home Building in the US.

Discuss.

Hypothesis: If builders built homes in the “Market Gap” circle, they would sell them. If banks lended to builders that were catering to this market gap, they would be successful.