HOMEWORKS®

Stephen Kendall, PhD

Director, Building Futures InstituteBall State University

July 2006

A New American Townhouse

HOMEWORKS®A New American TownhouseStephen Kendall, PhDProfessor of ArchitectureDirector, Building Futures InstituteBall State University

July 2006

Copyright: 2006

Notice of Rights

No part of this work may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information retrieval system without permission in writing from the author.

Book layout and design: Sabreena Shrestha, Sujata Tuladhar

Printed by: Digitalisbooks Published by: ISBN:

Contents

Preface

Townhouse Living by HOMEWORKS® 1

Chapter 1 Introduction to HOMEWORKS 2 A New Approach 2 Managing Variety 3 A New Delivery Process 3 Taking Initiative 7 Decision Flow 9

Chapter 5 Problems in conventional townhouse developments 28 Process rigidity and inability to respond to market “pull” 28 Technical and organizational entanglement 28 Obstruction of innovation and manufacturing “push” 29 Excessive waste in materials and labor 29

Chapter 2 HOMEWORKS® delivers solutions 10 INFILL “KITS” 10 Quality control through multi-skilled work teams 11 Opportunities for mass-customization and product innovation 12 Long-term stock adaptability 12

Chapter 4 HOMEWORKS® assumptions 24 Ordinary products 24 Some new processes required 24 Existing CAD and data software can be modified 24 New business formation 24 Task Partitioning 25 Scope of Work 26 Technical Interfaces 26 The Regulatory Environment 26

Chapter 3 HOMEWORKS® Principles 13

Appendix 2 Where to get more information 46

Appendix 1 Untangling the American House 32

Appendix 3 Notes on Attribution and Sources 48

Conclusion 30

PREFACE

HOMEWORKS offers technical solutions, strategies, logistics and methods in support of a new way of building townhouses in the “woodframe” tradition.

But all of this is only interesting if we first recognize that the current state of the housing stock is degrading in its repetitiveness, stunningly inattentive to individuals, riddled by poor quality and incapable of long-term adaptability. The current methods of house building are not only detrimental to the building stock per se as a public/private asset, thus passing on a massive economic and environmental burden to our children. They are demeaning to its inhabitants – all of us - and to the people building the houses.

Our challenge is therefore not only technical. It is fundamentally to reengage people with their living environments while also finding a way that will lead to more decent, dignified and caring professions in the building arts. Today, these two HUMAN issues cannot be addressed by the way we build.

The reason I wrote HOMEWORKS is to see it implemented. That being said, this monograph is largely a book of principles. Its applications will take varied forms and use varied technologies. But to be implemented, investment is needed and risks assumed. HOMEWORKS constitutes a very big change in practices and habits, and requires clear-headed technical thinking to avoid the inevitable traps facing any innovation in the housing industry, much less one as comprehensive as this. A number of technical issues still must be solved. A target market must be identified. Assurance of financial stability must be given to the team in charge of implementing HOMEWORKS. So this is written with no illusions.

In spite of the resistance - on both

ideological and practical grounds - I believe the time is right for such an alternative to be taken seriously.

Much has been learned in the application of open building principles to multi-unit housing over the past 30 years around the world. Commercial development is now happening in Japan, Finland, Russia, Switzerland and the Netherlands, and probably elsewhere.

But too little progress has been made toward the adoption of open building methods in the dominantly wooden house building tradition.

I offer HOMEWORKS as part of the ongoing effort in which many are engaged, to reform the way we build that sprang to life in the US in Chicago in first part of the 19th century. While not rejecting much that this tradition offers, HOMEWORKS takes what I believe to be a necessary next step in the evolution of our venerable “2x4” system.

�

Townhouse Living by HOMEWORKS®

T h e n e w H O M E W O R K Stownhouses in Clear Creek featurea totally new way for buyers to getwhat they want in a “new urbanist”developmentnorthofthecity. W h a t ’s u n i q u e a b o u t t h edevelopment is that HOMEWORKSoffers a large menu of interior floor plan layouts, equipment and finish packages thatcanbeinstalledinanyoftheunitsin the development. If you like a unitcloser to thepark,facingeast,youcanselect from a wide array of floor plans. Ifyoulikeaunitinthemiddleofarowwith the back yard facing south, youcan also select from the samearrayofchoices in interior layout. Ifyouhavean elderly parent moving in with you,orifyouareayoungcoupleexpectingchildren,thereisalsoarangeoflayoutsjustforyou.Becauseofthesophisticatedconstruction method, each layout andequipment design on a given floor can be chosenlargelyindependentoftheotherfloors in the townhouse, so the choices areverylarge. Allmenuselections includestate-of-the-art cabinet, finish and equipment choices,backedupbythelatestenergyefficiency methods. For example, if you want a large open kitchen next to thefamilyroom,youcanhavethat.Or,youcanhaveaformaldiningroomseparatedfromthelivingroomandkitchen.Theseareonlysomeofthechoices. This is possible because of atotallynewapproach tomarketingandconstruction.Thedeveloperhasobtainedapprovalforconstruction,buthasnotyetmadedecisionsaboutwhatgoes insideeach unit. This is for you to decide.Each unit is designed to accommodatewhateverinteriorpackageyouwant.Youcanevengetafullycustomizeddesign.HOMEWORKS provides the kit to fill inyourpreferredunit, just-in-timeandtotheexactspecsyouhaveselectedandattheexactpriceandschedulethatsuits

yourfamily. Many advanced industries areoffering what HOMEWORKS nowoffers for the first time in residentialconstruction – “mass customization”.This idea brings together the efficiencies offactoryproductionandqualitycontrolwithafullyorganizedmenuofchoicesfromwhichtocomposeyourownhouse.The choices on the exterior are morelimitedbutthechoicesintheinteriorareastounding. The model townhouse at ClearCreek has a showroom that allowsprospective buyers to use advancedcomputer visualization tools and costestimatingsoftwaretoquickly“build”avirtualmodeloftheunit,takeavirtualwalk-through and get immediate costinformation.Thecomputer thenallowsthebuyertomodifytheplan,equipment,finishes, cabinets and so on and getimmediate costs.The drawings can beprintedout,andthebuyercangohomeanddiscusstheplansaroundthediningtable. This process can be repeatedseveral times until the buyer is happy,acontractissigned,andsixweekslaterthey can move into their customizedunit. Soon, HOMEWORKS® will beannouncing another development, thisone supported by a web-based menuselectionanddesignprocess,whereyoucanworkonalternativelayoutideasinthe comfort of your own home beforegoing to the showroom to make final decisions.

(A fictitious article in a majormetropolitanarea’sRealEstate sectionofthenewspaper)

�

A New Approach

Introduction to HOMEWORKS

H O M E W O R K S ® i s a n e wapproachtothedesignandconstructionof townhouses.The approach has twoprimaryobjectives: �)toreducetherisktodevelopersin delivering for-sale houses that meetindividualconsumerpreferences,and, �)toproducebuildingsthatarelesscostlyandwastefultoadaptoverthelongterm. The approach calls for a strictseparationbetweenthepartofthehousethatshouldhavealonglife,andthepartof the house that can be customizedinitiallyandadaptovertimeinresponseto changing household preferencesand upgrades in consumer-orientedtechnologies.

These two parts are called the“SHELL” and the “INFILL”. The “SHELL” constitutes thetechnical components and spaces thatarelikelytohavethelongestlife.Theseinclude foundations, building structureandenclosure,themainMEPandHVACsystems risers and laterals, and theirconnectiontothepublicportionoftheseutilitysystems.Thestaitwaypositionisalsopart of theSHELL.These are thepartsaboutwhichlocalregulationismostconcerned and which are most tightlyinterdependant with adjacent housedesigns. The “INFILL” constitutes the technicalcomponentsthataremostsubjecttoindividualhouseholdpreferences,both

Figure 1: Image of INFILL on each floor of an hypothetical HOMEWORKS®development

�

Managing Variety

Instead of delivering a unifiedproduct – a“whole” townhouse - inwhich all decisions and products areinterdependent;itispossibletodeliverSHELLandINFILLasseparate“products”.This helps everyone, because eachproductrespondstoadifferentsetofperformance requirements, can takeadvantage of a variety of financinginstrumentsandproductionprocesses,and corresponds to distinct decision-makingprocesses. Thereasontodothisistomanagevariationandenabledecisionflexibilitywith reduced risk.The SHELL followsa decision path that depends heavily

initially and over time.These includetheinteriornon-load-bearingpartitions,the stairs, floor finishes, cabinets and casework, fixtures, and the MEP andHVACsystemsdirectlyassociatedwiththe arrangement of these other “INFILL” components.Thesearethepartsthatcanbeselectedoralteredwithouteffectingadjacenttown-houses. Once the SHELL and INFILL are distinguished,theircombinationallowsawidearrayofchoicesforbuyers,andbetter control of these choices by thedeveloper.Itshouldbepossibletoinstalla variety of INFILL layouts in a given SHELL. TheprincipletechnicalstrategyofHOMEWORKS® is to avoid buryingconsumer-sensitivewiringandplumbinginside the SHELL walls and floors.As much of the cabling and piping aspossibleshouldthereforebepartoftheINFILL. TheprinciplelogisticalstrategyofHOMEWORKS®istheuseof“kitting”or product bundling particularly of the“INFILL”, and the employment of “work cell”teamstoinstallthekits,replacingthenormalsequencingofsubcontractors.

A New Delivery Process

HOMEWORKS® requires a newdelivery process that accounts for thedistinction between a SHELL and anINFILL kit. This can be seen in the following diagrams. In each, the basicelement groups are shown comprisingthe INFILL:

a. Stair b. INFILL walls c. K i t c h e n a n d b a t h r o o mequipment and specific MEP linesassociatedwiththeseelements

The SHELL – including windowand other façade elements and fixed MEP system parts – and the Furniture are also shown. Thediagramsshowthreedifferentdelivery processes: a conventionalprocess, a modified conventional and what is called a “maximum buyerchoice” process, the latter beingHOMEWORKS®. In each diagram,decisions are indicated as being madeeitherbythedeveloperortheoccupantorhomebuyer.

on public approvals and is sensitiveto large-scaledevelopmentdecisions.TheINFILLfollowsadecisionsequencethat is as independent as possible oftheapprovaloflocalpublicauthorities,while meeting public health, safetyand welfare requirements through“systems”approvalsofsuchbodiesastheUnderwritersLaboratory.TheINFILLis also designed to enable decisionsabout each dwelling unit’s interiorlayout, finishes and equipment to beseparatedfromsite-planningdecisionsandlaterchangedwithoutrequiringachangetotheSHELL.

�Figure 2: ConventionalDecisionProcess

In a conventional house deliveryprocess, the developer has unifiedcontrol of all the parts making thehouse, but still depends on multiplesubcontractors each of which bringsmaterialstothesiteandisresponsible

for installing them. Quality assuranceis difficult as is control of scheduleandprice.Intheconventionalprocess,thehousehold’sprimarychoiceliesinthefurnishingsandafewotherminorvariations.(Figure2)

Conventional Process

�

Some developers, targeting themarketwherehouseholdsarewillingtopay for choice, organize their deliveryprocess a little differently, providing awidermeasureofchoice.Inthisprocess,the developer has a more complexprocesstomanage,havingtonegotiateprices and quality with the buyer, the

Figure 3: Modified Decision Process

contractor and the subcontractors.Potential conflicts arise when buyerswant wider choice, the subcontractorscharge more, and the contractor raisesthe price of construction to cover hisriskandmanagementcomplexity.Manyvariations on this “modified” process exist, with the emphasis on expandingchoice while managing price and risk.(Figure 3)

Modified Process

�Figure 4: MaximumBuyerChoice

H O M E W O R K S ® s u g g e s t sa significant, but still incrementalenlargementofthedecisionsavailabletothe household. (Figure 4) Generally, with conventionaldeliverymethods,enlargingchoice raises the level of risk to thedeveloper andheightens the likelihood

of conflict, because offering more choice and variation always presents difficulties and uncertainties.What follows is anexplanation of one way to solve theseproblemsfacingthedeveloperoperatinginthisthirdmodel,andsuggestshowitcan be beneficial to the developer, the contractorandthebuyer.

HOMEWORKS® Process

�Figure 5: ContractorInitiative

Initiative by a Developer

First, consider that a developer’s construction division builds SHELLSready for INFILL, on a speculative basis, basedonmarketdemandanalysis.Thiscan be organised in several ways. (Figure �:�,�,�) In the first case, the contractor can build the SHELL, and the homebuyer

Taking Initiative

Given a fixed SHELL and variable INFILL, several choices are available in meetingmarketdemand.Thefollowingdiagrams describe some of thesechoices.

then purchases the SHELL and at thesametimethehomebuyersignsacontractwith a separate INFILL contractor to fill intheSHELL. In the second case, the contractorbuilds the SHELL, the homebuyerpurchases it, and the homebuyercontracts with the INFILL division of theconstructioncompanythatbuilttheSHELL, to provide the INFILL. In the third case, the contractorbuilds the SHELL, the homebuyerpurchasesit,andthecontractorthatbuilttheSHELLsubcontractswithaseparateINFILL contractor to provide the INFILL selectedbythehomebuyer.

�Figure 6: HomeownerInitiative

Initiative by the Homebuyer

Homebuyers can also take theinitiative. (Figure 6: 1, 2, 3) In the first case, the homebuyerlooksforadevelopmentcompanywhocan build the SHELL they select.Thedeveloper’sSHELLconstructiondivisionhas a menu of SHELL choices fromwhichthehomebuyerchooses.Thesameconstruction company also has an INFILL divisionandthehomebuyerselectsfromthat INFILL division the right INFILL for price,qualityanddeliveryschedule. Inthesecondcase,thehomebuyeralso looks foradevelopmentcompanywhocanbuildaSHELLthehomebuyer

likes, fromamenuofSHELLchoices.In thiscase thehomeownergoes toanindependent INFILL producer and selects the preferred INFILL, signs a contract and the INFILL provider installs the INFILL. In thethirdcase, thehomebuyerhires an architect directly and acontractorishiredtobuildtheSHELL.Inthiscase,thehomebuyergoestoanINFILL provider, selects the preferredINFILL and installs it by their ownlabor. Othercombinationsarepossible,but these variations in initiative andresponsibilities illustrate the mainprinciple.

�

Chap te r one has p resen tedt h e o rg a n i z a t i o n a l c o n c e p t o fHOMEWORKS®.This new approachresponds to a number of problems inconventional townhouse developmentpractices, discussed in Chapter �.Chapter�describesinbroadtermswhatsolutions HOMEWORKS® delivers.

Decision Flow

TheseperationofaSHELLprocessfrom an INFILL process offers a way to controlvarietybutalsoraisesnewissuesofcoordination,somewhatdifferentfromconventionalprocessmanagement.TheseissuesareaddressedinChapter�Butthisrequiresadjustmentstonormaldecisionmakingprocesses. The following diagram representsthe principle decision points in aHOMEWORKS® house delivery.(Figure 7)

Figure 7: Decision Flow Diagram

Summary

Chapter�outlinesbasicassumptions,andChapter � discusses HOMEWORKS®technicalprinciples.Chapter�addressesnew coordination issues, and Chapter� outlines next steps toward actualimplementationofHOMEWORKS®inthemarket.

To implement these principles,decision-makingforaHOMEWORKS®townhouse is organized hierarchically.Decisions follow a certain order in a“decision tree” once a specific site has been selected for a HOMEWORKS®for townhouse development. Whilethis diagram represents the principleapproach, the precise distribution ofresponsibilities, regulatory approvals,andschedulingwillvaryineachlocale.

�0

Chapter 2 HOMEWORKS® delivers solutions

HOMEWORKS®deliverssolutionsby introducing a sharp technical andorganizational distinction between aserviced SHELL and the INFILL that fills in the empty space in the shell.Because of this separation, the infillcan be customized for each occupant/ homebuyeror canbe selectedby thedeveloper with virtually no additionalmanagement costs. This is possiblebecause the INFILL is systematically prepared in the form of INFILL “KITS”.

INFILL “KITS”

INFILL “KITS” (or product bundles)arethekeytoHOMEWORKS®new process. An INFILL kit includes all the parts needed to fill in an empty SHELLspacetomakeithabitable.Theprecise specification of parts included in an INFILL KIT will vary from one providertoanother,andfromone“wayof building” to another. For example, in aSHELLbuiltwithconcreteslabs, theINFILL may include not only the interior parts,butalsothefaçadeor“cladding”(as the skin is called in Japan’s INFILL systems). In other cases, the INFILL may include the interior finishes of the SHELL. An INFILL KIT for townhouses –showninmoredetailinChapter�asawayofdemonstratingtheprincipleidea– includes the followingbasic elementgroups:

InteriorwallsMetal studs, drywall, doorframes,doors and ha rdware , misc .hardware

CabinetsKitchenandbathroomcabinets

Fixtures and EquipmentTub, shower, to i le ts , s inks ,dishwasher, lighting fixtures

MechanicalHVAC unit, water heater(s),ductwork, bathroom and kitchenexhaustfans/ducts

PlumbingHot and cold-water piping, fittings, drain lines and fittings, fasteners

ElectricalandSignalCircuit breakers, home networkpanel, power and data cabling,boxes,terminations

FinishesFloor finishes, tile, trim

Ideally, all the parts making anindividual INFILL KIT are brought to and preparedinanoff-siteproductionfacilitysetupforthiskindofproduction,withjig tables, racks, and other productionequipment.The parts are then loadedintocontainersortrucksinreverseorderoftheirinstallationsequence,deliveredtothesiteandinstalledbymulti-skilledinstallation teams or “work cells”.AllpartsaresmallenoughtobebroughtinthroughSHELLdoorsorwindows. The following diagram (Figure �), used to describe an integratedINFILL system developed and used in the Netherlands, describes this basicprinciple, by contrasting it with theconventionallogisticsprocess.Variationson this logistics strategy are possible.For example, the INFILL KIT can be organized in separate packages,each delivered to the SHELL space insequence on a JIT (just-in-time) basis.Or,somepartsmaybesentdirectlyfromthemanufacturertotheSHELLforJITinstallation.

��

Quality control through multi-skilled work teams

HOMEWORKS®usesworkcellsfor the production and installation ofINFILL kits. A number of industries outside the residential constructionsectorhaveembracedthisconcept.Work

cells consist of multi-skilled workersorganized in teams tasked with theresponsibilityofcompletingadesignatedproductionobjective.Somethinglikethisisusedinmanufacturedhousingplants.

Figure 8:TraditionalvsNewLogistics(Source: Matura Netherlands BV)

��

Long-term stock adaptability

Theresidentialbuildingstocknowinplacewillneedtolastformanyyears,butitwillfacemorechangesthanwereexpectedwhenthestockwasconstructed.Buildings that are designed for a specific demographicgroupormarketnichefacea more uncertain future than buildingsdesignedwithmoregeneralizedconceptsofoccupancy. To meet the challenge of shiftingdemographics, life-styles and newtechnology, a new housing stock musttherefore be inherently adaptable.Someargue that theconventional lightframe building methods are inherentlyadaptable, with the cavities betweenfloor joists and wall studs available for the distribution – and rearrangement-ofpipes,wiresandducts.Whilethisistrueuptoapoint,theincreasednumber,disorganization and entanglement ofpipes, wires and ducts has made thatpresumptionamythinpractice. The SHELL – INFILL approach makesacalculateddistinctionregardingvariablelifecycledurabilityandutilityofthepartsmakingupahouse.Themostelegant approach would be to totallyeliminate the practice of embeddingpipes,wires andducts inside thewallsand floors that are likely to remainundisturbedforaverylongtime,andtohidethemina“layer”moreakinto“thickpaint”or“garments”. HOMEWORKS® initially makesa more modest proposal, embeddingsomepipingandwiring in theSHELLwhile putting the rest in INFILL walls. This is described in Chapter �. Other,more advanced solutions are availableand can be introduced when the basicreorganizationoftheconstructionprocessisaccepted.

Opportuni t ies for mass-customization and product innovation

Housing construction is plaguedby fragmentation and quality controlproblems,andhasyettofullyembracethenewmarketdynamicsofconsumer-driven processes and flexible production. By organizing the preparation of INFILL kits in a controlled environment,using the most advanced informationmanagement software and logistics,mass-customization techniques andprocesses help the construction sectormeet customers’ individual wishes andalsomeetstringentcostandschedulingrequirements. Using the idea of “virtual kits”(alternatives), marketing INFILL kits through the internet, reducing logisticscomplexity, and using interactivedecision-making as a marketing tool,HOMEWORKS® points the way to anew way of combining efficiency and customization.

Flexibility and product differentiation are twoofthemostimportantadvantagesoftheadoptionoftheworkcellapproach. Unliketheconventionaltrade-basedsequenceofworkperformedbyseparatesubcontractors, INFILL kits are installed in an integrated way by the work cell,eachmemberofwhich ismulti-skilledforthecompletetask.Sometaskssuchastilesettingmayrequirespecialists. This eliminates the managementcosts and other overhead of separatesubcontractors. It also enables greaterefficiency in the work as well ascultivating something like the guildculture lost in the movement towardshyperspecialization.

��

Chapter 3 HOMEWORKS® Principles

Relation of SHELL Facades to INFILL Tothegreatestextentpossible,thebuilding’sexteriorfenestrationshouldbeunlinkedfromthedecisionsconcerninginteriorlayout.However,somewindowopenings may need to have variable

Figure 10: SHELLfacade Figure 11: SHELL filter panel

window units installed as part of theINFILL decision when, for example a kitchen or bathroom is placed againstafaçadeandthewindowsillistoolow.(Figures 10, 11 and 12)

Figure 9: General Fixed-Variable Principle

General “FIXED-VARIABLE” Principle This general principle, called“FIXED and VARIABLE”, applies to

designdecisionsatalldesignlevels,asFigure 9 shows.

��

Figure 12: Anexampleofthisprincipleinahouse

Placement of SHELL windowopeningsshouldbedecidedbasedonananalysis of likely infill wall placement options. For example, with a fixed window arrangement, interior wall

Figure 13: INFILL wall zones Figure 14: Roomsizesvis-a-visSHELLwindowsanddividers

“position zones” e.g. (A,B,C) canbedefined, each with several wall placement possibilities.This allows a large rangeof layoutvariations in agivenSHELLdesign. (Figures 13 and14)

��

Tothegreatestextentpossible,theinteriorsurfacesofallSHELLwallsandceilings should have drywall installedas part of the SHELL contract. INFILL wallsaspartofaHOMEWORKS®kitattach to SHELL walls or floors using conventional mechanical connectors.(Figure 16)

SHELL floors are walk-able, using standard sub-floor materials or gyp-crete, as required on wood framed floors, or a concrete slab on grade. (Figure 17)

Figure 16: Walls Figure 17: Floors

Tothegreatestextentpossible,oncedecisions are made on the location ofkitchens,itshouldbepossibletodesign

General Interior Principles

Figure 15: Kitchenlayoutvariants

different layouts or configurations ofcabinets and equipment. (Figure15) The same should be possible withbathrooms.

��

SHELLMEPsystemsaregenerallyclusteredinoneortwoverticalshafts.(Figure18)SomeSHELLMEPpartscan

General Mechanical, Electrical, and Planning Principles

Figure 18: SHELL MEP stacks

bedistributedwithinSHELLfloorsandwalls,showninFigures20-26.

��

Drainage

One of the most difficult utilitysystems to manage is drainage. Toachievetheprinciplesnotedabove,twobasicpositioningstrategiesareshownintheaccompanyingdiagrams:The“abovethe floor” strategy will have less floor space on the floor (because of the need forthickerwalls)thanthe“inthetrench”strategy. In both cases, air-admittancevalves are assumed insteadof separatevent stacks. (Figures 21, 22 and 23)

Tothegreatestextentpossible,theMEPsystems(mechanical,electricalandplumbing)ofonetownhouseordwellingunitshouldnotpassthroughanyadjacentdwellingunit.Utilityconnectionsfromthepublic easement shouldgodirectlyto each townhouse and not cross intothe space of another townhouse. (Figure ��)

To the greatest extent possible,decisionsconcerningthelayoutofroomsandtheirassociatedMEPsystemsononefloor of a multi-story townhouse should be independent of the layout decisionson other floors. This is important to the homebuyer’s range of choices in theinitial, INFILL and subsequently. (Figure �0)

Figure 20: Independentlayouts Figure 22: “Above-floor” strategy

Figure 19: Independentutilities

Figure 21: “Above-floor” on the left and “In-the-trench”ontheright

��

In the “above the floor” approach, horizontaldrainagepipingisorganizedin“drain piping zones” in certain “INFILL” walls,thelowerzoneaccommodatingthedrain lines from toilets (floor mounted rear discharge fixtures), showers andbathtubs. The upper drainage zoneaccommodatesdrainagelinesfromsinks,washing machines and dishwashers.(Figure 24)

Insomecases,horizontaldrainlinescan be placed behind cabinets. (Figure 25) In other cases, secondary INFILL wallsareneeded(partialorfullheight).(Figure 26)

Water Supply

ThemainSHELLwatersupplylinesarelocatedintheverticalshafts,aspartof theSHELLdesign and constructioncontract.A distribution manifold isplacedintheSHELLstackfromwhichINFILL water supply lines are routed, either above the floor or in trenches.(Figures 27 and 28)

Figure 23: “In-the-trench”strategy

Figure 24: Horizontalpipingzone

Figure 26: Secondaryplumbingwall

Figure 25: Behindcabinetzone

��

HVAC (Heating, ventilation and air conditioning)

The horizontal water supplydistribution that is part of the INFILL kit is further organized according toa hierarchy of distribution manifolds.Thisreducesthenumberofpipesatanygiven place in the INFILL. Horizontal watersupplylinesaredistributedinsideof INFILL partitions or behind cabinets. When horizontal water lines are inINFILL partitions, they must be placed ina“middle”zonebetweenthedrainagepipezones(seediagram��-��). Water heaters can be centrallylocatedordistributedclosertopointsofuse.

SinceheatgainandlossofagivenSHELL will be constant for any INFILL layout,mostoftheductworkofaforcedair system are located as part of theSHELL.TheHVACunitcanbepartofthe SHELL or INFILL. The horizontal ducts can be embedded in the SHELLfloors, with diffusers placed underwindowsattheSHELL’sperimeter.Thisdoes not inhibit choice in location ofINFILL partitions. (Figure 29)

MainHVACrisers forsupplyandreturn, andexhaust for agasboiler, aswellasverticalductsforbathroomandkitchenventilationgointhemainSHELLstacks.Figure 28: In-trenchwaterpiping

Figure 29: HVACdiffusersinSHELL

Figure 27: Above floor water piping

�0

Electrical and Data cabling

TheSHELLwillhaveatleasttwocircuitbreakerboxesafterthemeterbaseentry, for example one on each floor. Use ofsuchsub-panelsreducestheamountofcablingneededineithertheSHELLortheINFILL kit. (Figure 30) For example, the kitchen can be servedbyonemainpower line,withadistributionsystemaspartofthecabinets.Thisdramaticallyreducescablingfromthemainbreakerpanelandallowsbetterintegration of cabling and cabinets.(Figure 31 and 32) (examples from HolecinEurope)

Figure 31: Traditionalcablingtothekitchen

��

Figure 30: Sub-panelconcept

Figure 33: KeyplanofHOMEWORKS® cable routing concept in INFILL walls

Horizontaldistributionofelectricaland data cabling uses the Wiremold“Two-Piece Multiple Channel Non-Metallic Surface Raceway (Access�000Raceway).Sincethissystemdoesnotprovideasuitablecablerouteunder

Figure 32: Integratedcabinetandcablingconcept

doorways,HOMEWORKS®providesanewtechniquerequiringtheinventionofanewparttoroutecablesunderdoorwaysandatpointswherelowerzonedrainlinesinterrupt the baseboard raceway. (Figures ��,��,��,��,��and��)

��Figure 34: SectionAA

Figure 35: SectionBB

Figure 31 is a partial floor plan showing how HOMEWORKS® routesthemainhorizontalcabling(poweranddata). It showspartof theSHELLandan INFILL partition and a doorway. The sections indicated (AA, BB, CCandDD)areillustratedinmoredetailinthefollowingdiagrams.Themainpointofthediagramsistoillustratethebasicprincipleofchannelingcablinginunder-door thresholds, and where horizontaldrainage pipes enter INFILL partitions, inbothcasesinracewayswithinasub-floor layer. This sub-floor can be a layer of one-inch thick homostote sheets orequal, and also serves as an acousticalbarrierandlevelerinpreparationforthefinish floor material. SectionAAshowstheconditiononan INFILL partition where a horizontal drain line in the “lower” zone servinga toilet interrupts a surface mountedhorizontal wiring raceway. In someinstances this interference may beavoidedbyomittingawiringracewayinthisposition.ButwhenbothcontinuouscablingANDahorizontaldrainlineareneeded as in Figure 33, a sub-floor wiring raceway is needed. (see also Figure 38)

Figure 36: SectionCC

Section BB shows the conditionin which a horizontal wiring racewayis needed on both sides of an INFILL wall.

Section CC shows dual sub-floor wiring raceways at the door threshold.Each is dedicated to channelingcables (both power and data) from itscorrespondinghorizontalwiringracewayon one side of the INFILL partition (see Figure 38 for more information on the newdeviceneeded todivertcable intothe sub-floor raceway).

��

Figure 37: SectionDD

Section DD shows the horizontalwiring raceway at a SHELL wall. Onprinciple reason for using a surfaceracewayistoavoidviolatingthethermalintegrityof theSHELL. If,however, averticalswitchlegoroutletisneededinaSHELLwall,oneoftwoapproachescanbe taken:a)penetrate theSHELLwallcavityandrunthewiringthereorb)addan additional “thin” INFILL wall whose cavitiescanbeusedforverticalwiring.

This drawing shows two keydevices needed for a fully functionalHOMEWORKS®wiringinfrastructure.One is the cabling diverter box.Thisdiverter’scoveriscoordinatedwiththeselected doorframe and trim package.

Theotherdeviceisaverticalwiringmast,leadingcablesfromthehorizontalwiringraceway to a wall termination or walllighting fixture. Where wireless controls are available, the use of such conduitsmaybereduced.

Figure 38: Horizontalcablingraceway

��

Chapter 4 HOMEWORKS® assumptions

Ordinary products One of the basic assumptions ofHOMEWORKS® is that ordinarilyavailableproductsareusedtothegreatestpossibleextent.Theonlyexceptionisacablingdiverterneededtocompletethepowerandlowvoltagecabledistributionunder doorways – as part of the INFILL kit.AllotherproductsneededtobuildaSHELLandtocompletetheinstallationofHOMEWORKS®areavailableinthemarket.Inthissense,HOMEWORKS®isan“opensystem”.

Some new processes required To implement HOMEWORKS®;developers must be willing to buildempty SHELLS, and either developersand/orhomeownersmustbewillingtomake INFILL decisions. The only way developers and homeowners will bewillingtodothisisthattheyareassuredthat one or more reputable INFILL companies exist to provide INFILL installationservices. HOMEWORKS®requirestheuseofworkcells,asnotedabove.Withoutthis, the approach cannot succeed.This means that the earliest adoptionofHOMEWORKS®maybeinameritshop laborenvironmentwhere trainingof multi-skilled installation teams ispossible. As noted, the idea of kitting orproductbundlinggoeshandinhandwithskill bundling. In respect to productbundling or kitting, precedents exist.Electrical contractors “kit” electricalcables,boxes,andotherpartsinoff-siteshopstospeedinstallationon-siteandtoassurequality.IKEA,theSwedishhomefurnishingcompany,provides“kits”tobeassembled by the buyer. “Infill” is a kind of“IKEA+productbundle”.

Existing CAD and data soft-ware can be modified

Existing CAD and informationmanagement software shouldbe suitedfor HOMEWORKS® with somemodifications.

New business formation

No bus ines s equ iva l en t t oHOMEWORKS® exis t s for theresidential market in the U.S. Othercompanies (e.g. OfficeRedi deliversjust-in-time office interiors for suchclients as H.R. Block, State Farm, and even kindergarten chains) operate inthe same mode – fitting out “white box” spaces with everything needed for theoperationofthecompanyororganizationoccupyingthespace.SteelcaseoffersthePathwaysproductthatdoesessentiallythesamethingforlargecorporatebusinessclients,andotherserviceprovidersexistoperatinginasimilarmode,forbranchbanks,fastfoodrestaurants,andsoon. Anewstart-upbusiness isneededto bring HOMEWORKS to market.It should be located within �00 milesof several major urban markets. Itshouldhavegoodsupplierrelationswithproviders of the parts needed to makeINFILL kits. HOMEWORKS® is targeted forboththeurbanandsuburbantownhousemarketaswellasfortheurbanelevatorbuildingtype–eithernewconstructionor adaptive reuse / conversion market.We have made other detailed studiessuggesting the efficacy of this approach in conversion of obsolete office buildings toresidentialuse.

��

Task Partitioning

Housebuildingbeyondthecapabilityofonepersonisordinarilysubjecttotaskpartitioningtogettheworkdone.Exactlyhowtopartitiontheworkcanbeanissue.Technical and organizational issuesare involved, including distributionof responsibility and initiative. (vonHipple) A few notes on this matter arein order, on the basis of which thespecific task partitioning embodiedin HOMEWORKS® will make moresense.

Partitioning Based on the Distinction of Designing and Making

One division in house building isbetween designing and making. Onepartyproposeswhatshouldbemade,andanotherpartymakesit.Communicationis needed between these parties, andusually a “design” is the vehicle forthat communication – some sort ofrepresentationofwhatisagreedshouldbemade.

Partitioning Based on Specializations

Once this portioning is made,many additional partitions can bemade, inside the domain of designingand also in the domain of making.Specialistsareevident ineachdomain,providing detailed representations orwork, following partitioning based onacceptedspecializations.Inthedomainofdesigning,wehavearchitects,engineers,interior designers, and so on. In thedomain of making, we have projectmanagers, carpenters, electricians,plumbers,andsoon.

Partitioning Based on the Distinction of Project-specific and Project-independent Parts

Anotherkindofpartitioningfoundinhousebuildingistheproduction(designand making) of “project-specific” and

“project-independent”parts.Theformerkindofpartsare“pulled”intobeingbytheproject–whethermadeonthespotofuseormadeelsewhereandbroughttothesiteofuse(prefabricatedparts).Thelatter (project-independent parts) are“pushed”intobeingbytheinitiativeoftheproducerandthusmadeavailabletoanyprojectforuse.Thisconstitutestheworldofmanufacturedparts. Increasingly, manufacturers arelearningtoharnessthetoolsofproductiondeveloped to “push” products intothe market for the production of parts“pulled” into being by a user.This iscalled“mass-customization”.

Partitioning Based on Order of Installation

Another way of partitioning inhouse building is based on the orderof installation.While variations exist,theusualorderofbuildingisdrivenbygravity (foundations precede floors, and walls follow the floors they sit on, etc). Anotherconventionalorderofinstallationis that the harder or stiffer parts go infirst, followed by the more malleable or bendableparts.Thustheplumberusuallyprecedestheelectrician.

Partitioning Based on Estimated Life Span Value and Control Patterns

Anotherbasisfortaskpartitioninghas its roots inmattersofdurabilityofuseofparts.Parts(physicalsystemsandspaces) deemed suitable for a specific estimatedlifespanvalueareorganizedasa‘whole”.Thisisconventionalpracticein the office market where base buildings areconstructedwithanexpectedlife,tobe filled in by tenant work with shorter expected life span value.A similarpractice is used in the construction oflargeshoppingcenters.

��

Scope of Work

Each of the possible ways ofpartitioning work noted above has itsown issues of defining and specifying the scope of work in each partitionedtask.Ingeneral,thelongerthepracticeof partitioning has been conventional,theeasieritisforallpartiesinvolvedtodo their work unencumbered by conflict and complex negotiations. Disputesover jurisdictions of responsibilitynevertheless arise when new productsareintroduced(whichspecialtytradegetscontrol?)orwhenpracticeschange.Thedispute between architects and interiordesigners still lingers and remains asource of conflict. Trade jurisdictiondisputesbetweencraftunionsstilloccur,althoughasthelaborunionsloosepowerin the construction sector, these conflicts are of less significance than before. In the early days of the nowconventional practice in office buildings andshoppingcenterdevelopment,whenthe distinction of base building and fit-out was first coming into currency, scope of work definition was more problematic than today. Inpractice today,everyoneis more relaxed about the problem ofscope definition and while legal advice isnormallysought, theproceduresandhabitsarewellunderstood. But where this particular taskpartitioning pattern is new – as forexampleintheINOHospitalprojectinBern, Switzerland – conflict is almost inevitable, particularly when controlofthe“parts”isdistributedtodifferentservice providers. In the case of theBauhütteprojectsinZurich,inwhichonecompanycontrolsboththebasebuildingand the infill production, the newlyintroducedorganizationalstrategyislesscumbersome and conflict is apparently minimized.

Technical Interfaces

Technical interfacesexistonthreelevels.At each level, interfaces arenormally identified according to their spatialposition,theirphysicaldimensionsand material properties. Generally, interfacesarepredicatedontheprinciplethat the part with the longest expecteduse value will be installed first, in such a waythatpartswithshorterexpectedusevalueattachedtothemcanberemovedwithlittleornodegradationofthepartinstalledearlier. Many thousands of technicalinterfaces exist in a HOMEWORKS®townhouse, as in any house. SomeinterfacesofaHOMEWORKS®houseareidenticaltothoseinanyconventionaltownhouse, but some are not in onerespectoranother. Toavoidproblems,theseinterfacesneed to be identified and specified,preferably on a performance basis,leaving decision-makers a number ofalternative solutions and materials.This decision-making flexibility should extend beyond the initial design andinstallation to include provisions forfuturealterations.

The Regulatory Environment for HOMEWORKS®

Thepublicregulatoryenvironmentfor townhouse construction shouldprotect the legitimatepublic interest inpublic health and safety.While doingso, the regulatory environment shouldalso set the conditions for maximumautonomy of the individual sphere ofaction,representedinHOMEWORKS®by the INFILL kit.

Today,inlargepartbecauseoftheextremeentanglementofthe“public”and“private”portionsofhouses(particularlythe MEP systems), this distinction isvirtuallyimpossibletomakeinpractice.Inaddition,amassiveamountofresidentialrenovation and repair work done is

��

undertakenoutsidethepublicregulatoryapprovalprocess,becausenoonewantsto bother with what is perceived as aburdensome regulatory process. Further, thehomeprojectcentersselleverythingneededtodotheworkwithoutdistinctionas towhether thebuyerwill submit tobuildinginspectionornot.Thiscancausetechnicalproblemswithimplicationsonpublicsafetyandwelfareaswellasoninsuranceclaims, in largepartbecausethetwospheresofactionarenotclearlydistinguished.

In the most basic reformulationof this regulatory distinction between“public”and“private”,alldecisionsthatimplicateotherhousesshouldbesubjectto local regulatory oversight, based onnationalmodelcodes.Thisincludesthefoundations,mainutilityconnections,thebuildingstructureandfaçade.Itshouldalso include provisions for effectiveenergy conservation embodied in theSHELL and performance requirementsfor the heating and air conditioningsystem and fixtures using public utilities suchaswaterandsewage.

On the other hand, nationalregulatorybodiessuchastheUnderwritersLaboratory should have jurisdictionoveralldecisions thataremadewithinthe “private” sphere of responsibility,concerningtheselectionandplacementof products with no consequence tootherhouses.Thesedecisionsshouldbeliberatedasmuchaspossible from theburdenoflocalregulatoryapprovals,andconversely local building officials should befreedfromunnecessaryresponsibilitiessotheycandobetterworkinthespherethat makes sense for them as publicservants.

Today, decisions in the “private”sphere include the entire spectrum ofconsumer electronics, appliances andcommunications devices. It would beunthinkablethatalocalinspectorwouldneed to approve plugging in a newcomputer or microwave oven, or theaddition of a new wall or door, or the

installationofnewkitchencabinets.HOMEWORKS®essentiallypushes

theboundarybetweenthe“public”and“individual”sphere“upstream”and,bycareful planning and safe technology,brings more decision-making into the“private”sphere,unencumberedbywhathappens“nextdoor”.

��

Chapter 5 Problems in conventional townhouse developments

Process rigidity and inability to respond to market “pull” Where uniformity of product isacceptable, a “Model T” approach tothedesignanddeliveryofhousesmakessense. In thismodelofproduction, theproblem is to optimize the whole andengineer its efficient delivery, managing supplychains,approvalsandmarketingaccordingly.As theessayat theendofthismonographpointsout,theresultingprocessrigiditywasthe“AchillesHeel”of the early “industrialized housing”efforts.Thiswas the ideaof“pushing”products into the market. It is also themain drawback of most conventionalhousingproductiontoday. Theproblemis that this industrialmodel , once the most powerfulorganizationalconceptformanufacturing,isnolongerusefulexceptforthelowest“commodity” products for whichcompetitionisweakornonexistent,orforwhichthereisapublicmonopoly.Whencompetitionisstrongandthemarketis“pulling”, the unitary industrial modelfailstodeliverrequisitevariety. Buildingproductionhasneverbeenentirely congruentwith the “ModelT”approach.Thereasonisthatabuildingisnotaproductinthesamewaythatanautomobileorarefrigeratoris.Abuildingisaone-of-a-kindthingthatexistsinaspecific place and is approved by local politicalprocesses.Ofcourseabuildingismadeofmanymanufacturedproductseachofwhichistheresultofinitiativesbyproducers topushproducts into themarket. Increasinglyeachoftheseproductsisunderstoodasa“consumerproduct”;this is changing the behavior and theorganizationalstrategyofthecompaniesproducingtheseproducts.Windowsareagoodexample.Now,largecataloguesareavailablefromwhichtochoose,and

somedegreeofcustomizationbeyondthecatalogueisalsooffered.Thisportendsan important shift away from the old“ModelT”scheme,buttheshifthasnotyetreachedtheproductionofhousesperse.

Technical and organizational entanglement

While manufacturers of specificbuildingpartslikewindowsorkitchensare moving toward a more consumer-oriented “mass-cuatomization” modeofproduction,contractorsordevelopersofwholehouseshavenotyetbeenableto make that same transition. The key reason is the excessive technical and organizational entanglement of the whole house process. Oneoftheprimary–andinevitable-organizationalentanglementsthatbindstheconstructionofbuildings(asopposedtocarsorwindows)isthepublic/privateboundary that buildings straddle. Onthe one hand, houses (even the mostremote,butcertainlyurbanhouses)existinthepublicrealm–regulatedandtaxedby public bodies, attached to a publictransportationinfrastructure,andutterlydependentonpublicutilitiesandservices.Inthissense,housesconformtoanideaofa“commongood”. On the other hand, houses areprivateproperty,areboughtandsoldinthe real estate market, and are financed by privatelenders.Inthissense,housesarepersonalpossessionsandareoneofthemostvaluedwaystoexpressindividualityinoursociety–witnesstheemphasisonhome-ownership as opposed to rentedapartments. The tensionarising fromcomplexinterdependencies between these twoforces brings increasing conflict today in the field of building construction.Thisiscausedbybuildingmethodsandorganizational forms that do not allow

��

a sufficiently clear distinction between them.

Obstruction of innovation and manufacturing “push”

B e c a u s e o f t h e e x c e s s i v einterdependencybetweenthetwospheresofactionmentionedabove,innovationinbothspheresislessrobustandprogressivethan,forexample,inthetransportationsector. There, because the road andthevehicleareautonomousbut relatedby rules and regulations developed inpublic-privateprocesses,weseesteadyincremental development in highwaytechnologyontheonehandandvehicletechnology on the other.This analogyshouldnotbetakentoofar.Butitmakesthe point that when buildings can beconceivedmoreclearlyasstandingwithone foot in the field of public oversight and the other in the field of the consumer market, we may see the flowering ofmoreinnovationinbothspheresthanisotherwisepossible.Thekeyistosharpenthedistinctionbetweenthesetwospheresof action, while at the same time refining and coordinating interfaces betweenthem.(seeChapter�)

Excessive waste in materials and labor

Houses change over time. Thestatisticsonremodelingshowthatmoremoney is now spent on remodelingand repairing houses than on the totalinvestmentinnewconstruction.Thiswillonlyincrease,formanyreasons. Buttheamountofwastegeneratedbyremodelingandrepairingisalsomassiveand excessive, and shows no signs ofslowing down. Landfills in urban areas are overflowing and refuse is trucked to neighboringstatesathighcost.Notonlyis thisprocessultimatelyunsustainable

fromanenvironmentalperspective,itisnotsensibleeconomically. Houses should be more durable,but this performance requirement isseemingly at odds with the prevalenceofremodeling.Itisrarethatadiscussionof durability is couched in terms thatrecognize the forces of change. Thecorrect formulation of durability inhousesshouldbedurabilityofthewholebecause theparts can change, albeit atvaryingcycles. Acorrect conceptualizationof thewhole house into parts according tolifecyclevalueand thepublic/privatedistinction may make sense in solvingthe problem of excessive waste inconstructionandremodeling. The second a rea i n wh ichconventional construction is wastefulisinthedeploymentoflabor.Itiswellknownthatskilledlaborisincreasinglyhard to find. Secondly, developmentorganizationsarefacedwithaproblemofsequencingvarioustradesondispersedprojects.A project manager spendseach day driving from house to housefinding the right labor crew to go to a specific house to complete a task, then hastoinstructthemwhichhousetogoto next. The inefficiency is obvious and themanagementcostisexcessivewhileadding little value to the final result.

�0

Appendix 1 Untangling the American House

A visit to an ordinary dwelling orapartmentbuildingunderconstructioninanyneighborhoodintheUnitedStates,justbeforethesheetrockishung,isagoodwaytoassessthestateofentanglementinAmericanhouse-building.

Imagine what we will see (Fig.1). Amidstthenormaljumbleofbuilding-in-progress,thesmellofsawdust,remnantsof wiring insulation, dried mud anddebris on the sub-floor, and emptystyro-foam hamburger containers, akeen observer will see the exposedwallandceilingcavitiesjammedfullofparts.Immediatelyevidentisanalmostunbelievablyconfusedarrayofinstalledpipes of varying types and sizes forsupplying and carrying away fluids, air ductsofseveralshapesformovingair,thousands of feet of wires for electricpowerandcommunications,and,insomejurisdictions and some building types,sprinkler lines for fire suppression.

Fig.1Theentangledservicesystemsinthe floor cavity of a normal residential project,����.

It was only five generations ago, around thetimemygrandfatherwasinhisteens,that plumbing and central heating, andlater wiring, became commerciallyavailable at reasonable costs and werepromoted by architects, developersandmanufacturersforuseinapartmentbuildings and houses.�These entrails

A State of Entanglement

Invirtuallyallconstructiontypes,multi-family and detached, wood frame andconcrete,thetechnicalandorganizationalentanglement ofAmerican residentialbuildinghasreachedacriticalstate.Theoveralldisorderintherelationbetweenthepipes,wiresandducts,andtherestofthebuildingstheyserve,isanindicationoftheproblem.

Fig.2Aballoonframehousein����.(The Architectural Record, August����.)

This largely random interweaving ofpartslackstheclarityandelegancestillattributed to wood framing or otherstructural systems per se.Today, wallsand floors of sticks of wood or substitute materials — the main elements of thebeloved and ordinary 2x4 system that first cameintouseinthe���0sinChicago�(Fig.2) - are filled to overflowing. The wooden or light-guage steel structuralelements are fastened in place.Then,pipes, wires, and ducts are knittedhaphazardlyintothem.Thisisespeciallydestructive now in traditional wood-frame construction, where holes are

nowdominatehousingprocessesinwaysunimagined at that time or even thirtyyearsago.

��

boredandchoppedouton-siteasneeded- often at random by each trade - andoftenwithnocoordination.

Eachpartoftheseserviceandstructuralsystemsnodoubtrepresents,initself,thebestproductfortheleastcost,availablefrom theworld-widebuildingproductsindustry, each installed by a differenttrade and each serving a perceivedneed.Thisinterweavingprocessseemstohaveworkeduptonowforfourmainreasons:theremarkablestructuralredundancyandforgiveness of wood or steel framing;the expectation that the next stage ofwork in this conventional chain ofevents will cover any depredations ofthe previous player; the relatively lowcost of materials; and the availabilityof sufficiently low-wage but skilledworkers.Noneofthesecanbetakenforgrantedtoday.

Becausethecavitiesbetweenwallstudsin all construction types and floor joists in framedbuildingshavebeenavailablebynatureofframeconstruction,theyhavebeen filled, in no particular anticipatory order, in a historical progression bythe first to get there. Trade jurisdiction work rules,starting in the craft guildsbut now dominating the work force ingeneral,followedtheemergenceofnewparts and processes, dividing the workaccordingly. Now, separation of workbytradeisasantiquatedandproblematicastheparadigmofhousebuildingtheyaccompanyandmaywellbeitsAchillesheel.

Theentanglementportrayedhereisthefault of no one in particular.This factmakes it difficult to assign cause orto assess responsibility. It is thereforedifficult to remedy. In an importantway, the diffused responsibility socharacteristic of this “system” is bothitsliabilityanditsstrength:itisaliving

system controlled by no one trade orcompany but is shared and graduallyimprovedbyallwhouseit.�

The Interplay of Technical and Organizational Patterns

Thesituationofentanglementwouldnotbesuchaproblemifitwereonlytechnicalin nature. However, as with manysituationsmadevisiblebyobservingthebehavioroftechnicalhardware,theissuesarenotdivorcedfromtheirorganizationalandsocialambiance.

Now, the entire constellation of actors-manufacturers,designers,constructors,regulators, and house occupants - islikewiseenmeshed,producingconditionsripeforpoorquality,highercosts,legaldisputes, and loss of decision flexibility. Notonlythat,thiskindofentanglementthwarts innovation,because innovationoccurs best when the interdependencyamongsystemspartsislow.

Amongthemanysocialandorganizationalforces at work, five stand out.

Demographic Churn

Mostofushave readaboutordirectlyexperiencedtheshiftingdemographicsinourneighborhoodsandregions,includingchanges of household types and sizes. For example,inmanyurbanneighborhoods,overatwentyorthirtyyearperiod,thesociological structure may change, intermsofincomeandhouseholdstructure.Two basic things will happen in thatcase;occupantswhowanttostayintheneighborhoodwillmodifythedwellingstock,orfamilieswillmoveoutifsuchchangesareinfeasibleortooexpensive.

��

If the building stock does not becomeobsolete in a short time, it at leastmay not make a good fit with the next statistical cohort of households.Whilein a very large aggregate sense all ofthese mismatches may sort themselvesout, in any one building or locale thediscontinuity can have telling butdifficult to measure negative effects on household well-being, contributing toasenseofpowerlessnessovertheplaceof dwelling at a very personal level.Becausedwellingsmeanthemosttousasinhabitants,sucheffectsareoftenfeltinthecommunityatlarge.�

Decision Deferment

We also know that, in larger housingdevelopments that take several yearsfromplanningtooccupancy,developersface adilemma.On theonehand theywillseektodeferthecostliestdecisionsand most-likely-to-change decisionsas longaspossible.Theywant tokeeptheir options open at all levels – fromnumber of units to color of cabinetsand fixtures. But the impulse to delay sends ripples through the entire chainof actors, pushing all action to thelast possible moment, compressing analready difficult and entangled process. Unless well organized, this decision-defermentprocesscancausemajorcostand construction management conflicts. The only other choice for a builder isto simply fix all decisions and ignore pressures for decision flexibility.

Control

Many households want a direct sayin major interior layout, fixtures, and equipmentdecisions,nolongercontentwithmovingintodwellingssomeoneelsehasdecidedhavegoodlayoutsandfeel.Thismaybeacaseofhouseholdswantingtoreclaimcontrolofhousingdecisionsfromremoteexperts,expertswho,oftenlackingothermeans,basedecisionson

statistics rather thanactual individuals.Organizingforvarietywithoutdrivingupcostsisaconstantchallengeforbuildersand development teams. Many arepushingvarietyasfarastheycanwithinthepresentproductionparadigm.�

Change

Industry statistics show clearly thatexpenditures on house renovations,adaptations, and upgrading are nowwell beyond $�00 billion each year inthe U.S. market.�These commitmentsto dwelling adaptation are more difficult and expensive for both professionalsanddo-it-yourselferstorealizebecauseof the entanglements of parts and theparties involved, as discussions withcontractors or building owners andinhabitantsreveal.

Organizational and Supply Chain Reconfigurations

Finally, many industries are reorganizing their supply chains in response tonewconcepts of value creation. Ikea is anexample of a large organization, withsophisticatedsupplyconstellations,thatoffersanewdivisionoflabor,includingcustomerswhoassumecertainkeytasksofassemblingwelldesignedbutlower-costproducts.Homeprojectchainssuchas Lowes and Home Depot representother organizations restructuring tonew demands.These companies offersurprisingly comprehensivedesign andconstruction services and the logisticstomakeithappen.Theconceptof“masscustomization”isnowdiscussedamongindustry forecasters, including the Global BusinessNetworkinCalifornia.RobertReich, Secretary of the Departmentof Labor, discusses the concept of“multi-disciplinary work cells” in arecent book.�The United Brotherhoodof Carpenters and Joiners now takesinterest in new cross-trade affiliations to alleviate jurisdictional disputes, and

��

wasrecentlyexploringvariousproactivetraining and apprenticeship programsthattheybelievemightbeneededinthefuture,asunionsseekmarketrecoveryinresidentialconstructionagainstthemeritshopcontractors.�

The latter reconfigurations, taking place nationallyandinternationally,aregoodexamples of responses to new social,economic, and technical conditionshaving a direct bearing on housingprocesses.

Animportantcomplexitythresholdseemsto have been crossed, in a fascinatingincremental process accomplishedwithoutanyonenoticing.Wehavecometoapointinwhichtheautonomytoactindividuallyisbeingdrasticallyreduced.Theopportunityisbeinglosttochangeadecisionoradaptwhatisalreadybuilt,without engaging - often in conflict - dozensofotheractors,eachcontrollingsomephysicalparts,eachwiththeirownproblemsandpriorities.

Thisistrulyasituationoflossoffreedomacross the board, not at all what wehaveexpectedfromourwayofbuildinghouses and the mythic democratic,market-driven house building culturethat has grown up with it.This loss isremarkable because it is happeningin a political economy that we havetraditionally associated in ideologicalterms with individual autonomy andcontrolinhousingprocesses.

Paradoxically, in a society stressingindividualrightsandresponsibilities,wefind that decisions by occupants, apart fromexpensivecustom-designedsingle-familyhouses,areconsideredanuisanceby housing experts who dominate thehousingmarketatallpointsinitssupplychannels.

Thisview,whichstillholdsaconstrictedview of efficiency and is based on

obsolete concepts of standardizationand unified expert control, is very much atoddswiththekindofhealthyhousingactivitieswenowneed.

A Short History of Entanglement

Early American Houses

Americanhousesbuiltintheeighteenthand nineteenth centuries are a goodbackground against which to trace theevolution of our present entanglement,because then, neither electricity,plumbing,norcentralheatinghadenteredthe houses of their time (Fig.3).

Fig. 3Plansofnineteenthcentury rowhousesinReading,Pa.,showingkitchenandbathroomasappendagesattherear.(StevenHoll,Rural & Urban house Types in North America,pamphletArchitecture�,NewYork,����.)

��

Otherpipesbroughtnaturalgastogiveillumination(ashort-livedtechnology),and still other pipes brought steam forheat. In the period between ��00 and���0, wires began twining throughwalls and floors and behind baseboards, replacinggasasameansofilluminationand serving a burgeoning supply ofelectrical appliances plugged intoconvenienceoutlets.��

The mechanical removal of odors andhumidity,andtheadditionofcoolingtothe technical services, with additionalequipment and distribution lines and

In these early houses, often followingprinciples of compositional clarity andformalsimplicitybroughtfromEuropeantraditions�,thefewspaceswereorganizedin such a way that they could be andwereusedformanyhouseholdactivities.Often, sleeping, living, bathing, andcooking occurred in one space in atime-sharingapproach.Itwasnormaltohavechangeofuseinharmonywiththeseasonsand,ofcourse,rearrangementsoffurnitureandlightpartitionsandstorageelements such as wardrobes, armoires,andthelikewhenanewfamilymovedintoahouse.

Rooms were labeled “hall,” “northparlor,”“southparlor,”“chamber,”etc.Few could afford to build use-specific rooms.Indoortoiletsandbathroomswerenonexistent,andkitchenswerefoundinany room where a fireplace provided a placetocookorwerelocatedinashedattachedtothebackofthehouse.

H o u s e s o f t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution

Daring the last half of the nineteenthcentury, indoor plumbing for waterdistributionanddrainagewasgraduallyandthenrapidlyintroducedintohousesand apartments, accompanying rapidurbanization, gradual increase inhousehold affluence, and justified fears of threats to public health, safety, andwelfare. This was supported by thedevelopment of inexpensive, mass-produced,cast-ironandleadpiping,andpublic water systems. The first vented trap toremovesewergasesfromtoiletroomswasintroducedin����,theintroductionof the first really sanitary water closets took place about ���0, and publiclyfundedsewersandwastetreatmentplantswerebuiltinthesameera.Thesepublicandprivateinitiativesenabledbathroomsto migrate, in stages, from the priviesin backyards to attached toilet rooms

tacked onto the back of houses, andfinally to take their place inside, even in multifamily apartment buildings.�0(Fig.4) Building regulations in most large cities required indoor plumbingby the end of the nineteenth century.��Even so, �� percent of households didnot have complete indoor plumbing aslateas���0.��

Fig.4AplanofaPhiladelphiamechanic’shouse in the early twentieth century,showingakitchenintherearmostspace,atoiletattachedtothebackofthehouse,and a bathroom without toilet on thesecond floor. (Parish, H.L., One Million People in Small Houses, Philadelphia,����.)

��

ductwork, waited until decades laterto make an appearance inside housesas standard features. Then, thesedevelopmentshappenedquickly, in thespan of several generations, followingWorldWarII.

Functionalism

Themigrationindoorsofbathroomsandkitchensattachedtotheirresourcetethers,taking place from the ���0s onward,coincided with the Victorian conceptof dividing indoor space into distinct“functional” territories.��Particularlywith the detached house, the conceptof a spatial order related to specificuseswasadistinctdeparturefromlongtraditions.Thesetraditionswererooted,inmanycases,intherelativeautonomyof“spatialtype”and“function”.Inmanyinstancesofthesametype,“functions”and “territorial distributions” wouldbedecidedby thosewho inhabited thesametype.��

Thus,during theIndustrialRevolution,housedesignexperiencedan importantevolution. From spatial and geometric orders offering a certain capacity fora variety of habitation patterns, housedesigntookonfunctionaldeterminism.This way of thinking locked in specific usesbytwomeans:thearrangementofwallstightlywrappedaroundthespatialrequirements of an activity, and theattachment of resource tethers servingthesespecializedspaces.Inshort,spatialarrangements and uses, distributed forreasonsestablishedbyconventionevenprior to the introductionofmechanicalsystems, were now captives both of“arrangement and dimension basedon function” and the resource systemsneeded to serve them. Thus, cookingequipmentwent into spacespreviouslycalled“kitchen”priortogasandelectricappliances,andbedroomsbecamespecialpurpose spaces by the introduction ofbuilt-inclosets,replacingwardrobesand

movablecabinets,whichhadpreviouslyallowed any space to be a sleepingroom.

Therewereefforts,however,toradicallyre-think the distribution of servicesin houses in ways independent of theparticular distribution of functions oruses in a house. In ����, for instance,Catharine Beecher’s proposal for anAmerican Woman’s House clusteredall services in a central core servingall rooms in the house, each claimingadjacencytothecentralcore.�� (Fig.5)

��

Fig.6 R. Buckmiunster Fuller’s Dymaxion house, showing a central service core.(Building Systems, Industrialization and Architecture, Wiley,NewYork,����.)

These early efforts at promoting a“standardized, functional” mechanicalcore for all houses can still be seen instandardized floor plans in so-called“low cost housing schemes” in whichbathroomsandkitchensarerepetitivelyback-to-back, an arrangement arguedto be more efficient and less costlythandispersedutilityspaces.Whilethisefficiency argument may have held at onetimeincircumstancesofbureaucraticmanagement, it has certainly not beenparticularly relevant as a “standard” intheAmerican experience, except whenorganizations based on bureaucraticcontrolhavebuiltforaneconomicclassassumed to be permanent and deniedcontroloftheactofdwelling.Evenhere,doubtsarebeginningtosurfaceaboutthecorrectnessofthoseassumptions,giventherealitiesofhousingdynamics.

Early Years of Experimentation

Thebuildingtechnologyandarchitecturaljournalsofthe���0s,followingdirectlyonthenewandwidespreadavailabilityofresourcedistributionsystemsinhouses,document tremendous experimentationwith improvements in house buildingtechnology.Thissurgeofinventiveness,almostallofwhichsprangfromprivateinitiative,lasteduntiltheSecondWorldWar and took place during the Great Depression when relatively few newbuildings were built.Aside from theexperimental work focused on newconstruction,muchofthepracticaleffortof the time focused on correcting andmodernizing existing buildings withnew mechanical systems, efforts thataccelerated after the HousingAct of����andtheformationoftheHousingand Home Financing Agency in the same period. (Fig.7)

Fig.5 Drawing of the central utilitycore proposed by Catharine Beecherin����. (fromThe American Woman’s Home,CatharineE.BeecherandHarrietBeecherStowe,����,inRussell,Barry,Building Systems, Industrialization and Architecture, Wiley,NewYork,����.)

Much later, but in the same spirit ofefficiency and rational planning, Richard Buckminster Fuller’s first Dymaxion Houseof����hadacentralmechanicalandstructuralcorefromwhichserviceswere to be distributed to surroundingliving spaces. He made this proposalwhile criticizing what he called theInternational Bauhaus Movement’ssuperficial approach to mechanicalsystems, an approach that, he said,“never went back of the wall-surfacetolookattheplumbing....”Thiswasanimportantbutseldomvoicedcriticismofamovement thathadbeenprecipitatedintheearly�0thcenturybytheinvasionof houses and streets by mechanicalservices.��The criticism was accurate,but theproposal seems tohavemissedthe mark, given what is known today.(Fig.6)

��

Despiteorperhapsbecauseofthenewlyintroduced resource systems, theseexperimental efforts from the ���0srevealacuriouslackofattentiontothesesystems.With only a few exceptions,published accounts in the architecturalpressofthetimefocusedonnewideasforthe space-defining elements of houses, their construction, and appearance:walls, floors, roofs, foundations, and all the elements of which they are made.Atthesametime,mostignoredoronlygrudgingly accommodated the pipes,ducts, and wires needed to make thehouseslivable.

Intheseschemes,ifcavitywallsofnewmaterialsandshapeswereproposed-andmanywere- thenewresourcesystemsmusthavebeenassumedtogobetween,inside, and through the cavities, butoften this information is not available.Someexplicitlystatedthatthiswasthe

intention.Whensolid-coreprefabricatedwalls and floors were proposed - and therewereandstillaremany-thereisseldom any mention of where wiring,piping,andductworkaretobeplaced.Presumably,theyareplacedindroppedceiling plenums, hidden in closets, orotherwise“putinafterwards.”

Thereasonthesesystems–atthattimestillrelativelynew-largelyescapedtheattentionofthearchitecturalandbuildinginventions of the ���0s is worthy ofspeculation in more depth than canbe accomplished here. But whateverparadigmwasatworkthenisstillatworktoday: thesenon-architecturalelementswillbeput in later, after the importantwork-usually,inarchitecturalthought,the structure and spatial enclosure - iscompleted, or more mysteriously, theywillbe“integrated.”

Fig.7AnintegratedhousefromtheModernHousingofWashington,D.C.,development.—”In its construction, modular design, standardized plans, a studied production “flow pattern,”andnovelconstructionpracticescombinetoeffectsubstantialcost-andtime-savings...”(The Architectural Forum,November����)

��

The Post-War Period

Many fine histories of housing design, technology, and production chronicletheperiodfromWorldWarIItotheearly���0swhentheOperationBreakthroughprojectofthefederalgovernmentclosedits books.After that, the literaturebecomes markedly thin, as though allthe enthusiasm of the previous fifty years haddissipated.

A careful reading of efforts that wererecordedrevealsonlypassingreferencestothecreepingentanglementinvolvingpipes, ducts, and wires.This absenceis understandable, since, until thewidespread introduction of forced airfor heating in the late ���0s and airconditioning in the late ���0s, thetechnical repertoire had not changedmarkedly for over forty years. (Fig.8, 9) For example, by the 1940 census, fewer than��percentofhouseholdshadcentralheating.��

Fig.8AdiagramofaVanNessSteelHouse.(The Architectural Record, 1935.)

Fig.9A prefabricated all-wood houseassembly. (The Architectural Record, August����.)

��

Integration

When resource systems are mentionedatallinthehousinginnovationliteratureduring the period after ����, thediscussionsarefrequentlyframedintermsofsystemsintegration.Thisisaconceptthathasdirectlyorindirectlydominatedmuch of the research thinking abouthousing and other building technologysincethe���0s.��

Thebasicprincipleofintegrationistoputasmanysubsystemsaspossibleintooneunified assembly. This was, and in some quartersstillis,thoughttobethekeytobetter performance.This approach canbedescribed as an effort to rationalizeandstandardizethephysicalpositioningof discrete parts currently installedseparately in buildings: pipes, wires,and ducts, within floors and walls. Many proposalshavesuggestedthatintegratedassemblies could be standardized toenable their mass production. In whatnowseemsacuriouslinkage,thisstrategywas thought to be a way to achieve“flexible” and “adaptable” housingschemes.�0

Whereas placement of service lineswithin walls and floors could, on aproject-by-projectbasis,meetthehighlyvariable demands of construction andmarket requirements until recently,efforts to standardize this intricateinterweaving-andthusreducemevarietyof configurations - could not possibly succeed.Noonewantedtobuildstandardfloor plans in large enough numbersto make an investment in such mass-produced, highvalue-added, integratedcomponentproductionworthwhile.

This was especially so as increasinglycomplexsystemswereintroducedinthelasttwentyyears:moresophisticatedandcomplex heating and cooling systemswith humidification and dehumidification, central vacuum systems and other

appliances and fixtures each requiring severalservicehook-ups,separatedblackandgraywaterdrainagelines,home-rundomestic water supply piping, morepower and communications cabling, adiversification of power or energy sources, ventilation systems, fire suppressionsprinklersystems,andthelike.

By the late ���0s and into the���0’s,faithinsystemsintegrationhadreacheda high pitch, with renewed efforts atthe US Department of Housing andUrban Development’s PATH initiative(PartnershipinAdvancingTechnologyinHousing)developedinclosepartnershipwith the National Association ofHomebuildersResearchCenter.

Systems complexity had increased,demand for variety had continuedunabated, but no new paradigm hademergedon the sceneof theAmericanhousing industry to help sort out andsimplifythetasks.Littleifnoevidencewasavailablethatthegoalofimprovingquality, durability, energy efficiency and flexibility would be accomplished with theparadigmsincurrency.

Shedding the Limitations of Functionalism and Entanglement

The principle direction of thinkingdominating housing technology upto now, can be called the unibody / integrationview.Thisviewcorrespondsclosely to attitudes held in currencyby many industry leaders, writers, andacademicsintotheearly��stcentury.

Butthisparadigmisnowobsolete.Itisfundamentallyastatic,technicalviewinthenarrowsense,trappedinamodelofcentralizedcontrolandstandardization.Becauseofthis,itisunsympathetictothe

�0

fullrealityofhealthyhousingprocessesintheUnitedStates.

The unibody / integration perspectiveignores one old reality and one newidea in housing, which the state ofentanglement we have now reachedcompels us to recognize.We are nowin aposition to shed the limitationsoffunctionalismandentanglement.

The first old reality – easily ignored in the deeply ingrained (but now questioned)cultural propensity to focus on “new”- is the fact that undergo gradual, fine-grainedadaptationtoremaincurrentandhealthy.Thisisaprocessofteninitiatedby households or for their benefit,makingforawidelydistributedpatternofcontrol.Thisispervasive,constitutingavitaleconomicandsocialactivity,onlypartiallyaccountedfor.

Thesecondideaistheuseoflevels.Levelsconcern theway thebuilt environmentorganizesitselfhierarchicallyaccordingto the distribution of control overit.�� This later concept is evident innonresidential projects such as officebuildings and retail facilities, whereit has been conventional practice forsometimeintheU.S.tomanagedesign,construction and management on thebasisoflevels.Intheseprojects,a“basebuilding” is constructed, consisting ofload-bearingelements,publicspaces,andcommonmechanicalsystems.Thispartofthewholeisdesignedtohavealonglifespan. Filling in the empty spaces - the “fit-out” – follows, with each occupant deciding individually what suits theirrequirements and budget.This processof “fitting-out” continues as long as the buildingstands.The facts of change and distributedcontrol converge in the levels concept.The base building is meant to be “fixed” relative to the more variable “fit-out”. One party (the aggregate of individual

occupantsoralandlord)controlsthebasebuilding.Anumberofindependentpartieseach controls its “fit-out,” retaining a degreeoftechnicalandlegalautonomyandresponsibility.

Thisapproachisappliedasamatterofcourse in the office and retail sector. It mayhavemeritinU.S.housingaswell,toliberateaprocessnowsoentangled.Amodelofthispracticehasbeenpatientlymoving forward in the Netherlands,Finland and Japan. Hundreds of housing unitshavebeenbuiltusingit.Oneproductdeveloped to aid this was the Matura Infill System. (Fig.10) According to people doingtheworkinthesecountries,newmultifamilyresidentialprojects,aswellasrenovationsinboththesubsidizedandprivatemarkets,arebeingbuiltusingthelevelsapproach.Inthem,basebuildingsare being “fitted out” with units meeting household preferences, at a cost equalto the unibody / integrated approach,which is conventional there too andequallyoutmoded.Theseprojectsofferdevelopers the new benefit of matching ratherthananticipatinguserrequirementsandgettingtheworkdonemorequicklythan before. They demonstrate howvariety,previouslyconsideredtobethesource of higher cost and more difficulty, can actually be more efficient.��

��

Fig. 10Adiagramofadwellingorganizedon the principle of base building andfit-out. All installations specific to the dwelling are in the fit-out, except for the mainsupplyandreturnpipesandducts.Thisapproachisapplicabletobothnewconstruction and renovation. MaturaNetherlands.(fromEntangled Building? (ed)E.Vreedenburgh.OBOM,TechnicalUniversity Delft, The Netherlands,����.)

This base building/fit-out approach also hasaninterestingdimensionthatshouldsatisfy architectural formalists andfunctionalistsalike.Well-designedbasebuildingscanbeconstructed followingsound and enduring architecturalprinciples,offeringcapacityandgivingopportunity for a wide variety of unitsizes and floor plan layouts. Thus,architects and builders can literally“give”formandspacetootherswhothenhave the freedom to occupy the given

formsintheirownandchangingways.Itisanimportantkindoforganizedhand-offinacomplexprocess,onewhichmaynowbeabletorespectthefundamentalneedforhistoricalcontinuityatthelevelof the building as part of the publicenvironment,whilerespectingtheneedforcontinuousthoughslowcultivationoftheinteriorspacesinrespecttoevolvinghouseholdneeds.

A Turning Point in Housing

A real turning point in meeting theproblem of entanglement inAmericanhousingwillcomewhenseveraleventsoccur. First, wiring, piping, and duct management following the unibody/integrated paradigm in currency today- “just put the pipes and ducts in thecavities or anywhere they will fit” - will have to become an economic burdento most actors in the housing game,especiallybuildersandconsumers.Itmayalreadyhavereachedthispoint.

Second,therewillhavetobewidespreadrecognition of the magnitude ofinvestmentsinalteringexistingdwellingsas apercentageof total investments inhousing. This data is relatively wellknown, but our building traditions areonlyslowlywakingupandadjustingtothisreality.

Third, the unibody/integration modelwillhave tobedisplacedby the levelsmodelasanormalbasisfororganizingcomplexity and variety. Despite themany differences between commercialprojectsandhousing-differencesintheirrespectiveplacesinoursocial,economic,and cultural fabric - the base building/fit-outstrategyisausefulmodelthatshouldbecarefullystudiedandtestedinhousingpractice. Thiswasrecentlyrecognizedin the NSF-PATH sponsored National HousingAgendaWorkshop.��

��

Therealityoftechnicalentanglementisbeingrecognizedinmanyindustriesandcountries.Itisgivenmanydifferentnames,“sorting out, “design for assembly,”“disentangling,” “base building/fit-out,” “workingonlevels.”Thereare,however,advantages beyond those gained insolving technical problems, critical astheyaretoimprovingthestateoftheartinhousing.Theconceptsoflevelsandtheprincipleofdisentanglementalsoenableus to rethink again the organizationalquestion of the balance between thecommunityandtheindividual,mediatedasalwaysthroughthecontrolofthebuiltenvironment.

A visit to a multifamily residentialprojectunderconstructionandorganizedthis new way offers a tangible image.Openingthefrontdoorofthedwellingunit,ourfutureoccupantseesanenclosedbut empty space, with columns orbearing walls at certain locations,and exposed vertical plumbing andventilation lines in a cluster.With theassistanceofadesigner,orbyreferringtoseveralpreparedmodel-unitdesigns,aninteriordesignispreparedmatchingour household’s preferences perfectly.Because a sophisticated computersoftwareprogramisused,thedesignistransmitteddirectlytoanoff-sitefacilitywhere all specified parts - including parts formakingwalls,allequipment,cabinets,fixtures, piping and wiring, and heating and cooling equipment - are preparedororganized.Oneweekafter theorderhasbeenplaced,thispackageofpartsistransportedtothebuilding,ordeliveredinjust-in-timebundles,accompaniedbyatrained,four-personinstallationcrew.Inacarefullychoreographedsequence,partsarebroughtintothedwellingspaceand installed. After installation of the fit-outiscomplete,carpetinstallersarrive,followed by drapery hangers, and thefurnitureisbroughtin.Theelapsedtimebetweentheinitialvisittothebarespaceand completed fit-out and occupancy is

lessthanthreeweeksforanaveragesizedwelling,atacostequaltothatchargedby a developer using the conventionalapproach, and offering the additionaladvantage that future changes will beeasiertoaccomplish.”

Thisscenariorepresentsanewparadigm.Thequestionishowtoshiftparadigms.We need to learn how to intentionallyembark on a new concept pathway,on which each will find opportunities unavailableifthepathisn’testablishedinthe first place. This would be a rare event inthebuildingindustry.

References

1. Wright, Gwendolyn. Building the Dream,ASocialHistoryofHousinginAmerica.PantheonBooks,NewYork,����.

2. Gideon, Sigfried. Space, Time and Architecture, The Growth of a New Tradition.HarvardUniversityPress,Cambridge,����.

�. Habraken,N.John.TransformationsoftheSite.AwaterPress,Cambridge,����.

4. Gallagher, Winifred. The Power of Place.PoseidonPress,����.

�. Author’s personal interviews withmajorhomebuilders.

�.. N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o fHomebuilders. The Future of Home Building;����-����andBeyond.Washington,D.C.,����.

�. Reich, Robert, Tales of a NewAmerica, Random House, NewYork,����.

�. Author’s personal conversationswith Edward Gorman, Carpenter’s Health and Safety Fund of North America, United Brotherhood ofCarpentersandJoiners.

�. Holl, Steven. Rural and UrbanHouse Types in NorthAmerica.

��

PamphletArchitecture�,NewYork,����.

�0. Nielsen,LouisS.StandardPlumbinEngineering Design. McGraw-Hill, NewYork,����.

11. Ventre, Francis E. “Building Regulation.” Dictionary ofArt,McMillan,NewYork(upcoming).

��. TwoHundredYearsofU.S.CensusTaking: Population and HousingQuestions ���0-���0. Bureau ofthe Census, Washington, D.C.,Nov.����.

��. Nye, David E. Elect r i fy ingAmerica, Social Meanings of aNewTechnology,���0-���0.MITPress,Cambridge,����.

14. Wright, Gwendolyn, op cit. ��. Habraken,N.John.TypeasSocial

Agreement.” Biannual AsianCongress ofArchitects, Seoul,����.

��. Russell, Barry. Building Systems,Industrialization,andArchitecture.Wiley,NewYork,����.

��. Banham, Reyner. Theory andDesign in the First Machine Age. Praeger,NewYork,���0.

��. TwoHundredYearsofU.S.CensusTaking: Population and HousingQuestions, ���0-���0. Bureau ofthe Census, Washington, D.C.,Nov.����.

19. Bender, Richard; Wilson, Forrest (ed).A Crack in the Rear ViewMirror.Van Nostrand, NewYork,����.

20. Kendall, Stephen. “Flexible Design, Encyclopedia of Housing, Garland, NewYork(upcoming).

��. Habraken,N.John.“CuluvatingtheBuilt Field,” Places. MIT Press, Cambridge(upcoming).

��. Kendall,Stephen.“OpenBuildingforHousing.ProgressiveArchitecture,Nov.����.

23. NSF/PATH Housing Research AgendaWorkshop.VolumeI&II.Michigan State University, June�00�.

��

Appendix 2 Where to get more information

Websites

Building Futures InstituteBallStateUniversitywww.bsu.edu/bfi

JohnHabraken’swebsitewww.habraken.com

OBOMStrategicStudiesTUDelfthttp://www.obom.org/

�-METCenterTokyoMetropolitanUniversityhttp://www.�-met.org/index-e.htm

Architecture Institute of Japan OpenBuildingSubCommitteehttp://news-sv.aij.or.jp/keikakusub/s��/

BensonwoodHomeshttp://www.bensonwood.com/company/openbuilt.html

MITOpenSourceBuildingAlliancehttp://architecture.mit.edu/~kll/OSBA_proposal.htm

OpenHouseInternationalhttp://www.openhouse-int.com/

Helsinki University of Technology,DepartmentofArchitecturehttp://www.tkk.fi/Yksikot/Osastot/A/AR/eng/index.htm

C I B W � 0 � - O p e n B u i l d i n gImplementationhttp://open-building.org

Partial Bibliography of Sources on Residential Open Building

Fassbinder, Helga, Jos van Eldonk, Flexible Fixation, the paradox of Dutch housing architecture(Van Gorcum, Assen/Maastricht: E i n d h o v e n U n i v e r s i t y o fTechnology,���0,��p.).

Fassb inder, H . J . van E ldonk , “Flexibilität im Niederländischen Wohnungsbau”. Architecture Plus, 100/101(����,p.��-��).

Habraken,N.J.,Three R’s For Housing,(Amsterdam: Scheltema andHolkema,���0).

Habraken, N. J., etal., Variations: The Systematic Design of Supports(Laboratory ofArchitecture andPlanning,MIT,Cambridge,����).

Habraken, N. J., SUPPORTS: An Alternative to Mass Housing(U.K.:Urban InternationalPress,SecondEnglishedition,����).

Kendall,Stephen,“Who’sinChargeofHousing Innovation? Vernacularconstructiontechnologiesdistributecontrol widely,” Architecture(October����).

Kendall,Stephen, “Shell / Infill ATechnicalStudyofANewStrategyfor �x� House Building,” Open House International, vol ��, no.�(���0).

Kendall, Stephen, “Open Building forHousing,” Progressive Architecture(November����).

��

(Blacksburg,VA., �00�, pp �0�-���).

K e n d a l l , S t e p h e n , “ M a k i n gAccommodating Resident ialForm: International Developments toward an OpenArchitecture,”Proceedings 23rd Annual Conference of the International Association of Housing Science (Montreal, June�00�).(CD)

Kendall, Stephen, “An Open BuildingStrategy forAchieving DwellingUnit Autonomyin Multi-unitHousing,” Housing and Society,Vol��,No.�(�00�,pp.��-��).

Proveniers, Ir.Adri, Prof. dr. HelgaFassbinder, New Wave in Building, a flexible way of design, construction and real estate management (VanGorcum, Assen / Maastricht: EindhovenUniversityoftechnology,��p.).

Tiu r i , U lpu , Markku Hedman ,Developments Towards Open Building in Finland (HelsinkiU n i v e r s i t y o f Te c h n o l o g y,DepartmentofArchitecture,����,��p.).

UlpuTiuri,“OpenBuilding-HousingforReal People,” Arkkitehti (Finland, �-����,p��-�0).

Vreedenburgh, Eric (ed), Entangled Bui ld ing (The Nether lands:Werkgroep OBOM TU Delf,����).

Werf, Frans van der, Open Ontwerpen,ISBN �0-���0-���-�, (Uitgeverij0�0,Rotterdam����,���p.).

Kendall, Stephen, “Prospects for OpenBuilding in the US HousingIndustry,” Proceedings, First International Conference on Open Building and Structure Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing(PRC,����).

Kendall, Stephen, “Europe’s Matura Infill SystemQuicklyRoutesUtilitiesforCustom Remodeling,” Automated Builder(May����).

Kendall,Stephen,“ANewMultifamilyHousing Paradigm,” Urban land(November����).

Kendall, Stephen, “Open Building:An Approach to SustainableArchitecture,” Journal of Urban Technology(December����).

Kendall, Stephen, “Toward OpenBuilding:PracticalDevelopmentsinEurope,”Open House International,vol��,no.�.(�000,pp��-��).

Kendall,Stephen,andJonathanTeicher:ResidentialOpenBuilding,�0�p.,Spon,LondonandNewYork,�000,ISBN0-���-����0-�

Kendall,Stephen,“ProductBundlingorKitting: Balancing Efficiency and Variety for the Market,” NationalConsortium of Housing ResearchCenters Session at the NAHBBuildersShow,Proceedings: Profit and Opportunity Beyond Traditional Building Practices,MichiganStateUniversityUrbanAffairsProgram(January�00�,pp�-��).

Kendall, Stephen, “An Open BuildingStrategy for Converting ObsoleteOffice Buildings to ResidentialUses,” Proceedings, 11th Annual Conference on Lean Construction

Stephen Kendall is an architect and Professor of Architecture at Ball State University in Indiana, where he is also Director of the Building Futures Institute (www.bsu.edu/bfi)