The more authority that we give the government, the more that bureaucracy gets a hold of our lives.
Hello and welcome to the Business of Architecture. I'm your host, Ryan Willard, and today I have the utmost pleasure of conversing with Alex got a luminary in the realm of architecture. He is armed with a distinguished pedigree, including a master's degree in architecture and construction management from NDSU. Alex also honed his craft under the tutelage of the illustrious Daniel Lipkin embarking on a collaborative Odyssey with his esteemed colleague and comrade Lance. They birthed F nine Productions, Inc, a testament to their shared vision and tenacity. Together, they've not only fostered architectural marvels, but also ventured into the realm of digital discourse with their acclaimed podcast inside the firm, which, if you're not subscribed to I highly recommend that you do and give it a listen. Moreover, Alex imparts his wisdom at the venerable University of Colorado Boulder, and has also authored the insightful tome, the creativity code, and extends his expertise to budding entrepreneurs via build a better co.com. In this episode, we discuss the very important topic of affordable housing, and we look at whether the AIA is actually advocating for better housing, we look at the sorts of things that the AIA could be doing, and how they could be using their strength as an organization to actually be a catalyst and the facilitator of high caliber, accessible, affordable housing. We look at some of the tensions between affordable housing and sustainability, for example, and Alex is very knowledgeable on this matter, and puts together an interesting argument around the tension between those two things and whether you can be both at the same time if you can truly be sustainable and truly be affordable. We also look into what is the nature of affordable housing, what is it? How is it categorized and how is it defined. And of course, we relate this all back to a wider commercial and business context of architecture. Really fascinating conversation, thoroughly enjoyed speaking with Alex and was very educational for myself as well. So sit back, relax and enjoy. Alex gore. This podcast is produced by Business of Architecture, a leading business consultancy for architects and design professionals. This episode is sponsored by Smart practice, business of architectures, flagship program to help you structure your firm for freedom, fulfillment, and financial profit. If you want access for our free training on how to do this, please visit smart practice method.com. Or if you want to speak directly to one of our advisors about how we might be able to help you please follow the link in the information. Welcome to the Business of Architecture. Alex, very good to have you. How are you?
I am great, Ryan, it's great to be here.
Fantastic. Well, I'm very chuffed to be speaking with you. I know that you're you're quite the academic, am I right? And understanding you've got not one but two master's degrees in architecture. One in construction management.
Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I
didn't know you knew that. Very good. Very cool. Which is interesting, actually, because it kind of reflects on the business model that you guys have f9 where you're actually architects and contractors. Really interesting practice. Of course, you're one of the CO CO hosts of the inside the firm podcast. I understand as well. You worked once for Daniel Liebeskind. Back in a day.
I did. Yep. It was very fun experience.
How was that as an experience?
It was great. Because as you like to actually be in the meetings with these famous architects that everyone knows about in school, because, you know, I'd get small moments like writing down in the elevator, you know, talking about one of his favorite books is Moby Dick, you know, so then I had to buy Moby Dick and start reading Moby Dick, you know, because that's him chasing chasing the whale, you know, chasing architecture. And then, and then just one of the funny stories was we were we were doing a Seoul, South Korea, they had this whole train station, the whole train area that was close to downtown on the other side, so we're going to redevelop it. It's huge, huge skyscrapers and everything and the competition was us and a bunch of other famous architects, right? The who's who. And one was going to win the master plan and one was going to win the tower. tower design because the tower was going to be iconic right? And our group was on it. And Daniel only wanted us focused on the Master Plan and the tower. I mean, the master plan, not the tower. So much so that the majority of it, we didn't even design a tower, but we'd make models all the time. Right, right. So we'd make models, and then there's always a blank space for a tower, because he never wanted us to design that. Well, I looked around, and I found a tower that I thought fit it kind of it was two things prongs that kind of like, went around each other. And Lance and I designed a skyscraper that was very similar. And I thought the symmetry of you know, the two countries, you know, it looks beautiful in there. And I kept placing the model in there, you know, just because I was like, we made the recipe. Like I would just sneak it in there right before. Right? We need to think that yeah. So anyways, we're like two weeks, three weeks before we have to submit and Daniel's like, hey, we need to start designing the tower, you know, so then everyone is designing the tower and placing different towers in there. And he's like, No, I don't like it. I don't like it. I don't like it. He's like, I know what to do. And he runs out. He goes, finds that model. And he's like, we need something like this. I was like, Yeah, I think so do I think so too. So that we worked on some islands and Dubai, you know, things like that. And then oh, eight hit. And it just devastated. Every firm I was young, they laid off a third of the firm's it was just a bloodbath everywhere. So then got my Master's in construction management. And just a very quick story there because I know we want to get into it. In construction management, I knew that I already had my architecture degree. So I focused on development and making townhomes and learning townhomes, the layouts, the the math behind it. So probably three or four years ago, we built our own townhomes, our offices in an office part that's connected to them. And I found my own drawings. I was like, holy cow, this is crazy. In you know, 15 years ago, I was doing this as my thesis. And now they're actually made, you know that design is different. And stuff like that is very relevant. Amazing,
amazing. Brilliant. So quite a very interesting and varied career you've had thus far. If you like, I know that as well that you're an author, you wrote the the creativity code, could you give us a little quick synopsis of what that book was about?
Yeah. So we teach engineers, and we teach them about the design process and the construction process. And it's very integral because if you've ever worked with engineers, good engineers see your vision, and try to make the engineering match it. Yep. So I teach them a part of how to use Revit. And how a building is constructed is what is the design process, because I thought it was very related to engineers, because if we just say Be creative, do sketches, you know, be be an architect be an artist's right, that might or might not appeal to their engineering inside. So the creativity code is about the process. And it's probably very similar familiar to every architect, it's about, you know, investigating the site, case studies, then iteration, and then creating a design filter, and what that design filter can be creative principles and rational principles, to make up architecture, and that the book kind of lays out that kind of follows the course, supplements, of course, and shows how creativity can actually be a process. Brilliant, brilliant,
I was very interested in you both you and Lance have got a very interesting relationship with academia. But yet a very different from the majority of academics certainly that I know, I'm more familiar with coming across with in in university, both of you have come coming from a very passionate and fierce position of actual just being practical real architects, and, and the importance of translating these architectural skills that we're learning in, in academia to actually making buildings happen. Can you talk a little bit about that about your, your, your approach with some of the students that you teach at the university? Yeah. So
there's, there's a couple of schools of thought, and I think you have to touch on both of them. And I think both of them are valid. And one of them is you need to abstract ideas in order to understand the ideas, right, take them and I think that's what architecture teaching is great about is taking an idea, abstracting it and then trying to make it into reality. The other side of the coin is an I think the false narrative would be is to be extremely practical, you know, and I want to say that that's what we're trying to do. What we're trying to do is mimic reality. We're trying to mimic reality. So like that creativity code process is probably variation architects. A variation on that, you know, like it. It's not going to be exactly that. But everyone would be familiar like, oh, yeah, that's that's kind of how I think about it. That's kind of how I do it right, we have a strong idea that if we mimic reality, we can, we can get better quicker, right. And it goes to teaching, you know, when we're teaching Revit in that course, and now Lance's teaching some different courses is, we have the firm, and we've developed our template. And we've developed our systems. And basically, the way we even model in Revit, like we have a facade wall versus a structural wall, same thing with the floors and all that because we're mimicking the construction process. So then it has like a couple benefits. One is they learn how a building is built, one they are drawing, because they're choosing the actual things. And then two, you don't have to have the final facade picked. When you're just laying out the space plan, you know, you just know that it's a two by six, wall, metal stud wall, whatever it is, and then you can move from there. And then you can mimic reality of Well, that's how construction happens. And that's how your design process happens. Of course, when you're sketching, you might have an idea what the facade is going to be right, but there's iterations. So you don't want to lock yourself down and have to choose that right away, you can leave it more abstract in the beginning, and then get more concrete as you go along. So we're trying to marry the two. It's just that I feel I feel like sometimes. Some people have a lot of good intentions, and their good intentions override reality. And it's not that that lands, and I don't have those good intentions. Also, it's, Hey, here's hard nosed reality also. So let's not let those good intentions ruin life, because of what reality actually is.
How do you integrate the kind of, for what parts of the business side of running a practice or just delivering a project? Do you bring up with your students?
Basically, none. And there's a reason for that. And the reason why is because architecture and design and construction is so difficult, I don't think that people give themselves enough credit for for how difficult it actually is. That not only through school, but your first three to five years, should just be focused on that. And I know that the AIA and I've talked to the President of N carb and all that. And they justify that you need to study that. Because the moment you get your stamp, you could go out on your own, I get that right. But the amount of within your first five years that you're writing contracts, and dealing with lawyers, and all that, typically is zero, unless you get laid off by leaps get right then
then you're thrown into it. And you gotta Yeah, so I
feel like, you know, Business of Architecture, what we do, I have a small group, build a better co.com When you are in the thick of building a business, that's when those lessons are going to stick to you, you know, when you can go on the entree architect community, you know, and ask the questions there. And when you're, because that's mimicking reality to like, Oh, I'm actually making a company, I'm actually looking at payroll. And it's not just an exercise, right? Because I, I could be wrong, just because I'm so visual based show that it's easy for me to understand a building and make a building and critique that, right. And you can see aesthetically, and you can make arguments, right? When you try to teach business in college and you say numbers, and you put spreadsheets up, and you talk about KPIs. It's not it's not real, it's not real. Where when you do it, when you are a business owner, and we start talking about KPIs and and what they should be, and how you can improve your cash flow, and how business is basically cash flow and profit. And if you get those wells, then you can worry about everything else. And everything else kind of works out. But then to there's ways to structure your contracts so that you can get more cash flow and profit quicker, right? Are you going to remember that, you know, in college, and then 10 years later be like, oh, yeah, there's a nuance in my contracts that can help me out there. And if I could talk to other architects and people who do this, like, like your group and our group, you know, it would really help. So I think it's more appropriate. Now verse
seven, yeah, that makes it that makes a lot of sense. In terms of your what you do. f9 you guys developed a very, you know, quite a niche with residential private houses multifamily. There's commercial work. there as well. How did that niche begin to emerge in the interesting how in housing, and this is kind of related as well to your construction management background? Yeah, it,
it started because of skill set and interest, and opportunity. So since we got laid off in the reception, we had to pick up everything. And that was everything from additions to houses. And in the beginning, we weren't even licensed because we got laid off too quick. Right, right. So we couldn't do large commercial, we could do small commercial T eyes. And that's what we did. And now we're doing manufacturing centers and things like that. And I can't wait to show some of them. They're They're super cool stuff that we're doing. But I've always loved houses, I think a lot of architects start love, you know, loving houses. And and it just grew up, that was the reality. And then we've just built from there, and then slowly built up to what we're doing now. Amazing.
Brilliant. Well, let's jump jump into the the question that we were going to discuss today, which was around affordable housing, and really looking at, well, you know, what is the AIA? Are they actually interested? Are they truly advocating for affordable housing? And I guess the first question would be, well, what is affordable housing? How do we define it?
Yep. And I know what this leads to what we were talking about earlier, about our difference in in what lanton are trying to bring to teaching and I other professors do, too, right. But what I was talking about with having great aspirations, you know, having a great open heart, but having that conflict with reality, right? And are you achieving your goals, if your counter to reality, right? The ACA does a lot of good stuff, but also to, you know, that, at best, it is aspirational, at worst, it's hypocritical, right? And I'll give you, I'll give you an example. Here's an example. A sustainability is a great goal. We make it a practice in our practice, right. But some of the new codes coming up some of the rules, some of the regulations about sustainability, and even affordable housing, are extremely counter to affordable housing. Right, by making everyone say, hey, we have this aspirational goal that we need houses with electric car plugins, in Denver, a lot of things have to be solar panels to pass codes, the insulation values are, are in 2021 are through the roof, literally, you know, like are 60 in the roof. I'm not arguing that that's bad for the building. I think that's good for the building, right. But you can't say that you can't have an onerous process. Same thing with the government, too. You can't design a building or neighborhood by committee. Have it be three years long process, and then complain that it's not affordable, you just can't, you just can't. I think there's ideas that a lot of people have that that we could aim for these different things. And maybe there is should be something as a top priority. And it can vary. It can vary. So for some housing, maybe the housing should be the top priority should be affordability, with the underlining of safety is key, right? We're not going to build anything that's going to do any any harm that way. We're not going to put asbestos in there. We're not going to make it structurally unsound all these sorts of things, right. But maybe that is a bigger issue. Right? And maybe other neighborhoods can focus on sustainability. Or maybe take these two up, maybe sustainability, you can still have that, but you can get it at its root. Right. And its root is power generation. Right? We should be advocating for clean power generation. And we can argue about nuclear power, and I would be happy to but the power density, and the storage capacity of the negative effects of of nuclear power are so much less impactful than coal, right? I'm still a wind is still awesome. Solar power is awesome, too. I know people have their issues with that as well. Just because of the minerals that go into it. Sure. But let's be honest, and net, let's not just put on a pretty face, right? And say I am for affordable housing, I am for sustainability. I am for all these other stuffs. So now anyone that looks at you says Oh, therefore what I'm for, but you're not, you're not, right. You're not for what I'm for. And just because I'm saying this doesn't mean that I'm against sustainability, right? Or against some of these other initiatives. It's just I am prioritizing and executing, because that is the way that the world actually works. Right and actually functions because the ramifications are huge. And here are the ramifications is that we've all seen like dystopian sci fi movies, right? Where things break down, and things break down, not because of our intelligence, you know, like me and you have skills, the people in government have skills. It's a bureaucratic nightmare. Yeah, that makes that grinds things to a halt. And all of a sudden, it's 20 years from now, me and you, and we all have kids and all that. And we say, hey, yeah, back in the day, I actually had a nice truck that I could drive around. And all this was great. And now it's in the future. And we don't have that, right. And we don't have food security, and we don't have all these other things. And I firmly believe it's because the bureaucratic system, always, for some reason, has to judge things by committee. And then committees become a bunch of priorities, and you can't meet all those priorities, you cannot meet all those priorities, because priorities means priorities, right? I priority, if you don't meet the lowest priority, that's fine. If you meet the higher ones, right? In business, if you're teaching business, you're not going to meet absolutely everything, you're going to strive for it. But there's priorities, and some is putting food on the table for your staff. And I think that's what we're exploring here today.
That's really, that's a really interesting way of kind of setting out a context, actually, and kind of removes it a little bit as well from it being overly rooted in something ideological. And that if that if you're for this thing that you're for this thing as well. And actually just putting it on a, on a spectrum of priorities of like, well, there's an actual practical reality of delivering buildings at a high level of sustainability, which means that they're going to be more expensive. Yes, that's that that is the economic reality of it. Therefore, affordable housing is need to be judged and looked at looked at in a in a different way. And
I want to bring up one example. So everyone, if you remember, in college, when you would want get books, look at architecture, right? And then you get older, and then you kind of stop, you know, and you don't do it as much, right? Maybe this is just me. Okay, maybe this is just me. So our firm has been getting back into it. And we have this huge, we have so many books now. And every night. I'm just like paging through them. And you might remember Norman Foster, it's an office building, north of London, by what two hours? I don't know. And it looks like a piano shape. And it's all like kind of black glass. The Ipswich, the Ipswich building. There you go. I knew I was talking to the right guy. Yeah. And I And because I have the book, I can see the details and the way that the glasses connected. I'm like, holy cow, you could not do this today. Like you could not do this today. It would be such a fight to get through to do today. Right? And what's funny about that is that building is so good is that they put it on the whatever historic registry that they put like churches at the old churches out like this is so good that like hell. Yeah. And, and so they admitted so good, but like, it would be so hard for you to do that. They've like outlawed what they love. Right? You've outlawed what you love. It's kind of crazy. And we do this in America. Right? Everyone loves Europe, because everyone just goes to the center and believes that that's how all of Europe is. They don't realize that there's like suburbs, like neighborhoods just like no, no people here. There's suburbs in Europe. And people don't know that. Right? So they see that and they want that. And I love that too. Everyone loves that. Right. And then here in America, we have the fire apparatus trucks. And if you have anything over three storeys, so 30 feet, then you need 26 feet wide, and then you have to be 15 feet from there. Like our scale just got messed up, too. Yeah, right. And I'm not saying fire shouldn't be a priority. But I've had these conversations, meaning can we shrink this so that we have better scale more walkability, closer knit community? It would be more dense, which then the owner then has more money to spend per lot because it's more dense, right? So there is a thing for him? And could we do something like we'll have more fire hydrants, or like it would be even worth it for us to buy larger ladders and somehow store them in the architecture so that they don't even have to bring their truck. It it goes nowhere. It goes nowhere. Right? So that's going back to the priorities right and it actually goes back to affordable housing, because not all density means it's going to be cheaper. But if you're if you can still use stick frame, a lot of times it will lower the price and why I do that caveat is because once you get The podium style with the concrete and parking garages above you actually, it gets more expensive per square foot just because it's a more robust system. Right. So I know I went on a tangent there, but I feel like it related.
Know what this is very interesting handling it just to kind of look back at the the initial question was like, Okay, what is affordable housing? And the next part of that will be well, what do we as architects expect governing bodies to actually be doing to be advocating for this?
Okay, I'm so glad you brought this back, you must be a great host. The AIA, the AIA could have a role in that, because they could have an influence on the code. And they could have alternatives. And they could lobby for that. Because we could put that on our normal citizens, right. So let's pretend that we are going to convince normal citizens that they have to vote for one mayor or another netmail. Mayor, because that one neighbor, that one mayor is going to fire the chief or make the chief do something with fire access apparatus road distance, and have that argument, and then all sudden, you're you're already on the lower footing because their trump card is safety. Right? That's again, it's again, great intentions, right? I'm for safety. I am not I must hate. I must hate people.
It goes back into the into the ideological position. Yeah, yes.
And what I want to say is, it's actually untrue. I actually don't hate people, right? Yeah, I actually, I had to double check. Sometimes they annoy me, right. But I actually liked people. So you aren't going to win that. That's so especially to like what you're alluded to, okay, now we're getting into politics, like that's going to be a disaster with your, with your neighbors and all that. So the AIA, that's actually a huge issue. It's, I'm so glad we went on this tangent and you circle this back. Our team is very familiar with these 12 to 70 unit developments, right? Right. And we're very, we hear a lot from citizens, all the criticisms. And I'm not even saying all of them are wrong. Because a lot of times they will propose solutions, and will be like, Yeah, that's what we want to do. Or that's what we wanted to do in the beginning. But we can't do the AIA with all their expertise, with all their knowledge with all their architects could be like, yeah, these roads are an issue, we should have an alternative here. And we should really fight for this. And we should make it in the code. And then, you know, the cities are going to fight against that and do their own amendments. But I would pay money for that. I'm not in the AIA, because I feel like their priorities are just smile washing. You know, it's like so I'll go into politics for a little bit black BlackRock, they make they make huge investments, huge big bankers, they buy up housing, they so that it gets gentrified. They help fund the military industrial complex, and then they'll put up a Black Lives Matter and be like, we're the good guys. And it's like, Are you or like, Are you one of the reasons why that's all bubbling up also like that, like, you know what I mean? Like you just step out, not us and be like, well, it actually might be you. Yeah. So that's where I'm getting back to. I think the AIA could do an amazing job if we mimicked and understood reality more, understood that prior Ortiz and attack those, and, you know, really, really attack those. So to kind of go into it. I know, we've been circling around it. You know, let's talk about affordability. And I wonder what you think about these concepts of what really makes something affordable. One would be mass production. And we know that's true. Because if you have 1000 square foot, I know because because we build and we just bid this out, you're digging down three, four feet, and you move that dirt off site because you're building in a neighborhood and then you have to bring it back $7,500 That's what five Dells, three apples to apples computers, right. And that computer is immensely sophisticated like me, we would have no idea how to do this. I could actually drive a truck and a backhoe. And if you couldn't write, it will take you half a day. Teach a half a day. Could we build a computer in? There's no right. So and we can get into like how we could advocate for mass production but but that's one key. That's one key right there. On Another one is to limit the government capture and limit the bureaucracy. And I think the AI could help out there. And then another one is just think about housing size. So I'll send you the Lincoln and your people can put it in there. But in 1950s, the average household size was 9830. Right? In the 60s, it was 1200. The first house that I built with I mean, lived in with my wife was from the 60s it was, it was like 910 square feet. Very efficient. three bedroom, one bath, one bath, right? And I mean, the UK knows this to like tiny houses, right? Yes,
I was just thinking these are enormous sizes, houses. And then yeah, then my next reference for America is New York. So again, it's tiny.
Yeah, exactly. But if we focus on some of those, we might be able to get somewhere, right.
But let's let's talk about the mass production element of this. First of all, because this is interesting about affordable housing, needing to be some element of, of mass production involved in it. And I've always found it really interesting that that has been floating around since the war, to numerous technologies, we've had Buckminster Fuller with his Dymaxion house kind of really pushing it to ideas. When I was working at Richard Rogers practice in in London, we were then this is about 15 years ago. Now, this is kind of 2009 2010 sort of, sort of era, we were working with modular construction. And you know, we were playing with volumetric ideas with with sips panels, like kind of quite advanced sips panels. And it just, you know, and again, the downward takes off, it never took off. And I could not understand why. Yep, right. And we had one at some of the world's best architects here really advocating for it, it seemed to, you know, we were going to bits of London and campaigning to the mayor. And, you know, at some point, we felt like the projects were going to be fast tracked, because it was going to, you know, we were able to open up a, like a production yard, actually in one of these deprived areas of London, where we could produce the the materials and the, you know, the bits of module for the buildings, and actually become a site for producing the modules for other developments in other parts of the borough. And it was like, great, and we can provide jobs, which are going to be semi skilled. But it was, these projects always had a way of finding the end very quickly. Yeah, let's
talk about that. So one of the reasons why, okay, one of the great things about mass production, is that you actually have middle managers, and they are very beneficial in the sense of they have their production line, and some of their jobs is just to find out how to make something more efficient. And they can just walk they can see what if we tweak this, oh, what if I go into this other reseller wants to sell me a new machine, I can calculate that it's stimulating work. And and, and we don't have to go into why mass production works. But we know it does just be as the computer if you think about a car people, you know, they might say cars expensive. A car is a magical machine, go back 200 years, it'd be like, What are you? This is insane. Go settling America. Remember how they used to have to go? Like, that was terrible. That was the worst? You know, now it's, you know, I would have a field day I would do it for I would do it for free. I love just driving in my car. Okay, but let's the issue, why does it not work? Okay, here's one of the issues, it takes a massive amount of capital to make a factory, right? Yeah. And then it takes a lot of time to go through this whole process of which I have been complaining about. So you spend, doesn't matter what the number is 50 100 million dollars, right? You've maybe even more to make that. So now you have that factory, it can produce a lot of things at scale, you have another problem. When you make development. It's in Spitz and start, because you might have, hey, we're going to make this factory, because we have 200 500,000 1000 houses we can build in this neighborhood. Well, that's great. But if the other one isn't lined up perfectly, right after it, all of a sudden, you have a massive push, where for a couple years, you're trying to make 1000 houses, and then you have a glut. And I know this to be true, because there are some of these companies that have tried, and most of them have failed, and they've never really brought down the price too much. Because when I talk to clients who want to use it, it's all that push and pull, like let's do 100 at a time, then zero at a time 100 at a time and it's like that developer is going to be busy doing 100 at a time then that manufacturer has to find another person to buy 100 or 1000 units, and you are no longer taking advantage of that weak system that every minute turns out a vehicle. And that leads to the other big differences. You buy a vehicle. In America, it can go anywhere in America, right? They can probably change the plant around and flip the wheel on the other side. And who knows may pick it slightly smaller for Europe doesn't matter. They're basically the same cars. I could ship an American car over there. And I'm pretty sure I could drive it. At least you couldn't. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So
no, that's, that's interesting, because they're kind of regulations for autumn. Automotive vehicles are pretty standard across the world. Yes, that there's a high level of safety a high level of rigor that's, you know, translatable, transferable. Yep.
So now they can be smooth and steady. And they just have to slightly increase or decrease production. Because, you know, let's say, Europe is not doing great. Well, America is doing fine right now. Right. And I know that there's recessions and all that, but most of the car manufacturers that started at around the war before the war, for GM, all them, they've lasted forever. And now Tesla has made it through and then and they're gonna last right? You can't do that with housing. You can't just buy a house. Like you could buy a Ford and be like, I doesn't matter where I live, I could live in Alabama. Yeah, I could live in, you know, California might have some, if you get too big of a truck, they might put up a fuss about it. Right. But generally, besides California, you could dry the car anyway. So you can't just buy a house, which, if you could, now that factory is making a brand. Now they're marketing to the consumer. Now they're competing against developers, because they can do it at a at a price. That's better. So the problems with that is now and I think the AI could help. Okay, how do we tackle that review process? Just like there's an IBC. IRB? Should there be an international planning code I, if that's the plumbing one, then we'll make up another name, right. So that basically, you could go streamline through, and people might say the caveat, like, oh, yeah, manufacturers, housing can already go streamlined through, try it in practice, right and practice. And then going back to,
I mean, that would be enormously beneficial for like, just, you know, even just on the bureaucratic side of things where you've got a, you know, you've got pre approved certain models of houses, fantastic. And it,
and it could be that, and it could be of, hey, if this is a manufactured home, here is the process for where it could be put on any site in our city. And it's streamlined. And it's simple, because it's a Plan B is a building code already takes care of like safety, welfare, and all that, right. So what's the planning code to go through? Because a lot of times, it's like, oh, even if I do this, I still have to hire an architect, I still have to get a server, I still have to do all these steps, that's still going to take six to 10 months, it's going to take even longer, and I'm not even kidding. So it's going to cost me 1000s of dollars, and I might not even get approved. And then the second part of that that's for like, infill normal places. Most major development, unless you are catering to the very upper middle class. It is Luminar. It is KB Homes, whoever it is, they make fine homes. You can't you can't put anything in there. It's their their houses or nothing. Right. And that makes a monopoly. Right. And I'll go on a side note is is that because some people think all these are interrelated, right, capitalism verse, you know, more socialism and stuff like that. Don't forget that people who like capitalism don't like crony capitalism. crony capitalism is the capture of politicians capture bureaucrats captured of monopoly. It's not the free market. Yeah, exactly. So so if I say I like capitalism, don't assume that I like crony capitalism, right? Yeah. So what if the process in the areas that adopt the IPC is that developer lots, you know, somehow are open to public sale? You know, and I don't know the language to do that. But I bet you some realtors, and the realtor commission in the AIA could figure that out. And it's not going to be perfect now, but now all of a sudden, now I have much more a lot. Now I could buy the builders homes, or the manufactured homes, right? And the builder might even have to then now compete. But now all sudden we have competition. Now we don't have a captured market. Now we can actually with competition, drives down price. And with the manufacturing process. It's like a TV. Remember, we're maybe the same age. When our parents would buy a TV. It was a big deal. And that TV was your TV for forever. Look, I'm still baffled that I can get a TV for 390 bucks, and it's 10 times better than any TV I had growing up for 20 years, you know. And to say that that's not a sophisticated piece of it is, of course, it's sophisticated, right? So that's, that's where I'm trying to align priorities. And we can talk about some other stuff too. But like, those are true goals. These are lasting, those are things that they can tackle, not the general public. Yep.
No, absolutely. These are these are things that the AIA can actually have a have an influence on, put pressure on, as the AIA done this in the past. Diane Watts has kind of lobbied or made changes at that kind of level of zoning or of Yes,
well, I'm sort of, honestly, in my opinion, if you go look up, and we'll see if I can bring it up here. State and local issues. This is perfect. Right. And then here's the AIA, right. So let's design a better world. And it's funny, have you seen any AI commercials? I have you? Okay, what are they about?
They're normally like, kind of very aspirational. Yeah, about the possibility of architecture and what it can do that and
then a lot of about designing a city, designing broad civil engineering, what are we? How many civil engineers are in the AI? I don't know, maybe there's a lot. Maybe it's, it's going that way. But I want to scroll down, right, because basically, they have be a voice for exchange, explore the issues. Right. Advocating? So they do advocate. This is right up their alley. Right. They are lobbying? Right. Okay, your international efforts? I don't know how much. That's the first one that you want to go for federal policy, and then state and local local issues. Right. And what I found before this, is that their first priority is climate change. Right? Okay. If it is climate change, it's not affordable housing. And I'm not saying for different projects, you couldn't have it. But But I don't want to mince words, and say that you can do both. Just because you can't. And I'll give an example. The 2021 electrical codes have beefed up all electrical bids by like over four 40%. It's not, that's not affordable, right? So federal policy issues, right? infrastructure. The first one they talk about is infrastructure. The first one they talk about is infrastructure, right? Climate change, design policy, the taxes might help. They might help slightly right. Then historic preservation, you know, okay. And now housing. Okay, learn more. There first thing on affordable housing is energy efficiency standards, which means higher insulation. I'm not saying that that's bad. I'm not saying that's bad. But that is wrong. If you're trying to get affordable housing. That is the wrong thing. Right. Minimum property standards for flood risk management standards. Are you? How is that? Doing it? This? Supporting yimby? Yes, in my backyard. Awesome. So I don't want to just be a native person on on everything. But I feel like it's missing the mark. And I feel like it's okay to talk about.
Yeah, no, amazing, a very, very fascinating. Let's go back to some of the other things. You mentioned him about size. So that the mass production one really interesting. Yeah, what about what about size?
So that's a Yep. So obviously, size relates to your impact on on sustainability, but also on the money that that you spend, right. We've all seen amazing houses that we would love to live in and love to design that are 10,000 square feet, and are sustainable and have the label on them. And I don't doubt that they have thought about a lot of aspects of sustainability. But you would also have 1000 square foot house that doesn't have that. And also that's not sustainable. And the 10,001 is the one that we're lobbying. It's the one we're advocating for. So one that we're showing, right. So let's think about it this way, could the AIA advocate in their planning standards, right? That if you adopt this code, we have a rolling nine year, only nine year code issuance. So what that means is that if you are building above 3000 1000 square feet, you're in whatever newest code that they and I, these numbers can change. Maybe it's 5000 square feet, I don't know, 2021 code, you're building a big house, you're building it. Now you build in that code, right? If you're under 3000 square feet, it's nine years past what you know, you know, let's say this is in the future. So you don't have to keep updating, right? You get to use 2015 code. And I'll tell you why. And then let's just say under 2500, you can use 2012. Under 2000, you can use 2009, whatever the metrics are going to be, and we need to go back that far is because those codes are the ones that make a difference. And you can't tell me that those houses are falling down. You can't tell me that those houses allow for asbestos in them. You can't tell me they are in endangering people. And I would contend that a house under 2000 square feet in a 29 code is just as sustainable as a 10,000 square foot sustainable home. I just rationally it makes sense. Yeah. From the amount of materials, labor inputs, even solar panels have a lot of impact, and I love them, and all that. But we got to be able to be to address the issue. Right.
Very interesting. Let's, let's talk a little bit about land and taxes. And this is something that's from now me being an outsider to the US and spending a lot of time here. Number one, property taxes, certainly in places like California, New Jersey, New York have just completely blown my mind. In, in the sense we've got, I was at a friend's house recently, they were in a house, maybe a four or $5,000 house for 5000 square foot house, and they're paying what $35,000 taxes annually, or 20 $25,000. So it's been in that bracket. I've seen people, which is this is an enormous amount of money. Yep. And, and again, the the other part of this as well, is land banking. And so I was watching something the other day on California Insider, and vast swathes of land kind of south of, you know, of San Francisco, San Jose, moving down the Californian coast, it's ripe for development. It can be it can be open, it can be used, but it's not. And clearly, there's a kind of economic reasons well, there's the people who own property. There's, there's economic reasons for this, because we're able to kind of create a sense of scarcity with housing, which keeps property prices and people's assets at a certain level. But it seems really anti, being able to produce affordable housing, and actually this kind of land context. And, you know, whatever the context is, as well, in terms of taxation on people's land and the size of their houses. These things seem like they're massively obtrusive to actually being able to get affordable housing up and running. And what is what's the AI's position on this? Or what can they do? Yeah.
So let's talk about the government just for one second to because that was the first part of it. Yep. So So I run a business. And I can tell you that it is uncomfortable giving performance reviews, where you have to tell people to step up. And I have to do it, because their livelihood, the other people's myself, all depend on this, because I'm in a competitive market. So we have to upskill people or kick them out. Because you can't let poison, the water poison the whole water. Sure, sure. But even me knowing that even me knowing the numbers and all that still hard to do. In the government, you don't really have to do that. You might have performance reviews, but you're not having the tough ones. And if you ever have to lay anyone off you're looking at you're probably looking at a lawsuit and a bunch of headaches on your plate, right. And they also exist in a monopoly the same way big corporations exist in a monopoly, meaning some of these big corporations won't, wouldn't be allowed to exist unless the government gave them an monopolistic system on it. Right. And we don't have to go into that because we could go down a rabbit hole, but what I'm getting at is that in these large corporations or this government, it's Hey, Ryan, you you're you are a mid level manager. And for some reason, you need more time off because your kid is sick, and you need to go every Thursday to the doctor. And then all of that, right. Okay, that's great. That's great for you. I'm obviously making up this scenario. But now we're in a big corporation, someone else hears about that it's unfair to give you something, not give it to someone else. So now it's like a commit now, every benefit that one person has. Everyone has. And can you see how that was just a small? Like, what are the chances? Like that would be one out of 10,000 scenario? Yeah, but now you have 10,000 people, and now they all have 10,000 scenarios, right? And then on top of that, we can't just let you make a decision. Because we need to let everyone make a decision. Now we're making decisions by the committee. And what that does is it gums up the system. And I can't remember if we were talking before or not about, we're talking off air about dystopian futures. So like, everyone has seen those, and everyone has seemed like, this is the future. And somehow, it's like, Judge Dredd is like, you have awesome cars. But then everyone is like stuck in this poverty zone too. And it's not because people suddenly came became dumber, like Idiocracy. It's not like that. It's literally a foreshadowing of, if everything is ruled in this bureaucratic nightmare way, you literally can't have the stuff that we could have now. And we could be faced in the future, where our future generations have it worse, and more restrictions, and is not as good as what we have now, which would be devastating and crazy. So that's why we have to acknowledge that men just like big copper companies shouldn't be monopolies. Maybe governments shouldn't be monopolies. I am not a libertarian. I have at all, I think it's actually a very stupid idea. Right? I think it's easily testable throughout history that like, oh, then anyone who's organizing the government just takes you over and now you're under them like it's, it's a libertarians, let's, let's listen to reality and not just placate to our ideas that you think you know better, so that you should be free to do whatever you want. It does not work. I'm sorry, maybe in 4000 years, it will. So but that doesn't mean that we should like we should know, the more authority that we give the government, the more that bureaucracy gets a hold of our lives until it becomes crippling. And I'll give you an example. Because it's happened on projects is, you do what they say, they give you comments, you do what they say they give you comments, you do it, you need to resubmit what you did, because it's over a year old, that initial survey, that initial habitat thing, and then also we change the code on you. So now, please show us how you apply to the new code you do that? They give you comments you do that give you comments you do that you give comments, you can now another important feedback loop forever. It happens. It happens. And all sudden, we're smart people who know how to use Revit and do cool design, and nothing's getting produced and everything's expensive. And why do things suck? Well, we had to make sure everyone's concerns were heard. And we had to make sure that we checked every single box beforehand. And then and it's just crazy how the world worked without that. Yep. It's just crazy.
Well, I mean, I mean, it's, it's, it's fascinating, you know, we start looking at the, and again, this is one thing I've noticed about both the UK and the US as they become more and more mature, and particularly when in the US. I mean, I think in the UK, we're probably more used to lots of bureaucracy. But here is massively bureaucratic with every step. And for a country that's kind of built so much of its economics, success on there being a certain amount of liberty, and kind of a context of freedom, that the danger is, is that this is the sorts of things that stops innovation is the thing that starts to stop things actually happening, and it starts to make it and then we will really see it just in the world of business, how how expensive it is to run a business here, how expensive it is to do things. And you're talking about this example, with just trying to get planning permission for something and you're just interfacing with a highly bureaucratic mechanical system that is just ticking boxes, ticking boxes, ticking boxes, you have an answer, and then go for it.
Oh, sorry, I love where you're at, and it's not. And then also, it's sticking to an ideology that's detached from from reality, right? Like these thought patterns that we talked about. And here's the proof. This is how crazy and this is why it's a real threat, the bureaucracy and these weird thought patterns that don't match reality. I want to ask you a question. I don't know the answer to I don't know what you're gonna say to me. Right. But if you had to guess if you had to put money on it, if you had to put on like, authentically, I think that this is true. Which car manufacturer that in the United States is the most sustainably minded manufacturer?
I thought you were going to ask me which which company would be put my money on for global success? And I was thinking about some of the Chinese electric electric companies. But you us both? I,
I would It's not a trick question. Not a trick question.
I would, I would hazard a guess and put money on it, that Tesla was the company.
Yep. And just because they're going electric, they put solar panels everywhere. They they sell solar panels. They're very efficient, they reuse their water, they think about the environmental impact. Anytime that they make a plant. They eliminated paint on the cyber truck, they eliminated chrome on all cars, which was a heavy, energy intensive material to produce so light, it's it's not a trick question. It's probably Tesla right. There. Did you hear what happened in Germany? No, the Green Movement was so mad at them, that they destroyed power, so that the plant shut down. So the greenest car company, the green people are against. And it's like this, this makes no sense. And it's only because people have this assumption that I I have this way of thinking I like green or or, or any of these other movements, right? And if if you aren't for my extremeness, you don't care. And it's not true. Yeah, it's clearly not true with Tesla, like they're, every time they have their stupid presentations. There's like eight minutes on how sustainable they are. And, and they go into the nuance, they don't just say it, they don't just put a label on they go, Well, we made this plant. And we realize batteries are bad this way. So if we could dry do it, and then some chemists talks about dry battery technology, and you're like, well, he's probably saying the truth or else someone call him on it, you know, it'd be a lot to make up. And
there's a genuine with Tesla. I mean, there's a genuine mission and vision there for, you know, a sustainable infrastructure to be able to provide electricity for all these all these cars, like there's, you know, and there's been genuine work by Elon Musk, for example, as well of being involved in those sorts of technologies and that kind of infrastructure. It's really like, way bigger picture than any other car company is, is being seen to be doing certainly, and other car companies are kind of are you will look at other car companies in there, and then move into electric, it appears like it's more of a four that's the way the market is going. So they need to be able to compete with something.
Yep. And why that links back to the government is because in Germany because I was following the making of the plant is that it kept getting delayed, and they actually put a pause on it. Because it Bri oxy and the statement from the local planners was, we are going to wait until we make sure we address every concern that a citizen brought up. It's like, okay, even the ones that are gonna bomb it later. Like, what are we talking about here? What are we doing? Right? Wow, it was great. Yeah out
place for us to conclude the conversation there, Alex that absolutely brilliant. And I'd love for the people who are listening to this to leave your comments in the podcast on the YouTube channel on iTunes or Spotify, wherever it is, you're listening, because this is a really fascinating topic, and certainly worthy of further conversation. So Alex, thank you very much for coming in sharing your expertise and your thoughts and, and I hope to do this again soon. Absolutely.
Thanks a lot, Ryan.
And that's a wrap. Oh, yeah. And one more thing. If you haven't already, please head over to iTunes and leave a review for the show. reviews help this message spread and it raises all of the boats in the design profession. Special thanks to those who recently left a review tramps studio, date Doyle 90 Tommy Kaiser, Jorge co 9090. Mike, the manager K to the T two to two h a studio. Jessica amo. Si el canto la familia flora is a very loyal listener. CRS 999 TFS Arch 2011 LG 2017 on the architect and co exist studio. This
episode is sponsored by Smart practice, business of architectures flagship program to help you structure your firm for freedom, fulfillment, and financial profit. If you want at access for our free training on how to do this, please visit smart practice method.com Or if you want to speak directly to one of our advisors about how we might be able to help you. Please follow the link in the information. The views expressed on this show by my guests do not represent those of the host and I make no representation, promise guarantee, pledge warranty, contract, bond or commitment except to help you the unstoppable
