Cuba at the crossroads

I read in the newspaper a few days ago (4th Nov 2011) that Raul Castro has allowed Cubans to buy and sell property. It perked my attention and on reading a bit further, I thought.... wow.... what a wasted opportunity.
It is being hailed, specially in the neighbouring US, as a lifting of state control on the economy, but somehow I cant stop thinking of the fantastic opportunity that Raul had to create history. This does not mean that I am in anyway sympathising with a fascist regime, or, that I not empathising with the beleaguered Cuban economy that is going through the motions. I am simply bringing a third world perspective.... let us not replicate the mistakes of the so called developed world. Such tales of sorrow resonate all across this country of ours.
Quite obviously, this reaction of mine is a displaced point of view, not knowing the true ground realities, but it begs some scenarios of what if....!
Cuba has some wonderful examples of a strong sustainable and flourishing organic agriculture, and to boot they have a resilient community that is still rich and celebrates the unique culture that is uniquely Cuban. In its communist foundations, Cuba stands for an equitable society. All ingredients for creating a sustainable planning model. So has Raul lost this very opportunity to create such a model?

Let us see some of the areas that could have been explored:

1. Property price variation based on weightage given to select criteria (as given in the consequent points). Indices of growth/appreciation would also be according to these factors. Difference in taxation also according to these criteria.
2. Property price control based on work-home commute corridors and distance of property from major/ potential mass rapid transit system hubs. The further away one stays from these corridors it would be fair to assume that stress on urban infrastructure to cater to these residents would higher. Therefore, the closer one is to work-home commute corridors, the greater the value of the property. The further you live from these commute corridors, the higher the taxation. 
3. Property control based on access to urban infrastructure like water, waste treatment, power etc. 
4. Valuation of asset on property and not property itself..... therefore gain from merely sitting on land will be discouraged. 
5. Tax sops to properties that do the following. The more independent they are, they more sops they get.:
• Those who grow their own food, 
• Those who provide for their own power
• Those who provide for their own water
• Those who manage their own waste
• Those who build sustainably

Of course, this applies to all states and not just Cuba, but I felt that their history gave an advantage to institute such measures.
There could be more to this list.....My reason to explore such alternatives is to see if that would lead to a more sustainable urban model. One that does not see urbanity spiral into a monster that chews into the countryside, one that does not create riches merely due to a speculative land market and so on. Also, such a wishlist need not find translation onto the ground in one Haussmann-ish move, but could be baby steps towards this.
Those like Raul sit on the crossroads of history, and like Frost suggested, could enter its chapters by taking the road less travelled.

Building your own ‘Green’ Home

Gloss vs Green

In my last blog I berated ‘Individual Homeowners’ (and others) for attempting to build their ‘green’ homes on their own without sound professional advice. In this blog, in a more ameliorative frame of mind, I have attempted to offer a few strategies and suggestions that they should keep in mind; before the design phase, and during the construction phase, of a project.

A) Read all you want on the subject(s) but remember it is a vast ocean of things that you have to assimilate and without a holistic view on the subject you are likely to miss the forest for the trees.

B) When it comes to designing a home, whether ‘green’ or not, please get professional help. Design and architecture are complex disciplines that cannot be equated with mere drawing work! Please remember, your sense of aesthetic, however, appropriate or ravishing, is little basis to think that you are a designer. Design in architecture is a function of putting forth an appropriate built environment through an understanding of engineering and structural dynamics; a knowledge of building materials and systems; ease of replication of processes and systems; cost of labour, materials and time; scheduling and project management; knowledge of essential services and amenities like water, energy and waste management; principles of good design (and bad design); aspects of alignment and joinery; understanding of local and regional climate and surroundings; building codes and regulations, incorporation of and referring to larger social constructs, building a continuity in terms of building traditions and cultures, and finally, a sense of aesthetics with functional purposefulness. If any of you think you can trawl through this quagmire with a little imagination and a spot of reading, think again. Look around you....one statistic says that only four percent (unverified source) of all buildings in India are designed by architects: no wonder that we have urban-scapes which are crumbling edifices of our own imagination!

C) Work with the architect to get the design that you are happy with. There is an established process of interaction which is designed to bring about what you want with professional guidance, and recommendations, from the architect. Spend as much time with the architect at this phase and think of all that you might want; usually, it is better to have a long term perspective on your home. Do give your architect a good ear on his/her concepts and design solutions, and understand the minute aspects of design decisions, material choice, building system alternatives, etc. This will prevent a lot of heartburn, and ill spent cash, during the construction phase.
We will put out another post on 'specific questions an individual homeowner should ask their architect' soon.

D) Define the professional engagement via a properly written contract/agreement. Many a time, small misunderstandings due to a expectation mismatch arises and threatens to topple your home design/building project. Clearly write it all out (the architect should have a standard format for this) and seal it in ink!

E) Understand the greenness of design and materials suggested. For a sustainably built project make sure you understand the broad aspects of what makes it green, in terms of design, in terms of material/s characteristics, in terms of structure, in terms of social responsiveness, and in terms of its environmental implications. Your architects would show you a palette of materials, how the materials fare over longer periods, how they look over larger surfaces, what maintenance they require and so on. Try and get them to show you places where some examples have been demonstrated. In the case that no examples are there to show, then understand why the architects are convinced and see if that convinces you.

You would also need to understand the innovative technologies that are being deployed in your project: their costs, their operations, and their maintenance aspects. Good green design also addresses water security, energy management, and waste management - ensure that you understand the goals that are being set for the project.

F) Do not get down to controlling costs yourself. Assign your architects to exercise an overall control on costs but be pragmatic where choices need to be made. Attempting to reduce the architect's or other consultants' fees to save money on the project is not a great idea. Professionals who bargain on their fees are likely to trade on other principles, too. Rather, give the architects an interesting challenge; get them to reduce these costs from construction, without loss of design value. The life-cycle costs of the project also needs to be evaluated and sustainability architects should be able provide intensive calculations on various costs (based on usage) over different periods of time. Sometimes your upfront costs be be marginally higher but if a certain technology or design element saves you money over the long term, it probably is the right way to evaluate it.

G) Always hire a contractor to build your house in tandem with your architect. The architect will be able to refer a good contractor. Working piece-meal with petty contractors is fraught with grave dangers. Even if you take a sabbatical and have the time to supervise the building of your house, you are likely to lose all your hair, and gain a stress level that could prove to be lethal! Your architect may suggest some specialized vendors/contractors to work with in addition to a main contractor, but do so only under the architect's guidance.

H) Never try to supervise a contractor’s work by standing around on a daily basis. If the project is large enough, hire a professional project manager to care of all issues. In most cases, your architect should be able to guide the contractor appropriately during construction works. After all, they have a better handle on the design and can ensure that it can be satisfactorily executed during construction.You certainly have the right to interject if things are falling apart, but ideally, all your inputs should have stopped at the design period; and at best, it is the architect/project manager’s job to interact with the contractor.

I) Again for green buildings, think local as opposed to global; think ideal as opposed to large; and think low carbon footprint as opposed to an intensive one! Sustainable development involves using resources sensibly to ensure that the status-quo is not tilted against the next few generations. By this measure, use less, recycle more, reuse and cut down the distance that any material takes to reach your site. It is possible to achieve very elegant and contemporary design solutions by adhering to this.
As a further guide to your home building process you could check our blog 'Tenets of Sustainable living'.

J) Take pride in your ‘green’ project: there will be many people who will want to scare you about some aspects of sustainability, or poke fun at your becoming an environmental crusader; but rest assured that no revolution is possible without relegating cynics and nay-sayers to the dust-bowl of history.

Harbingers of Sustainability

A gem by Scott Adams

We have been dabbling a bit in sustainability for a few years now. We hope to help clients (three categories that are discussed here are: individual homeowners, corporate houses and developers) design and build structures that are meaningful, healthy, less wasteful on resources, and have a low carbon footprint. But alas! All three categories of potential customers have views on sustainability that are either uninformed, or myopic, at best. This makes for a difficult permeation of the sustainability trickle that is no doubt imperative to bring about a small revolution in the built environment (read Real Estate) in India. 

Though I speak in jest and list only typical situations, there are quite a few who are fairly knowledgeable, and they should be rightfully anointed as ‘harbingers of sustainability’ for bringing about the change desperately required in the building industry.

Individual Homeowners:
Perhaps the most receptive group amongst all three, they are nonetheless all at sea about the concept of sustainability. While one or two individuals delve into the subject of ‘green’ with an overarching thesaurus and a digital microscope in hand, most are in a state of ‘little-knowledge-is-not-so-dangerous-a-thing’. They see-saw between the subjects of design, building materials, water and energy independence, cost of construction, aesthetics, and built-up area without any holistic approach, and seem to want the best of all at the cheapest price. Many of them feel that gleaning the internet or reading a few articles will turn them into an architect, contractor, materials expert, energy expert, and sustainability guru, all rolled into one, overnight! While a few will trawl through trash to find waste that can be converted to a building material (for a wall or door), they are rarely willing to sully their hands in the mire of understanding required to build the right home for themselves while keeping the local and environmental aspects in the balance. And finally, while some of them do not mind forking out megabucks when buying from a ‘known’ developer, they seem to tighten their purse-strings to their detriment when they deal with an architect or contractor. The result is either a house-that-jack-built or severe delays in construction which eventually inflates the cost of construction anyway.

Corporate Houses:
This group’s story is a story of two protagonists. One is the CEO, or head honcho by whatever name, who inevitably has a vision about everything his organization does. The other comes with the non-flattering title of ‘Facilities Manager (FM)’. Even honchos who have disedified the Bangalore skyline with bizarre steel-and-glass monstrosities have a perspective on sustainability. They appear in unending articles on eco-sensitivity just because they are corporate captains of IT, pharmaceuticals, mining, media, fashion technology, or any industry for that matter. The fact is that some of these leaders are so devoid of sensitivity to the environment, and people as well, that they usually lump their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities under the awkward stewardship of the HR department! Now if have got your message somehow past the CEO you have to contend with the FM. Unfortunately, the FMs in many corporates are not a professional lot. The FMs I have met all have at least three of these four attributes:

a) They are complete yes-men to their CEO
b) They want an idea for free so that they can get it done from their contractor
c) They have usually failed at all other jobs in the corporate hierarchy
d) They are taking a cut from every vendor that enters the premises

Again, the outcome is institutional structures that are eyesores, as well as resource insensitive. Of course, there are exceptions, but who is to find them amongst the thick haystack of corporate greed and incompetence.

Developers:
Easily the most despised lot, not only amongst the three listed here, but also amongst all business categories listed in India. Developers, the chieftains of the real estate industry, are a motley crew of desperadoes from all walks of life. They span a wide gamut from being front-men of politicians; criminals, even; to foreign returned technocrats, and from village rustics to architects who have abandoned their almost Hippocratic ideals to the lure of the lucre. One tawdry developer in Bangalore, after hearing a presentation, said, “You see, I am a businessman,” in a tone that refused to acknowledge that the others present in the room (architects, consultants, contractors, and suppliers) were also businessmen. For some reason, all developers feel that they are the only ones who should be raking in the moolah while their technical partners should be happy to fork out ideas and advice at a fractional cost! While expecting developers to forefront the cause of sustainability is not inappropriate; the developers themselves will only incorporate any aspect of sustainability so long as it is on paper only, or is decreed by law, or is a minor cost element, which if adopted, can be touted with blaring bugles in the next ad campaign.

The result, friends, is again, buildings that are shoddy and unhealthy, flout all sorts of building codes, and bring disrepute to many aspects of sustainability. And, as for tom-tomming the cause of sustainability, for now, let’s keep piping plaintive little notes and hope that the strains reach a crescendo sometime in our lifetime!