360 Winnett » Financial

10K in Rebates? Not exactly.

jeremybell — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:20:30 +0000

Well, for those that watch the evening news, you probably just found out that we don’t exactly qualify for the ecoENERGY rebates that we once thought we did.

I’d been contacted by CityTV a number of weeks ago about wanting to come and record the demolition of the house. After it went down, I was interviewed about the project and what we were planning. Of course I spoke about the website and our green plans, but I also mentioned that we qualified for about $9,500 in government rebates. Well, that doesn’t exactly turn out to be true.

As I mentioned earlier, I was originally skeptical if we’d actually qualify for these rebates. Their documentation definitely makes it seem as if we qualified, I mean it clearly says:

If you live in Ontario and own a single family home you are eligible for the Home Energy Retrofit Program.

I suppose that should read:

If you live in Ontario and own a single family home you are eligible for the Home Energy Retrofit Program UNLESS YOU TEAR IT DOWN COMPLETELY.

Before having the energy audit, I had contacted 2 independent sources about the project and had made it quite clear what our intentions were. Both confirmed that we would indeed qualify for the rebates, but only for what we were replacing. For instance, any additional windows or toilets or square footage would NOT be covered. However, they stated that we’d still see a rebate when we replaced our old boiler with a new furnace, etc.

Apparently you don’t qualify for anything if you completely tear down the home.

Now, it’s still a little unclear where the line between “renovation” and “new home” blurs. For instance, we could have maintained our old foundation and a few walls, and it would have been considered a “renovation”. However, EVERYTHING would be new. New insulation, new furnace, new windows, etc. I obviously have to question the logic in this, as we’ve actually taken the extra step (or like ten) and our building envelope will be far superior.

I also have to wonder if I should attempt to contest this, or if I should just let it go?

Regardless, we’re still moving ahead as planned. I hadn’t included the rebates in our budget, as I didn’t exactly want to count my chickens before they hatched. But it’s definitely a little painful to have $9500 dangled in front of you, only to have it taken away.

How Green is Green?

jeremybell — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 03:07:57 +0000

What exactly spurs someone to take on a project like this? After 5 years in a small pre-war bungalow, my wife and I decided we wanted more room to start a family. So for us, this project was born out of a need for more space.

However, at some point along the way, our priorities changed. We still need the extra space, but I came to realize we could build a better home instead of a bigger home.

I’m sure “better” means something different to everyone, and for us it originally meant a modern esthetic with nice fixtures. And while we still want this, I’ve also come to appreciate how sustainability must work into the equation. So I’m left wondering… how green is green?

I’m not sure I have a definitive answer for this, but we are trying to do as much as possible given our budget. I’ve heard many claims that “green” doesn’t necessarily equate “expensive”, and while this is true in some cases, it’s hard to argue when you look at the budget. The fact is, we could have built a much larger home if we wanted, but instead we reduced the footprint so we could build it greener. I’m not suggesting it’ll be the poster-child for LEED construction, but it’ll definitely be better than it would have been.

I’m planning on discussing these more in future posts, but here a few things we’ve considered with the design of the house:

Window shading
Passive lighting
Passive heating & cooling
Rainwater collection
ICF / SIP construction

Spray foam insulation
Beyond the products & practices we’re considering, I’m often asked about the existing house. Why did we decided to bulldoze it? Why not build on the existing foundation? If we are going to demolish it, what will happen to the waste?

These are all excellent questions, and I must admit I hadn’t actually considered all of them. We had originally intended to build on our existing foundation, however proximity to our neighbors made this problematic. And I would love to recycle/reuse everything… I just don’t think that’ll be entirely possible.

Crushing and reusing the foundation is an intriguing possibility given our flat roof (we’re investigating covering it with crushed gravel). As for the rest of the house, we’re going to be selling/giving away as much of it as possible (the kitchen cabinets, radiators, boiler, etc). However, I realize that won’t make much of an impact and I assume most of it will end up in a landfill.

Not exactly the most eco-friendly solution, but that’s where we stand today. I hadn’t considered recycling the rest, but it’s something I’m definitely going to look into it now.

So these may not all be the greenest of steps, but hopefully they’re steps in the right direction.

Photo via Flickr user CasualTea

Windowed Debate

jeremybell — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:35:48 +0000

And so begins the first major debate of the project—what type of windows do we use: wood or vinyl? Our architect is strongly recommending wood, while our contractor thinks vinyl is the way to go. As always, there are pros and cons to each, but I’m inclined to follow our architects advice. Of course, that decision will have a significant impact on the budget.

At the moment, our plans call for about 54 windows. So far we’ve only priced all-wood, and the quotes we’ve received have ranged form $21,000 to $34,000. These all include a “designer discount” of about 45%, which has proved to be another huge advantage of working with our architect. That said, this is still well over what we had originally budgeted… but we knew we’d be going over as soon as we saw the first set of drawings. As for vinyl, we haven’t priced them yet, but I’m told they will be significantly cheaper.

If vinyl prove to be less expensive, why would I want to shy away from them? I have to question if they’re cheaper in price, cheaper in quality, or both. I’m told they’re “maintenance free”, which is an obvious plus, but my architect still advises that we avoid them. I’m a sucker for aesthetics, and I have a feeling wood windows will simply look better. And as usual, I’ll end up paying a premium for that luxury.

Regardless of my aesthetic preference, we need to be very conscious of our budget and I expect a compromise will be in order. My guess is that we’ll ultimately end up with a mix of both – vinyl windows in the clerestory (where you won’t see them up close) and the basement (where moisture comes into play), and wood windows everywhere else.

I’m going to be visiting a few window showrooms this week, after which I’ll hopefully have a better understand of why I don’t want the cheaper and maintenance-free vinyl windows.

Choosing a Contractor

jeremybell — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:33:20 +0000

Choosing the right contractor can be a daunting task, and it simply cannot be taken lightly. However, I’m not going to preach why or how you should go about selecting one, but instead I’ll explain the logic behind our decision and why we felt it was right choice.

We decided upon a contractor we know personally. Yes, an actual “friend of a friend”. I recognize this seems somewhat crazy (and completely contradicts everything I’ve read on the matter), but I believe the logic is sound. We still went through the necessary steps before making this decision; ensuring that we toured previous projects and checked all references. We also arranged a meeting between him and our architect to discuss roles and responsibilities, plus went through contract negotiations before we made it official. He’s someone we trusted implicitly, so if (when?) things go sideways, I’m confident he’ll make it right. That, and I know where he lives. That’s gotta count for something, right?

Traditionally, a contractor’s compensation is based on a percentage of the overall construction costs, plus they handle the payments made to the sub-trades. There is a payment schedule based on milestones, and reciepts are provided for all materials purchased.

So long as you’re demanding proof-of-payment (so you know the trades are going compensated correctly), I see plenty of logic in this approach. Although I can’t say I’m comfortable with it. I mean, why should the contractor make more if I choose a more expensive product? What about situations where the product costs more, but installation is less complicated (such as sprayfoam insulation)? It may end up costing me more, but didn’t it make the contractors job much easier. I’ve simply heard too many horror stories of “hidden” costs that present themselves at the end of the project… Isn’t it in the contractors best interest to use expensive products and labor-intensive installation methods?

I don’t mean to demonize those who charge a percentage (they’re not all evil!), but we decided to doing things a little differently. Our contractor will be paid a flat-fee for his services, and we’ll be paying the sub-trades directly. With this arrangement, all of the savings are passed onto me (I’m free to choose the products and sub-trades as I see fit), plus I can ensure everyone is being compensated correctly (and not worry about getting liened at the end of the project.)

There are obvious downsides to this approach though. I’ll be taking on more responsibly throughout this process, so the onus is on me to understand the building process and techniques as much as possible. That, and it’s theoretically in the contractors best interest to get the project done as quickly as possible. Why sweat the details when you’re getting paid the same no matter what, right? I’ll be watching closely, and can only hope this arrangement will force our contractor to be efficient… and not sloppy. Time will tell.

Ultimately I felt this arrangement afforded us the most transparency, and provided the best risk to reward ratio. If all goes according to plan, there shouldn’t be ~~any~~ many surprise expenditures we haven’t budgeted for.

Or so I hope.

Photo via Flickr user {ryan}