Wow! It looks fantastic.

before...
after, still...

shhhh.... negative nancies.....

yeah... i find them both boring.....
but this is the awesome parts

"esign-build firm Hammer & Hand worked with Scott Edwards Architecture to transform this dilapidated 1905 building into an energy-efficient duplex that uses less than $100 a month in energy costs!
In addition to the energy upgrades and overall face lift, this renovation boasts other tenets of sustainable design:
The lower unit was designed and built to be ADA-compliant with aging-in-place components that make it easier for people to live independently as they grow older.
The duplex harvests rainwater and includes native plants and a bioswale for on site infiltration.
The project is also a good example of how transforming a neighborhood eyesore can encourage urban density, less driving, and a stronger sense of community."

i know in my overly price, highly inflated, very depressing suburban city, in melbourne... NONE of this exists... including $100PM on energy.

Great job - very cool and what a gift to the neighborhood!

so who owns the property? are they going to keep up the rain water system? i wonder how much maintence is over time?

I applaud the work but I also think that the railing is clashing with the house. Maybe if the house was painted a darker gray or something like that, or if the railing was stained or painted as talktoearthworms suggested, it would be a better fit but right now, they are just fighting with each other for attention.

ah yes, all that concrete added to the side of the house is really good for the environment. In the UK, the buildings department in a lot of areas have made concrete driveways not within code. Instead one could use pavers (allowing rainwater to seep into the ground - instead of running off), which look nicer, more expensive, but this would limit the amount of driveways people lay out too..

a. That concrete work does not look new to me.
b. When judging its attractiveness, try to take into account the financials.

This looks to me like a project where they really chose their battles financially. By the looks of it, the goal was to change it from an obsolete tear-down to a viable space that would be a credit to the area and the future tenants.

They could have spent more and made it more attractive, but how high would rents have to be to support the outlay? After all the work is done, if they can rent these units at levels appropriate to the neighborhood, then they successfully completed a truly sustainable project both ecologically and economically.

I'm guessing that the owners had a modest budget to work with (in order to keep the rent at a reasonable rate) and chose to invest in areas that would have the highest environmental impact.

wish they had been bolder.... painted it orange - with gray trim boards - landscaped it with some of that funky tall grass ... i wanted to go HOLY MOLY... instead i went...well, it's better than a poke in the eye.

I'm impressed.

Given that this building was in the state it was, it probably isn't in a neighborhood where it can command really high rent. They went midrange on the upcycle and were successful IMO.

I LOVE the re-use of the boards as the railing and privacy screen. The combo of old and new is generally very pleasing to me.

I'm guessing that they built to suit the neighborhood and the prospective renters and think they did a great job.

Wow is everyone else not seeing what I'm seeing? I think it's gorgeous, perfectly reserved genius. Why mess with the design of the original? Because they can?

I LOVE the reformulation of the old siding into modern balcony rails. And the white with the natural wood color is so serene.

It's a shame that the masses don't recognize the beauty of subtlety in design and only appreciates it when it hits them in the face. They're missing out because this is awesome! And the fact that you could have done so much more with it but didn't is even more awesome.

I think this project is awesome.

From a design standpoint, it doesn't blow anything out of the water, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT.

They were able to take a seriously sad looking building and make it respectable; I don't think a lot of landlords would have invested that much to begin with. The after looks clean and modest, and the salvaged boards add a nice visual interest (although a coat of paint would do wonders, I agree).

There are a lot of really shady looking places in Chicago - if I saw a building like this with a "for rent" sign out front, I'd totally check it out.

All of the people who wanted this to turn into a mid-century modern paradise can scurry back to their AT safe-zone.

A different, more modern, exterior color would have made a huge difference in this house's curb appeal. Or possibly a different siding altogether. And yes, a permeable driveway...why is that so hard?

Wow, you really can't please everybody.

I find that the "reviews" in this site depend on the first coment I kind of creates a trend.

I think the balcony railings were a creative, modern way to display reclaimed boards from the original, a sort of statement of victory about what that dilapidated building became. It may not be the boldest design pop, but this is on Re-Nest, not the main AT site--turning a scrap-heap from 1905 into a modern energy-efficient building that uses less than $100 worth of per month is pretty amazing.

That looks plain wrong!

I like the railing. Imagine all the flowers you can hang from it, not to mention perhaps some pots with veggies and stuff in them. So I like it. There is a lot of potential in it.

I really appreciate the something-old-something-new approach. If you demolish the original and start from scratch, how "green" would that be? This is an approach that inspires me and my old conventional, boring floor plan and construction.

The railing is one of the better solutions I've seen for integrating an outdoor staircase onto an existing structure. The white paint seems to be a bit at odds with it, but I think functionality was the first priority with this design.

Excellent work. Come on, negative Nellies.

I've driven by this place and as previous commenters suggested, it is no in a fancy neighborhood with high rents.

1905? maybe this is the back side of an american four-square w/add-ons? then the railings &1950's shed roof might be tolerated in light of saving the bldg & upgrading its energy footprint (greener than razing & rebuilding). the comment on the concrete is spot on; that's grass in the before pic, so is the new material at least permeable?

Oh dear...another repost. :o(

A great job taking an eyesore and turning it into something interesting. The inside shown on the blog looks lovely too. Well done.