There's a Triangle, but non-Durham note that was too 'extreme' for me to pass on posting today in the N&O. I had previously read that the not-so-reality-based tv show 'Extreme Makeover' decided to help out a low-income family in Raleigh's Mordecai neighborhood and National Register district by 're-doing' their house with the added kitsch of sending the family to Disneyworld while this happened. A cool and worthy endeavor, I thought.
I was shocked to read today (and, particularly in the world of real estate and development, I am not easily shocked) that not only did the show plan to tear down the 70-year old bungalow, but 1) they did it in an over-the-top staged 'Braveheart'-emulating event of demolition derby cars pulling apart and ramming the house to death, and 2) the replacement house would be built in a week.
Yuck.
The meager humor is that the cars couldn't actually do this - they pulled the columns off, but the porch roof stayed up. The crew had to pre-chainsaw the framing of the house in order to get the walls to fall down when the cars hit it. So then it looks like the place really was not-worth-saving. After all, if a car can knock it down....
And, bottom line, you cannot build a quality house in a week. You can build a functional, servicable, and ultimately, disposable house in a week. The irony is that what they build almost certainly could be knocked down by a car. What results is questionable charity - renovation of the now-demolished house is not the kind of project that meshes well with Pez-dispenser television, but the end result would be a much greater appreciation of the property value for the family than when they sell the house-that-was-built-in-a-week. Given the holiday season, it's reasonable to ask if the net result is 'Giving', or 'Taking'?
Here's the story:
Comments
Submitted by Joe (not verified) on Sun, 12/3/2006 - 5:23pm
I guess also you can't restore or remodel a house in a week either, especially if you're putting up the occupants in Disneyworld. I wonder how much money Extreme Makeover makes on one of those shows. And you know -- the city must have been in on this to get even just the inspections straightened out in a week. I've never watched the show; I assume the "makeovers" are usually less extreme?
The idealist in me wants to form a non-profit called something clever that restores a house on a reasonable schedule without destroying it, but the money still has to come from somewhere. It would take longer, and you couldn't send the family to Disneyworld in the meantime. I guess This Old House essentially does that, but the homeowner foots the bills?
Submitted by Sven (not verified) on Mon, 12/4/2006 - 4:42am
Yeah, I think the 'in-a-week' part is a problem - you just can't build anything of real quality in that short of a period of time . Corners must be cut - sometimes, evidently, with a chainsaw.
I've never watched the show, and I don't think I'll start now.
I'm not sure what the TOH model is, although they do talk about the homeowner budget. Seems like they must supply something. Maybe their guys work for 'free' ?
GK
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 12/4/2006 - 6:46pm
FYI, I've read a number of reports about the screwing-over that really happens behind the scenes of these shows. One report mentioned a custom bathroom in one EM:HE house where none of the plumbing was actually connected - they hooked up a garden hose or some such for the "on camera reveal." And the homeowner is left to foot the bill for completing or repairing whatever the TV crew left or screwed up. I would not be surprised in this case if the permits were NOT actually complete, and the family will get a nasty shock sometime in a few months.
Oh, and the makeovers are often quite extreme - not often a whole house, but I have seen a one-story ~1000sqft turned into a 2-story, 3000+sqft on there. It might even have been the same show as the faked bathroom!
And you can't tell me that it was quality work, not done that fast, in place. Maybe a modular home, built in factory conditions, but not a stick-built, sheetrock & chipwood.
- katuah
Submitted by Karen (not verified) on Mon, 12/4/2006 - 8:19pm
Demo Porn.We have a lot of it here in New Orleans
Submitted by Sven (not verified) on Tue, 12/5/2006 - 2:03pm
"Demo Porn" - I like it.
Props go out to Karen's + et al blog site, by the way: Squandered Heritage, which is documenting the push for demolition in New Orleans, my hometown - on often quite dubious grounds. I hope to take pictures of the Cabrini church in N.O. when I am down for Xmas - a fantastic modernist church that a new congregation has pushed to tear down - and gotten City Council approval for. Tragic.
GK
Submitted by Sven (not verified) on Tue, 12/5/2006 - 2:05pm
Katuah
Awful, and sadly not surprising. I continue to be nauseated at the N&O's fawning coverage of this event.
GK
Submitted by coco (not verified) on Fri, 12/22/2006 - 2:40am
lots to see on squandered heritage - lots to research and photograph in NOLA!
Submitted by coco (not verified) on Fri, 12/22/2006 - 2:46am
that bungalo was beautiful. (it is shown on a link from the N&O story) they were nuts to knock it down and build the ugly fake stone building.
Submitted by The Crissey's (not verified) on Sat, 12/23/2006 - 5:40pm
Gee most of you who posted something negative about the show don't even watch it.
FYI The makeover where they had to use a garden hose was where they had a fun "Car Wash" thyme shower, and this was the 1st or 2nd season, and the contractor did not complete their part in time, but was completed later in the day. If you recall the spin off "How’d they do that" this was where they showed "Behind the Camera view" it actually had that build.
Most of the home's main walls are built off site in advance, by professional builders. And look at the companies building the homes, they are mostly Major builders. As far as inspectors, they are on-site 24 hrs till the 106 hrs of build are done.
So before most of you spew negative remarks, how about watching the show first. And look at the entire spectrum of the show, yes it's a "Hollywood Production", and even our local news has their spin or angle of things, by not reporting "ALL" the story. And why doesn’t the news report more "Good-News" articles? Because it doesn’t sell in our twisted socitity of looking for the bad!
One last thing, the homeowner get’s a warranty, right down to the paint matching, and durability.
Submitted by typographica (not verified) on Mon, 11/24/2008 - 10:50pm
For The Crisseys:
It's a 5-year warranty. Two architects who looked at the construction of the old house said a remodel / restoration project, which would have cost 1/4 as much, would have lasted far longer; the old timbers were fir and redwood, and would have been at least 8x harder and stronger than the pine, sheetrock and chipboard used in the new house.
Here's an article that explores what wasn't mentioned:
http://www.hewnandhammered.com/hewn_and_hammered/2007/01/extreme_makeov…
Add new comment
Log in or register to post comments.