Reuters Money
6 Barbie Dream House additions you’ll want for yourself
Over the years, she’s been a surgeon, paratrooper, ambassador for world peace and of course a princess. But after more than 125 career changes and regardless of whether Ken wants to settle down, Barbie’s got a new title: smart dream homeowner.
In conjunction with the release of Architect Barbie, The American Institute of Architects and Mattel are sponsoring an Architect Barbie Dream House Competition, and the designs shed light on some great additions for real-life homeowners looking to add value to their residences. We looked at finalist Michelle Krochmal’s design for an oval-shaped 11-room domicile and picked out six stellar features worthy of your own dream home — the pink color scheme is optional. We sorted out the costs and benefits, and leave it up to you figure out whether such amenities fit your lifestyle.
“I can only hope that I get a client like Barbie, someone who is tech-savvy, easygoing and open to pushing the envelope,” says Krochmal, 35, a New York City architect who says being in the contest is like a “Toy Story” plot come to life, since she built Barbie dollhouses as a kid. (Voting is open until Aug. 1, you can see all five finalists and vote for a favorite here.)
If you want to live as grandly as Barbie, check out what it would cost you in real life:
Item #1: Solar power
Why Barbie wants it: Once a lifeguard, always a sun goddess.
Why you want it: You can “get off the grid” while letting your neighbors see how committed you are to the environment.
How to go solar and save
Early last year Solange and Michael Whitehead made the decision to put solar panels on the roof of their Phoenix-area home. The couple, who have three children, say the move has cut their peak electric bills in the summer from around $400 a month to $210 a month.
“We’d do it even if we weren’t saving money,” says 49-year-old Solange, who ran an environmental nonprofit before becoming a real estate agent. “For us, it’s mostly about helping the environment.”
As the fallout from nuclear disaster in Japan continues and oil prices remain stuck in the triple digits, the appeal of an energy source that’s reliable, doesn’t leak poison and isn’t whipsawed by day traders becomes more apparent. But with changing financial incentives and a growing number of options, deciding whether or not to “go solar” also involves some serious number crunching.
A few years ago, it was standard to spend $40,000 or more to buy a residential solar system. While buying is still expensive, Federal and state tax incentives, along with utility rebates, bring prices down considerably. And now, buying a system outright is no longer necessary.
An increasingly popular choice is to lease the panels and related equipment from a solar installation firm, as the Whiteheads do. You can go “a la carte” with mini-panels just for heating water. Or, if you don’t want panels or are a renter, a growing number of utilities let you draw some of your electricity from renewable resources such as solar or wind for a modest monthly surcharge.
The bad news is that with more and more customers moving to solar, many utilities have lowered incentive rebates over the last year to avoid running out of money for the programs. That affects both buyers and leasing companies, who pass their higher costs along to their customers. Other, less obvious costs might include removing the panels for a roof repair or clearing trees to provide unobstructed sunlight.
There is also the issue of how solar panels might affect a home’s value. Whitehead says that many of her clients “would be happy to buy a house with solar because it lowers their electrical costs.” But she also admits that a neighbor has complained about the appearance of her panels, even though they are in the back of her home and difficult to see from the street.
Solar is on its way to being self sufficient. Even without any subsidies, a small system offsetting peak bills will pay for itself before warranty expires (in California). The cost of modules, which is approx. 70% of the system cost, have dropped 50% over the past 4 years due to the subsidies that have been in place, which have created a large industry backed by R&D and streamlined business practices.
The AIA should focus on the health of the architecture profession, which has very poor financial incentives and returns for its members, rather than conning little girls into thinking that you will be successful if you are an architect. The only interest of the AIA is in expanding its association and the dues received from its members.