Sometimes I think I’m sitting on a time bomb in this house.

February 9, 2022 7:35 AM

Brad Pitt's Make It Right Foundation (previously) built 109 eye-catching and affordable homes in New Orleans for a community where many people were displaced by damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Just a few years later, the vast majority of these homes are now riddled with construction-related problems that have led to mold, termites, rotting wood, flooding and other woes. At least six are boarded up and abandoned. Many residents have filed lawsuits that are still pending. Make It Right, despite what its name might suggest, has not resolved these issues and has stopped assisting residents. Instead, the movie star-led nonprofit has apparently become defunct.
posted by DirtyOldTown (36 comments total)

(An update of my first-ever FPP, from about nine years ago!)
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:36 AM on February 9, 2022 [19 favorites]

Is this same Make It Right as Canada's Mike Holmes? Hasn't he made his name on good quality work for those in need? Was it a sham all along?
posted by NoMich at 7:41 AM on February 9, 2022

Not the same group, no.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:45 AM on February 9, 2022 [2 favorites]

Were building codes simply not enforced?
posted by AndrewInDC at 7:47 AM on February 9, 2022 [3 favorites]

I work in the non-profit space and I see such atrocities on a regular basis. The people making the "big" decisions in these scenarios often have zero experience in the field they are "raising money for" and or supporting. So much well intended money, or laundered money going into the wrong hands and to inexperienced contractors that ends up costing more than just cash in the long run.

I wonder who was hired to vet all of the contractors? How was it so easy to pop those things up in a crisis? It's all so disgustingly vile.
posted by lextex at 7:51 AM on February 9, 2022 [28 favorites]

Another reason why relying on philanthropy for basic infrastructure and services is a terrible idea.
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:02 AM on February 9, 2022 [138 favorites]

Reading this article I can't tell whether it's a case of "well-intentioned star betrayed by scumbag contractors" or more like "housing reform is difficult and a generation-scale project, and famous people aren't in it for the long term (except Jimmy Carter)."

Either way it completely sucks that, as usual, poor people get screwed.
posted by wenestvedt at 8:07 AM on February 9, 2022 [28 favorites]

Not the same group, no.

Thank goodness. Mike Holmes is a bright spot of hope for humanity for me (low bar, I know).

This article brings up the Mike Holmes connection to this Brad Pitt project (scroll down). According to it, Mike Holmes teamed up with Pitt's Make It Right for one house build and apparently that house is the only decent one.
posted by NoMich at 8:10 AM on February 9, 2022 [15 favorites]

It's such an outsider NGO cluster-fuck. We know how how to build for wet sub-tropical conditions. Some of these houses had flat roofs which is... not so good. Lack of guttering and overhangs is going to lead to the kind of water loadings on walls that you'd need a boat hull to withstand.

Some of the issues:

-Flat roof designs, not great in such rainy conditions
-Lack of other water diversion such as gutters and overhangs to manage rain water away from walls
-Use of silicate impregnated wood (TimberSIL) instead of wood impregnated with conventional pressure treatment - nontoxic but unfortunately it doesn't hold up well. We use nasty arsenic based treatments for a reason.
-Poor quality detailing on waterproofing features
-Inadequate attention paid to ventilation systems - house structures have to stay dry. There are a bunch of ways of tackling that problem depending on local conditions but you have to manage moisture in any structure.

They had a bunch of leading edge designers involved but John C Williams, the local architect, is most at fault here. It was his job to turn these designs into buildable projects.

some more technical detail... also points out that the foundation may have been engaging in delaying tactics to run out the five year statutory warranty period
posted by atrazine at 8:23 AM on February 9, 2022 [58 favorites]

atrazine, that is a mind-boggling list. Not surprised, but frustrated and disgusted for the nth time.

Thank you for the post and update, DirtyOldTown!
posted by rrrrrrrrrt at 8:26 AM on February 9, 2022

Despite their experiences, some residents said they still believe Make It Right’s founder had good intentions. “I don’t blame Brad Pitt,” said David, another resident. “He had a vision to build low-income houses and get people back in the Lower Ninth Ward.”

How do you not blame him? He’s got… $300m net worth and just… lets these folks be ruined because god-knows-why? He got bored? Stopped paying attention? What?

The rich sure do have a lot of “vision” nowadays but the track record on execution feels rather poor.
posted by eschatonizer at 8:28 AM on February 9, 2022 [32 favorites]

Is this same Make It Right as Canada's Mike Holmes? Hasn't he made his name on good quality work for those in need? Was it a sham all along?

He was involved in some capacity... I think?... He did build houses in New Orleans following Kathrina and here it says he's partnering with the 'Make It Right Foundation', but that could be a different foundation with the same name. Confusing.

A crew of contractors from Canada may or may not be the best crew to build houses up to code in Louisiana, Ontario has a very different climate and you'll use different materials & technique. Would be interested to know if his house his still standing, he's usually a "duct tape, belt, suspenders" guy, his the sense that he goes beyond what's necessary.

Also it's a TV show, I'm never sure how much they really do VS what they contract out. Mike Holmes although he clearly knowledgeable, seems to care about good work, and does the right thing by admonishing people to get permits and hire licensed trade workers, is not a licensed trade worker himself (he has a GC license I think). I think I remember his dad worked in the trades and he learned from him, but he never bothered to get licensed. (I don't know in Ontario, but in Qc that's possible path if you want a license and don't want to go to trade school).

He makes a good show, but it's a show. Must feel you've won the lottery when he gets to your house, because they seem to go all out, rip everything and then redo which most people can't afford.

Also, I'm wondering if the focus on renewables and eco-friendly materials combined with tight budgets didn't doomed these houses. Not that these are bad things, but virtue might have trumped practicality.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:29 AM on February 9, 2022 [3 favorites]

-Flat roof designs, not great in such rainy conditions
-Lack of other water diversion such as gutters and overhangs to manage rain water away from walls

Nearly every building in downtown New Orleans has a flat roof. It's not that flat roofs in New Orleans are a bad idea, they are a bad idea for middle income homeowners because they carry higher maintenance costs than shingle roofs even when built well.

And though foundation is getting a lot of grief here, all they probably did was sign checks for contractors would actually did the building. And in a disaster, contractors come from all over the US to collect insurance money and get out of town as fast as possible. So whoever did the vetting of the contractors is most at fault.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:39 AM on February 9, 2022 [8 favorites]

I hate to be That Guy, but they really didn't need "star designers": they needed something functional first, and then attractive.

I used to work at a very famous architecture firm. They did a lot of beautiful work, but it had to be sound before they turned the designers loose.
posted by wenestvedt at 8:41 AM on February 9, 2022 [9 favorites]

Also New Orleans climate is basically the same as the entire south eastern coast of the US. It's not special. It actually gets less rain than Houston.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:42 AM on February 9, 2022 [4 favorites]

For me, the most telling detail in the story was that Make It Right’s 2018 IRS filings indicate it was spending more by then on legal services than on construction and maintenance. More "Make Them Go Away" than "Make It Right."
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:54 AM on February 9, 2022 [22 favorites]

Good grief, how depressing.

The most environmentally friendly house is the one you don't have to tear down in 10 years.
posted by 1adam12 at 8:58 AM on February 9, 2022 [10 favorites]

I hate to be That Guy, but they really didn't need "star designers": they needed something functional first, and then attractive.

100% this.

I think this comes for a good place though, probably "houses for the poor don't have to be ugly and non practical", but clearly the goal was not attained. Were the architects plan bad? Too expensive for the budget? Or was the work botched?
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:02 AM on February 9, 2022 [5 favorites]

Interestingly, the previous post goes into a whole different set of serious problems that were apparent even before the houses had the chance to start disintegrating.

I think regardless of whether you've got star architects or regular builders, the most important thing needed for any serious project is long-term support and responsibility for things that go wrong. That's especially true for a project like this, where the homeowners are by definition people who don't have the funds to clean up the mess they've been planted in, or move, or sue for restitution.

How is it sane for legal responsibility for a building you've built to last only 5 years?
posted by trig at 9:10 AM on February 9, 2022 [8 favorites]

I was on the Gulf Coast just after Katrina, and the scuttlebutt on the ground at the time was that, in addition to the houses being built badly (which was kind of a known thing even then) people did not want all the eco features of these houses. It seemed to me like a clear case of someone with money and power coming into a community where they didn't have relationships and just doing whatever the hell they wanted without involving the actual people in that community in the decisions. Brad Pitt was carrying out a vision he was excited about, not doing something that the people he was supposedly helping actually wanted or needed.
posted by aka burlap at 9:29 AM on February 9, 2022 [7 favorites]

Has anyone considered wrapping them in chainmail?
posted by 7segment at 9:35 AM on February 9, 2022 [17 favorites]

There is, unfortunately, a vast gulf (and probably extra-vast on the Gulf) between what architects think people should like and what the plebians who must use their buildings actually like. I think a lot about the 'Rural Studio' in Alabama, founded by late Samuel Mockbee, where architecture students go into poor communities and e.g. design and build a little house for a retired couple. All well and good, but they can never seem to help themselves from making it all architecty: random angles and protuberances; corrugated metal everywhere; stairways of raw 2X8 planks with no handrails. So this Brad Pitt debacle is no surprise at all.
posted by Flashman at 10:20 AM on February 9, 2022 [8 favorites]

To detour a bit with Mike Holmes, one of my heroes, he took a crew to NO and built a LEED Platinum home after hearing that Pitt violated his Make it Right trademark and decided to build a house rather than sue. The whole thing was filmed as Holmes in New Orleans and it's a great watch if you can find it. The crew falls apart in the heat and humidity, a couple of the team go home, and they build a really lovely home that the owner is still really happy with, while visiting neighboring home owners and highlighting the devastation.

I think Pitt bit off well more than he could chew. The Holmes in New Orleans episodes showed how difficult the situation was--heavy rainstorms and extreme heat caused enormous difficulties and delays and they were just building one house. I can't imagine how much harder it would have been to build so many.
posted by ceejaytee at 10:52 AM on February 9, 2022 [14 favorites]

He got bored? Stopped paying attention? What?

Getting divorced and having some personal drama, I assume? But yeah, theoretically he should be paying someone to do something about this.
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:21 AM on February 9, 2022 [4 favorites]

109 homes, $150k average each, comes to $16,350,000... about 20% less than Pitt gets paid for a single film. He could literally pay everyone back cash and be done with it and would never feel a thing, financially. I mean, no, it's not all his fault, he's just the most visible one. But he's also ostensibly the socially conscious one, he has to know this sucks, and he could make all 109 families whole for, what proportionally to him, would be like the cost of a new roof to one of us.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:38 AM on February 9, 2022 [15 favorites]

interesting and sad. I know Common Ground Reflief, a more local non profit, had these critiques for a while, and had built an affordable model home in response--pretty sure there weren't many takers on their alterative program.
posted by eustatic at 11:44 AM on February 9, 2022 [3 favorites]

It wouldn't have been near as 'sexy' to haul in a bunch of good quality house trailers, and they'd probably have lasted 20 years.
A friend put a used house trailer on property in the cold and wet Pacific Northwest. They then put a gabled tin roof over it for protection and as a carport. Not classy, but cheap, comfortable, and the 1970's trailer still functions and is nice shape.
Typical celebrity--get all the attention and feel goods, then walk off leaving people in the same situation.
posted by BlueHorse at 11:47 AM on February 9, 2022 [2 favorites]

109 homes, $150k average each, comes to $16,350,000... about 20% less than Pitt gets paid for a single film. He could literally pay everyone back cash and be done with it and would never feel a thing, financially.

He could 'Nick Cage' for a year or two, and pay for everything.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:03 PM on February 9, 2022 [3 favorites]

Seems like the celebrity architects involved deserve a lot of the blame. Look at these stupid houses. Of course they're failing.

I see one of them with some sort of in-roof deck... those things are waterproofing nightmares. A smaller but similar deck on my house is presently costing me $30k in repairs: roofing, resurfacing, mold remediation, drywall, painting, replacement of doors and windows. Any architect who says you should put something like that on a house designed to be sustainable for poor people in a place that rains a lot is professionally negligent. I wish these lawsuits the best of luck.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 12:58 PM on February 9, 2022 [5 favorites]

Many of the houses lacked ordinary, essential features such as rain gutters, overhangs, waterproof painting or covered beams

I read this and just yelled "come onnnnnn" -- I live in a differently rainy climate and like seriously, what the hell, how do you not build basic features for the climate the building is in?!
posted by epersonae at 1:02 PM on February 9, 2022 [6 favorites]

Seems like the celebrity architects involved deserve a lot of the blame. Look at these stupid houses. Of course they're failing.

Maybe but the project did basically the right thing and exactly what a responsible developer would do which is to hire a local qualified architectural firm which knew the local conditions, available materials, and local contractor skillsets to manage the process. It was exactly their job to push back and say - "this won't work, nobody here knows how to adhere this fancy membrane roofing system properly, it's going to fail." They didn't do any of that.

In fact, a lot of "fancy" architects have a whole layer of long-suffering structural engineers to turn their designs into buildable projects. Personally, I think if you want to be a sculptor, you should do that and that architects who can't design buildable and functional projects are contemptible dilettantes but, hey that's just like my opinion, man.
posted by atrazine at 2:50 PM on February 9, 2022 [5 favorites]

109 homes, $150k average each, comes to $16,350,000... about 20% less than Pitt gets paid for a single film. He could literally pay everyone back cash and be done with it and would never feel a thing, financially.

I mean, this is a no-brainer, right? Brad Pitt does the right thing, even though the cause of the problems were not (really) his fault. He takes a haircut off his next film, or even if it's the entire payment for his next film, he can afford it. Or a small-ish dip into his Croesus-worthy vault of riches he already has and he wipes the slate clean. No more lawsuits, no more bad publicity, and he comes out the hero, the families get their homes.

Brad, it's a baller PR move, just do it!
posted by zardoz at 3:49 PM on February 9, 2022 [4 favorites]

It wouldn't have been near as 'sexy' to haul in a bunch of good quality house trailers

It definitely would not. And people would have been complaining that these poor folks were getting sub-standard housing. There's definitely a lot of talk about how affordable housing shouldn't mean ugly or poor design. The other side of that is that a house that "looks neat" isn't necessarily going to be a good house.

I think this whole thing is a tragic fiasco. I think Pitt and Gehry were the star power drumming up interest and marshalling cash but....somebody needed to be the voice of reason and be empowered to act. I hope that we get a real deep dive on this story to figure out where the problems were. Inspectors? Some of these things seem like they should have been flagged. Shoddy construction? Swapping in poorer materials? Putting the brakes on in that situation could have resulted in years of partially finished homes just sitting there while everyone got sued and counter-sued. It feels like one of those projects where all sorts of good intentions ran at counter purposes. If a sane person had been empowered to say "no" then you'd likely have a failure of a project - one in which nothing got built. The star power just further muddies the waters.

109 homes, $150k average each, comes to $16,350,000... about 20% less than Pitt gets paid for a single film. He could literally pay everyone back cash and be done with it and would never feel a thing, financially.

I mean...yes. But then they are not housed. I wouldn't be surprised if fixing these homes was over $150k right now.
posted by amanda at 4:16 PM on February 9, 2022 [1 favorite]

To build those houses correctly would have required highly skilled tradespeople who have a strong understanding of building science. Unfortunately, I suspect the homes were built by your typical production home builder-type sub. Which is to say they can bang it out quick, just don’t look too closely. I suspect many of the workers intuitively understood where the buildings would develop problems but it is the rare employee who can then articulate the problem and come up with a solution.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 10:18 PM on February 9, 2022 [2 favorites]

May or may not beat sleeping under a tree or on a rooftop or squatting in an abandoned building or under the bridge. (btw, I've done all of those things).
posted by zengargoyle at 7:46 AM on February 10, 2022

"Brad, it's a baller PR move, just do it!"

The media seems to love the opportunity to drag a celebrity otherwise, but so far the stench from this is not really following him or affecting his career or image adversely - and it's been years.
posted by Selena777 at 7:44 AM on February 11, 2022