Replies

1. 
   calvin | Dec 15, 2011 07:06pm | #1

   Well

   If I walked through I might have some thoughts and suggestions,

   but all I can give you from here is a

   Best of luck!

2. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 15, 2011 07:42pm | #2

   come on down!

   your welcome to come on over anytime and have a look.

   one thing i didnt point out is the fact that just about all the horizontal runs of water piping, conduit, romex, gas lines and dwv lines have to horizontal support except at the ends.

   some of the runs are as long as 20feet. 

   hurray for me....

1. 
   calvin | Dec 15, 2011 07:53pm | #3

   You're in Oakland

   I'm just outside the Glass City................

   Might be 3k miles.

   You'll have to suffer w/o me.

   Besides, I'm way too expensive........................

   which is what happens when you reach 62, think you learned (know) alot, feel you're better than all the run of the mill guys and most of the better qualified.   Of course, added to that is a good work ethic, a conscience that won't quit and immense pride in your work.

   One of these days I'll be too old to do it and have to make an attempt at selling my opinion.............

   Might go broke trying that one.

   The feeling I get from looking at the bones of your place is that for several years things were done to get by.  No thought of the future, certainly pinching the pennies along the way.  All those junctions covered like that exceed the number I've been asked to just go ahead and do (and that's almost 40 yrs worth).   There's always a way to do it right, sometimes people do it.  The wallet oft cut those numbers.

   Again, best of luck.

2. 
   MarkH | Dec 18, 2011 08:09am | #5

   There are codes for everything, especially in over-governed states like California.  Codes are generic, meaning they are a one size fits all applications.  This reduces some innovation, but generally protects the populace from disasterous building methods.

   Just because something doesn't meet code makes it bad.

   In fact, meeting code is sometimes insufficient, sometimes overkill.

   My house doesn't currently meet code, but it did when it was built many years ago.  Unfortunately, many similar houses in the neighborhood have burned down, due to issues that don't meet current codes.  The walls were made of plywood during WWII.  I replaced most of mine with drywall.

   Usually common sense trumps code, but code is the law...

   Hang some pipe hangers and fix the wiring probs, and go on, don't worry about it.

1. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 05:01pm | #6

   You know

   I completely agree with you.

   And the good news the code enforcement inspector that I will be dealing with through out this adventure feels the same way.

   He leans towards common sense things..he seems to be intimating that he's not going to rake me over the coals and make me fix every little thing that gets uncovered as long as theres not a safety issue in his mind....

   We'll see I guess...

1. 
   MarkH | Dec 18, 2011 07:01pm | #20

   I had a thought after posting about the lack of an above ground plate for earthquake retrofits.  Could you cut PT plates to fit between the studs and attach them to the floor over the existing plate?  (Cut a bunch of 14 1/2 pieces and secute them to the concrete?)

3. 
   ward121 | Dec 17, 2011 11:41pm | #4

   Been there, am there

   Feel your  pain,  sitting in a 1949 cottage.....what's behind wall #3???

1. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 05:04pm | #9

   The one good thing

   Is that with the ceiling down in the basement I can fix a lot of things on the main level.

   There are a couple runs of knob and tube I can replace along with redoing the hvac....

4. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 05:03pm | #7

   I know

   This was meant for Calvin...somehow I sent it to myself.....

   I was mostly kidding...

   Doesn't really seem to be anybody from the SFbay area on this forum....

   Seems like if I was on the East Coast I'd be near several people....

1. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 05:03pm | #8

   mad,

   Check this line out-it's supposed to tell you/me what post you replied to and what day/time.

   by madmadscientist in reply to madmadscientist [original] on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 17:58

   Now, so as to help those that are attempting to make this site better or more workable.............

   Would you please tell me (them) who you were replying to?   What reply button did you his to get to the reply screen?

   thanks.

1. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 05:06pm | #10

   I thought

   I hit the reply to this button on the left...

   Was that not right?

1. 
   DanH | Dec 18, 2011 05:15pm | #11

   You need to hit the reply button IN THE POST YOU'RE REPLYING TO.  I suspect you know that, but it's kinda easy to absent-mindedly hit Reply in the post above or in the original post, when you're paging back and forth to look at things.

2. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 06:11pm | #12

   mad,

   That's why I'm asking what post you hit the reply button on, it came up as you replying to you

   by madmadscientist in reply to madmadscientist [original] on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 17:58

   So, as dan says, it seems you didn't hit the reply button in the post I made to you.

   I say "it seems" because that doesn't really seem possible as many times as it happens here.  I think there's yet one more thing wrong with this worthless as tits on a boar hog software called a forum.

   So I ask just in case they can see this interchange and work on changing yet another bogus part in what makes this run.  If they can't see it, I'll make sure I send it to them so they do see it.  But, we need the information as correct as possible or we just might get zip/nada/zero attempt at a fix.

   Thanks for the help, if you can remember.

1. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 06:14pm | #13

   Ha!

   I think there's yet one more thing wrong with this worthless as tits on a boar hog software called a forum.

   That's got to be my fav quote here so far this year!!

   I can't believe tits didnt get bleeped out...

2. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 06:23pm | #15

   Must be sun spots.

   or they couldn't think of a quippy "alternative" word or phrase.  

   They might try "nice ones", perhaps "hooters"..............heck, I don't know.

   I think big ass'd makes it past the word patrol.  Not that I want to cross any lines, but I think the original XXX worked fine to keep the young and prim from seeing those disgusting references, yet the XXX's kept the pertinant meaning alive in the prose.

   But then again, I'm less than a genius in this field.

   Edit:   Nope, big XXX'd don't cut it.

3. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 06:18pm | #14

   by madmadscientist in reply to madmadscientist [original] on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 17:58

   Supposedly, you click on that [original] that's just above-it takes you to the post that was replied to. 

   Well, in this case it takes you to the first post-meaning you replied to that original post...................which is unlikely because it's way up there-you'd have had to have scrolled up after reading my reply.

   It seems to happen to only the original poster that started the threads-and it's happened often, but of course, not all the time.

   Do you use I.E. as your browser?   Seems that's the default excuse for when no one knows the reason something doesn't work.

1. 
   DanH | Dec 18, 2011 06:28pm | #16

   which is unlikely because it's way up there-you'd have had to have scrolled up after reading my reply

   I have the software set to show posts in reverse order, so that the newest is right below the thread-starter.  (Much simpler to follow long threads this way, if you come back often enough.)  So it's fairly easy to press "Reply" on the thread-starter by accident.

2. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 06:30pm | #17

   ok then

   How you got your's set up Mad?

   Do you read the bottom or the top?

3. 
   madmadscientist | Dec 18, 2011 06:42pm | #18

   nope

   not that clever.

   I read mine as they come in newest on the bottom.

   I do use IE.

4. 
   calvin | Dec 18, 2011 06:44pm | #19

   There you go dan

   No "accident".

5. 
   madmadscientist | Jan 31, 2012 11:36am | #21

   Had the BI out last week

   Couple of code violations I didn't know about or didn't catch....

   I did not know that it is against code for copper water pipes to be in physical contact with galv gas piping.

   Fire stopping...

   The HVAC chases are indeed not correct...has to have 5/8 type X drywall completely incapsulating the chase.

   Also need fire blocking between the top of the furring wall and the actual exterior wall. He says he'll except fiberglas insulation stuffed tightly into the opening. I will fill the joist and stud bays completely with fiberglas anyways...

1. 
   calvin | Jan 31, 2012 04:40pm | #22

   mad

   You say "completely encapsulating the chase".  Would he allow metal duct instead of you drywalling the stud/joist sides along with the covering?   If that is what you meant.

   Furrings need topped off when open to a joist system above.  And of course the open soffits added after full ht. wall frame is done-you need stops in the wall at the soffit line.  If you stop the wall, here they've allowed the soffit cover to be considered ceiling when covered with sheetrock.

   As far as the galv/copper, that's for the reaction between the two metals I would think.  Gas pipe isn't usually galvanized, no?

1. 
   madmadscientist | Jan 31, 2012 05:47pm | #23

   nope

   He meant that eventhough I am using metal ducting for the HVAC he wants the chase to be covered on the inside wall/ceiling with drywall. Why is that so hard for me to explain that...encapsulate probably didn't help.

   Ya, the galv gas line thing again.. Its always done in galv here..I know thats strange for everybody else to understand.

2. 
   madmadscientist | Jan 31, 2012 05:48pm | #24

   wow

   I got 4 notification emails from your single reply?

   Weird...