At the risk of opening a can of worms…
Do any of you out there consider anything “overbuilding”? By this I mean that around here, it seems that everything gets ripped out and replaced within a maximum of 10 years. Why build a kitchen to last 50 years when it’s just going to end up in a landfill? It would seem that (in certain specific areas, anyway) it would be less wasteful to build it ‘just good enough’, but is this even possible?
Are there projects where the common practice is actually better than it it needs to be, or should everything always be built to last ‘forever’?
It also makes things much harder to demo when everything is glued, etc.- why is subflooring now always glued down, just because we can? This makes it more expensive and resource- using.
Also, this makes it much harder to re-use components. I personally have never thrown away a cabinet or fixture that’s been removed, and have even used used framing where available. I even re-use nails that have been pulled if the’yre straight. This, to me, is ‘green’ building- not building a brand new house with ‘green’ products.
-Bill
Replies
Well, usually "underbuilding" or "just enough building" implies using fiberboard materials instead of solid wood or plywood, vinyl siding, plastic "veneer", etc. I think most here prefer to work with the real stuff.
Depends on where you are. Our kitchen is 31 years old (old as the house), as are probably about 40% of the ones in this neighborhood. Other areas they remodel every eight years.
Lots of framing practices are overbuilding, I'm sure. Many headers are overbuilt. But it's easier to build everything the same than to size stuff to the requirements.
PS: The irritating thing is when something is over/underbuilt. Overbuilt from the standpoint of glue, eg, but underbuilt from the standpoint of quality materials, accurate framing, etc.
In my experience, everything is built to the budget. If you have the budget, then things tend to get over-designed/built. When you are pinching pennies, your looking for ways to cut cost, which is cheaper materials and faster production methods.
If you begin your project with "value engineering" then the question of "life span", amoung others, would be addressed.
DanH said exactly what I was thinking.
Yes, I've run into things that I have considered 'overbuilt', and it's a real pain.
The biggest pain is when things are not built right. When the materials are all there but they were installed out of sequence or improperly causing all kinds of maladies within a short period of time.
I'm replacing all the windows right now on a stucco McMansion...I believe a Toll House, where all the existing windows were nailed through their fins right onto the raw OSB, then the fiberboard trim installed with no Tyvek, felt, watershield or installed first..nada. Then the stucco edging was butted to the trim and 15w felt was applied along with nonfirring mesh and a thin layer of stucco (no, not Dryvit).
You can imagine the result. Any stucco homes in that development were done that way.
It obviously wa
sn't a money thing. They just had no idea.
'Overbuilding' also tends to be a natural by-product of those who value craft and quality.
The 'underbuilding' you describe is an interesting phenomena. There is a movement towards something like this where future reuse is planned ahead of time. It requires considerable planning and forethought though.
i would imagine it's more difficult to apply to residential work. Project size is considerably smaller for the effort involved. The users also tend to be more fluid (than, say large commercial or hospital projects).
Edited 7/11/2007 9:54 am ET by draftguy
Yeah, "overbuilding" is more "brainless" -- can use the same technique everywhere, vs having to adapt to conditions. For residential construction this actually makes it an efficient way to build, if you're building one-off structures (vs, eg, Toll Brothers cookie-cutters).
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
Oh, A Philosopher, enh? Why, I oughter... Slap, slap.
Generations ago, when we were a self dependant people, the concept of a family dynasty was the rule, we built homes that we could die in and our grandkids could inherit. We knew that we had to provide for the time when we would have to depend on our progeny to take care of us when we were just too damme old to do so ourselves. We lived by the adages that it is cheaper to do it right the first time than it is to do it over. That a penny saved is a penny earned. If you can't afford it, do without it.
There was no such thing as overbuilding. That philosophy led to the birth of companies like Maytag and Rolls Royce. Homes built 100, 200, even 300 years ago are being lived in by Bt'ers right now. Homes were first, shelter from the elements, and only second, a class statement.
Four generations ago we had a World War, followed a generation later by another. These two events expanded the horizons of millions of young people, as no other event in history ever did. At about the same time, we took the first fatal turn to socialism.
The result was that our kids knew that we could depend on the gubbmint to take care of us in our dotage. Our children started moving away from home and stopped following in their fathers' footsteps. If they inherited, they were not going to move away from their own homes and careers to come back to that old house or farm, they were going to take the money, so they could provide for their own children or enjoy their own retirement.
We started looking at the examples of our leaders: It doesn't matter if it's not "right" as long as it's legal; There's nothing wrong with debt; The good of the individual is more important than the good of the nation; The elite are more equal than the hoi polloi; Appearance over substance.
The new rules of life became "Get it while the getting is good," "He who dies with the most toys, wins," "Get to the top of the ladder, whatever it takes," "Me first," "The golden rule is, he who has the gold makes the rules."
The home was no longer a family asset, a bastion of comfort and protection, it became a personal investment and status statement. Look at the multiple mansions our elite owned. A home became a masque one put on to impress others of our own eliteness.
It only worked as an investment at all because of the extremely long reputation as a very long-term asset, that with only minor maintenance, never depreciated. Because only the appearance of a masque is important, the cheaper you could buy the masque, the more status you could show. Now, we get McMansions for status, rather than family assets. Call it the new "China Syndrome."
While browsing Jerrald Hayes' blog the other day, I saw this; "If quality is so important, why did Rolls Royce go out of business?" My answer: The China Syndrome.
Many years ago, Forbes, (IIRC,) published the results of a study that found that there are only two kinds of successful business; the ones that provide the cheapest product and the ones that provide the most expensive. I would add, those who provide the necessities at a reasonable quality and a reasonable cost. A Rolex won't get you to an appointment any faster than a convenience store, Chinese made, gold colored, glass chip studded watch will, but to the crowd each owner hangs out with, they both say, "I'm important." People that just need a timepiece buy Timex, which gets you there on time, but doesn't say anything.
I submit that McMansions are Chinese made, tract homes are Timex's, and Fine Home Builders are following the Rolex plan. All three can be a sustainable and profitable way to go, but it is very important to your success that you do not get confused about what plan you are following.
SamT
I don't buy the political twist, but there's a fair amount of truth there.Mostly it's the public's mind-set. Compare what folks in the US consider "quality" to "quality" in Scandinavia, eg. When buildable land is expensive and homes small, folks are less inclined to run out and get the biggest couch and the largest big-screen TV they can find.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
I agree with much you say, but to blame it on "liberalism" is ridiculous."The result was that our kids knew that we could depend on the gubbmint to take care of us in our dotage. Our children started moving away from home and stopped following in their fathers' footsteps."That's crazy talk, and something of a contradiction. In your second sentence, you are romanticizing in a fantasy world. You think it was better when you were destined to be a carpenter, butcher, or ditch digger just because your father was? That is pretty much at odds with what I thought personal liberty was all about, and I sure don't long for a return to that world.
bullsh!t!
SamT never once used the word "liberalism" in his response.
The seed corn was given me. This never costs anything to speak of, unless you plant more than enough. I got twelve bushels of beans, and eighteen bushels of potatoes, beside some peas and sweet corn. The yellow corn and turnips were too late to come to anything. My whole income from the farm was
I submit that McMansions are Chinese made, tract homes are Timex's, and Fine Home Builders are following the Rolex plan. All three can be a sustainable and profitable way to go, but it is very important to your success that you do not get confused about what plan you are following.
I hereby nominate the above statement for inclusion in the "great breaktime quotes" listing.
Politics is the antithesis of problem solving.
Your statement was good and the bigger picture has to do with a lack of foresight and planning as much as anything. I recommend this book highly if you want to get a good over all view of the problem.http://www.amazon.com/Geography-Nowhere-Americas-Man-Made-Landscape/dp/0671888250
Most of the overbuilding is a dog and pony show.
Sure they glue down the sub floor, but they won't clean off the dirt that mucks up and prevents the glue from adhering in the first place. I think much of it is just to make the HO feel better and permits some builders to use the overkill as a crutch not to do a quality job from the start, figuring the overkill will pick up the slack.
The length of time between remodels of kitchens/baths and even entire homes is getting shorter. Around the corner from me, a couple has begun there second gut rehab of their home, their last was completed in 1999. The kids have moved out and they want new. People seem to have more money than sense these days. I think it is rare that people HO's included that are willing to reuse materials, because sometimes it can be a real PIA but most times it simply is the old doesn't fit the new design scheme.
Are you familiar with the "Not So Big House" series? If not, you should take a read. Smaller homes, though not necessarily cheaper, but more livable by taking real design and construction into consideration and not big for big's sake.
If you are looking for a $50,000 difference between two identical-sized homes, don't look for one thing, but 500 $100 differences.
Edited 7/11/2007 5:37 pm ET by byhammerandhand
Personally it is always enjoyable being around stoutly built houses if that might be one definition of overbuilt by being beyond the necessities for shedding water and keeping some heat in a house.
Recalling one poster here mentioning a goodly time back how he uses nothing less than 5/8 ply wall sheathing on 2x6 framing with 5/8 sheetrock.
I would imaging the overall sound and feel of that house would be solid and the extra cost of materials wouldn't be that much more excessive percentagewise over the total costs involved in the building total.
be liberal with yer building materials
beside produce consumed and on hand at the time this estimate was made of the value of $4.50 — the amount on hand much more than balancing a little grass which I did not raise. All things considered, that is, considering the importance of a man's soul and of today, notwithstanding the short time occupied by my experiment, nay, partly even because of its transient character, I believe that that was doing better than any farmer in Concord did that year.
-Thoreau's Walden
Bill,
I am in the midst of doing exactly that. overbuilding.. (you can see pictures at 85891.1) The reason I did it is because day in and day out I see the same short cuts taken that simply do not have to be taken if any consideration for durability is important..
A classic example is the roof.. properly toenailed according to schedule a rafter will come off at 208 pounds of force..If you multiply that times the number of rafters you'll know exactly when a roof will come off.
To be retained the roof must be put on better..None will survive even a Level 1 tornado. That's simply inexcuseable.. Simpson sells connectors that for a few dollars more will allow the roof to remain on in much much higher wind force and if the roof remains the whole house stands a chance..
Simpson makes connectors that hold a roof on to over 3000# of force (per rafter) they cost a few dollars and evan with labor we're talking about at most a few hundred dollars..
I'm certain that customers if informed of this option would galdly select it..
In case you think I'm touting Simpson connectors please note I didn't use any in my home.. Lag Bolts have similar strength even if improperly installled..
When combined with stronger wood I've been able to get more than 15,000 pounds of force per rafter..
In addition common stick built houses simply waste energy.. ICF or SIP's offer much greater energy savings and given a full market share would cost dramatically less to build than stick building everything..
I took the additional effort to use stainless steel connectors. My timbers are either black walnut or white oak.. both of which have high tannin contnent to ensure decay resistance.. However that tannin content could cause rust in noirmal steel connections. That rust would then cause decay in the wood and eventual failure..Stainless steel is a relative minor price differance if bought in sufficent quantity.
IN addition I was able to find surplus copper and bent up my own flashings etc.. because it wasn't the typical 16 once copper (more like 42oz ) my flashings should last massively longer than normal.
My shakes should last a very long time since part of my roof is 27/12 pitch while the main house is 17/12 pitch..
My walls are 16 inches thick. and would support your average semi..
I won't have the lastest kitchen or a Jacuzi tub.. And I too reused wood taken from an old building.. Heck I reused plumbing and even some electrical.
I drew a line at reusing the nails I pulled for old framing material.. (The ease of a nail gun lured me) ;-) . but at least all that metal was recycled..
Another words I built with durability in mind. Hopefully this home will last thru the next millenium. some homes do but only if they are first constructed with durabiluity in mind..
Sounds fabulous- my point is that (particularly with interior materials) why bother if the next owner is just gonna rip it out? I hope no one buys your house for the lot and wants to tear it down to build to the latest fad.It's ironic that the more high-end projects are more subject to this. A new kitchen with birch ply dovetailed drawers and solid cherry fronts in a 20,000 sf mansion is much more likely to have a short lifespan than particle board cabinets in a 1,000 sf starter home.Back to your example, though, the framing is less likely to be re-done than interior stuff.My wife is a designer who used do do a lot of retail displays, so she has a lot of experience in 'slapping it in' to look great and fulfill it's purpose without being too permanent. She's always asking if we 'really have to' make it that strong, etc...BIll
I'm reminded of the story told of Charlie Chaplin's house.Supposedly he hired studio carpenters to build the house (reportedly in support of their unionizing efforts). But studio carps build stuff to be torn down, so it was one nail per stud, absolute minimum of anything.The house was (according to the story) falling apart before it was even finished.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
But he never said a word about it!
PGproject,
My sister is an in house interior designer for one of the HMO's you should see some of the offices those guys have! but you're absolutely correct.. Some VP's office is redone to his taste with a budget that would make a serious down payment on a house and the company might fire him and replace him with another inside a six month period .. (and you wonder why you insurance keeps going up!)
When she worked for Northwest airlines prior to their going bankrupt the average spent on redoing an office for a big shot approached $100,000. (this was with an airline about to go into bankruptcy) as management changed so did the offices..
One VP's office had a $60,000 budget and needed to be done over the weekend he was away. talk about slap dash job!
If someone does buy my house for the lot, they will be shocked about just how well built this fortress is. All the timbers are morticed and tenioned, plus they have several 1/2" by 12" stainless steel hardened lag bolts connecting them in several ways..
If you try to pull this place down you'd better bring dynomite and a lot of it! I mean 15,000 pounds per rafter!!!!!
"...my point is that (particularly with interior materials) why bother if the next owner is just gonna rip it out?"
Bill, I've been reading this thread with interest. I started a related thread about permanency and reversibility in the Construction section. Although I was asking about temporary (or hopefully temporary) alterations to historic buildings, my question is essentially the same:
Can alterations and remodeling be done in a way that more easily allows the work to be undone or redone in the future ... without compromising the functionality and reasonable durability of the current product? And, in the case of an historic structure, without destroying original "fabric" in the process.
"A new kitchen with birch ply dovetailed drawers and solid cherry fronts in a 20,000 sf mansion is much more likely to have a short lifespan than particle board cabinets in a 1,000 sf starter home."
That's an excellent point; ironic, but so very very true.
Allen
One very relevant question is how long is the current owner likely to continue owning the house? Yeah, there are a few folks who love to keep remodeling the same space, but in most cases the remodel follows a sale, more or less.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
build it 'just good enough', but is this even possible?
Have you ever looked at the low end cabinets and fixtures at places like HD and Ikea? They take 'good enough' to a new (low) level.
Run Fine Homebuilding through the BT spell checker... :-)
BTW - subfloor is glued to prevent squeeks.
According to my joist span tables I can span a greater length if glued and nailed. I'm going by memory now but the spans start with strapping underneath with nailed subfloor, then strapping with glued and nailed subfloor, then bridging with nailed subfloor, then bridging with glued and nailed subfloor, then onto bridging and strapping with and without glue and then continuing whether there is a ceiling attached or not.
So in effect, in some cases you might be able to use smaller joists or spaced further apart if you use glue. Is the use of glue overbuilt...........maybe.........maybe not.
roger
never seen a span table like that....
That maybe so but I got one :)
It is/was put out by the Canadian Wood Council
Span Tables for Canadian Dimensional Lumber and Glued Laminated Timber
ISBN# 0-921628-37-4
It has tables for joists, rafters, headers, built up beams and glue laminated floor beams for all types of snow loads and some other stuff.
roger
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf1998/ritte98c.pdf
The concept of stress-laminating decks has also been expanded to include the use glulam, rather than sawn lumber, as deck laminations. This came about in response to a need for longer spans and deeper decks than can be economically provided by sawn lumber.
Using this approach, glulam beams of variable width are stressed together to form the bridge deck (Figure 1).
The first known example of this type of construction was the Teal River bridge (Wacker and Ritter 1992). Since construction of this bridge, several similar bridges have been built,
some with spans exceeding 15 m. Because glulam allows for deeper sections, longer bridge spans are possible.
Additionally, glulam can be manufactured to be continuous over the bridge length and butt joints are not required.
One of the most noteworthy advantages of glulam use has been the force retention in the stressing bars. Because glulam is dry when installed, bar force loss due to lamination shrinkage from stress relaxation and moisture losshas been very small. Overall, these glulam stress-laminated bridges have demonstrated excellent performance. Once when a follower was done up with a headache and incapable of motion, hoping his associate would comfort him and perhaps afford him a sip of tea, he said, "There are people who are sick in that way every morning, and go about their affairs," and then marched off about his. -Ellery Channing Remembers Henry Thoreau
Because the clear span of stress-laminated decks is limited by design and economical limitations on the bridge depth, other options have been investigated to provide longer clear spans.
Two types of experimental bridges that are currently being evaluated are T- and box-beam bridges (Figure 2). T-beam bridges are typically constructed using vertical glulam webs with flanges constructed of sawn lumber.
The composite action between the flange and web is developed through friction by compressing the section with stressing bars through the flanges and webs.
The box section is basically the same as the T section, but a bottom flange and stressing bars are added to create a greater moment of inertia. Once when a follower was done up with a headache and incapable of motion, hoping his associate would comfort him and perhaps afford him a sip of tea, he said, "There are people who are sick in that way every morning, and go about their affairs," and then marched off about his. -Ellery Channing Remembers Henry Thoreau
To date, over 50 stress-laminated T- and box-beam bridges have been constructed. The longest structure is a 27-m span stress-laminated T-beam bridge, which was built in Arkansas in 1993.
Field performance of many of these bridges is currently being evaluated and several publications are available (Wacker et al. 1997).
In general, the costs of T- and box-beam bridges have exceeded expectations and a conventional glulam girder bridge typically provides a more economical option. As with stress-laminated decks, there bas also been higher than expected bar force loss.
This is more critical in the T- and box beam configurations because slip between the flange and web can occur at a higher bar force than slip in a stress-laminated deck.
The new alternatives to replace steel bars and box-beam bridges. for stress-laminated decks (previously discussed) should also help to reduce bar force loss in stress-laminated T and box-beam bridges. Once when a follower was done up with a headache and incapable of motion, hoping his associate would comfort him and perhaps afford him a sip of tea, he said, "There are people who are sick in that way every morning, and go about their affairs," and then marched off about his. -Ellery Channing Remembers Henry Thoreau
In addition to glulam manufactured from hardwood and secondary softwood species, a significant effort is strength is controlled by the tensile strength of the lumber or the end joints on the tension side of the beam.
The potential for increasing the bending strength by reinforcing the tension side has been evaluated by many investigators during the past 30 years using a variety of materials.
Recent developments in fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) suggest that this big high performance material offers the possibility of being easily attached to wood.
Forming a composite by using a small amount of FRP offers the potential for significantly increasing the strength of beams, but will likely have a limited effect on stiffness.
To date, numerous bridges have been constructed using glulam beams with FRP plates bonded in the beam tension zone (Tingley et al. 1996). Research has also been completed to prestress reinforcing fibers directly in the glue line between lumber laminations (Galloway et al. 1996).
Reinforced glulam beams of this type have the best chance of showing economic advantages in applications where either (1) bending strength controls the design, (2) it is critical to minimize beam depth, or (3) the beams are part of a composite structure where the added strength provides substantial benefits.
It also appears that the greatest economic gain will be in glulam manufactured with low strength species.
Beyond these applications, the economics of using reinforced glulam beams must be compared with the use of traditional softwood beams that are manufactured somewhat deeper to achieve the required strength and stiffness. Once when a follower was done up with a headache and incapable of motion, hoping his associate would comfort him and perhaps afford him a sip of tea, he said, "There are people who are sick in that way every morning, and go about their affairs," and then marched off about his. -Ellery Channing Remembers Henry Thoreau
Are homes becoming another disposable in the minds of buyers? We've been conditioned to consume as much as possible and that means throwing out stuff that no longer works or suits our immediate needs. Everything from appliances, to furniture, to tools is being made cheaper with the unwritten understanding that it will get tossed at the first sign of trouble.
I see that mindset in new construction where exterior materials are selected mainly for their appearance and low cost and to hell with longevity. We may see the day where buying a house means bulldozing the existing structure and replacing it with something newer and more "up to date".
most tract homes built today follow that principle - built just good enough to pass inspection and sell.
"What's an Arkansas flush?......It's a small revolver and any five cards."