Printable View
Carry cost is a bitch on this one so we’re moving fast. Framers were in today; we’re finalizing plans room by room a few days ahead of them. Working well so far - made easier given that Mrs ski-wpk is a designer and we’ve done half a dozen projects with the same architect and builder.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
You need tile.
Solid strand bamboo.
Dark green shag for the period look. 1970s is the new mid-modern.
In all seriousness: Finished-in-place #2 red oak (available for pickup at Home Depot for $2.99/ft) with the hardest finish that a local installer will put down. I'm not sure what it is but it will require respirators and a clearing of the site for a week, at least.
Oak floors will never not be timeless, even if you hate oak in other contexts.
Gray/Grey as a color/colour.
It is the the 10 dan black belt of painting, the Somme brushetry, the Mt. Olympos of all the Farnsworth-Munsell'eers.
FML.
After five different paint tests I finally found the perfect neutral gray, like a damn grey card grey...only to find out that it is too neutral and does not work at all.
Painting larger areas on 4 different walls, watching the paint dry and sun move across the sky, casting shadows...I find out that the perfect grey is the first one tested.
I do not think there is a wood out there that could deal with my 80lb Malamute running on it. The good news is last time the oak floors were refinished they used a finish that was cured with lamps like a dentist does a filling. That stuff holds up remarkably well even though the dog can put a grove in it, it doesn't breakdown and allow the wood to become exposed. So ya, there are nail marks in the floor if you look closely, but no damage to the finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-wpk
People reuse old flooring because they value the patina and because the stains and gouges cry out "history", which is why old costs more than new. Here you have opportunity staring you in the face and you don't realize it -- instant patina and wear. Heck. You could even rent out your kids and dog to distress other people's new floors. Or buy salvaged flooring and you won't mind more dings from your family.
Seriously, judging by the kinds of concerns you have, both scratches and liquid damage, I think you'd be best with solid wood finished on site with oil based varnish and waxing it a couple times a year. No wood floor is going to be impenetrable but a good varnish won't stain with messes. Beats the stainability of carpet, the hardness and coldness of tile or stone, etc. You just have to expect some kind wear with wood. And consider clipping your dog's nails. They shouldn't be scratching your floor.
We had a 1939-installed 3.5” red oak floor that had been painted white (found under ratty shag carpet) refinished last year, and it was amazing how it cleaned up. If I could find reclaimed at a reasonable price, I would definitely go that route.
1939 floor: Attachment 276194
I will be replacing the sheet linoleum on the kitchen floor. The rest of the house is well patina’d, 1952 era oak.
With my Great Dane, Murphy, I will always have a wet area around the water bowl. It’s just reality.
So we are thinking the vinyl planks. With only 200 sq ft, getting the top end stuff isn’t that much more.
Mine's 1933 or something (I probably already said that) was under carpet for its entire life as best we can tell. We pulled up the carpet, waxed, and it looks great. Some evidence of water staining outside the bathroom, which doesn't bother us. Over the years, the Irish setters didn't do any damage. The cursed rabbit my wife had dissolved the finish in a number of spots but my wife was able to match stain and revarnish with excellent results. I really wish I knew what they used back then. There's obviously some kind of film finish, most likely oil based varnish, but you can't see any thickness to the film. It's low gloss unless my wife waxes it, which she did a lot for some reason when the older kid was 9m and learning to walk. We'd here thunk several times a day as his head hit the floor. A miracle he survived.Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-wpk
You get what you pay for with oak flooring. We got some fairly cheap oak when we added a second story but the color match between pieces is not close to the match in the old oak downstairs. A light stain helps even out some but with cheaper wood there will still be a noticeable difference between pieces. I would only use in the less important areas of the house.
I just picked up about 4k feet of 5" white oak. I hope it holds up better than the above. Shit should last forever.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Cool house. Are you a professional flipper or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-wpk
My current house (built 1966) has very similar red oak--short pieces and clear. It's badly in need of a refinish but we are waiting until we remodel the kitchen.
My old floor has color consistency so good you don't notice the end joints or whether the pieces are long or short. I wonder if you can even get wood that consistent any more. Good hardwood gets harder and harder to find every year.
my neighbor has some of the hard wood flooring rescued from the court used by the Vancouver grizzlies B-ball team, he didn't refinish it he just put it down at random with the painted B-ball court lines runnning where ever ... looks cool
If it's not too late my flooring guy was showing us the floor he did across the street--nail down thin oak strip to match the rest of the 30's house. The finish was gorgeous--Bona Mega satin, a water based finish for high wear areas--used for things like basketball courts, although I didn't ask if it was used for dog basketball. He had 3 coats on with one more to go with no plastic look. The stuff looks to be expensive and may not be available to the public, only to professionals.
I have an electrical question. My 1905 house is partially updated, but still has some knob and tube, including some in the attic that has insulation blown over it (thanks for the tip, home inspector). From what I can see, this line only feeds three ceiling light fixtures- no fans or anything big and it's the end of the run. There is a some romex that comes up from an exterior conduit pipe into the attic and feeds the bathroom and exhaust fan. In my mind, this should not be a huge job to replace the knob and tube by either splicing off the existing romex or drop a new line down the conduit to the breaker box which has empty slots. I do worry why this was not done in the first place, but there's a lot of half ass stuff with the electric update (uncovered junction boxes etc, thanks again inspector). Considering this is Seattle and it's boom times for fleecing the rich, what is a reasonable cost for this kind of thing?
I almost feel like I could do it myself- not the breaker panel option of course. The last time I hired electricians they ripped me off hard and I'm still pissed.
yeah ALWAYS ask for the stuff they only use on "commercial jobs". hard like a rock. Matte finish if possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by RootSkier
Can a homeowner pull an electrical permit? If so, the electrical inspector may be an asset. I wired my shop and added a subpanel along with swapping out circuit breakers in the main panel and adding new in it and another subpanel in our pumphouse. I had to redo a couple things, but the inspector really helped me out.Quote:
Originally Posted by knopfler
After you do the job yourself (read: walk a mile in their shoes), reevaluate whether the previous electrician 'ripped' you off or you just didn't like paying for what the job really took to complete, including his time spent related to the project aside from the actual on site work.
Also might want to make sure that insulation isn't asbestos. My house(1898 + 1908) had a fair amount of knob and tube in blown in insulation(asbestos based). Our electrician was able to cut out knob and tube but we're in small town montana so things happen a bit different over here. Also agree with advice above re getting ripped off. Its important to be cautious and well informed but people in the trades work pretty damn hard for their money although there are always exceptions.
I miss the days of working a Building Department that required an asbestos test for any project that disturbed more than 32 square feet of sheetrock. It warmed the cockles of my heart to see millionaires get apoplectic over asbestos being found in their home that was built in 2002; that they would need to mitigate it, and provide us with the clean air report before they could remodel their bathroom.
If nothing else, you can shut down the elec service at the entry & cut the K&T circuit at the head & abandon the wires until you deal with the insulation, or some other home improvement project that gives you convenient access to rip out the remaining elements.
Running new home wiring for a few lights isn’t that hard
We're getting close to pulling the trigger on a second story addition of 800-1000 sqft. New bedroom, bath and office space. I also need to replace the carpets in the existing bedrooms, and my roof is overdue for replacement (not leaking yet, but I'm replacing shingles after every storm). I'm re-reading the thread from the beginning.
I'm going the GC route because I have a day job building bigger things. My current top candidate says he generally doesn't use architects because he has been doing this for 25 years and generally knows how to make a house look. He has a decent portfolio that looks good, but I need to investigate further. I'm still waiting to interview a couple others. As far as the plans and where/how we can add, there isn't a ton of options for us. We got the smallest slice of the cul-de-sac pie, and the lot setback limits pretty much have us blocked from pushing any existing wall outward, except toward the street and we have a 50-60 year old tree there that I don't want to encroach on too much. I measured and drew up our house in cad, played with ideas for a couple months, and the best course of action seems to be to add above the garage and kitchen. It works pretty darn well from an engineering perspective for structure and utilities. I don't know that bringing an architect in will add much value with our situation.
Yes, it should be less expensive in my market to add a second floor addition vs. buying new. This market has always been lacking supply to the tune of a <1% vacancy rate. The addition will end up less than what I paid in 2008 in $/sf, and far less than moving in the current market. We also have a house on a cul-de-sac which is rare here and we like all of our neighbors, and they like us and our kids. Moving is off the table because you can't buy that.
Any other wisdom from the collective that hasn't already been beaten to death?
Are you going to live there during the process?
If the answer is yes, are you sure you want to?
We are probably gonna pop the top on our house in 2-3 years and I plan on moving out for the duration. But then I used to be a professional remodeler so I know for an indisputable fact that the cost of you staying there in terms of the workers dealing with your shit will be far more than the cost of moving out for 3-4 months.
I would think long and hard about the decision to forego an architect. Do you need to get your plans stamped by an engineer or an architect before you get a permit?
Can your existing foundation support the loads of an upper level addition? Often, beefing up an existing foundation and dropping loads to knew footings are necessary. In some cases supporting the upper level outside of the existing structure (or parts of it) is a better solution than remedial work on an existing structure.
Do you have a site plan with setbacks, footprint and tree drip line?
Absolutely not living there during construction. The kitchen won't have a roof and the main breaker panel needs to be replaced so we won't have power. We also need to move and replace the HVAC. That and 2 kids with 2 dogs in a 1200 sqft house without a roof on 30% of it during a California summer... no way.
I'm a licensed PE, and I know for home reno purposes the titles architect and engineer get thrown back and forth. Architects are not PE's, architects make pretty designs. PE's figure out how to make it actually work, meet code and are ultimately responsible for the building if it collapses due to poor design. We will need to get stamped plans to meet California seismic code before we go for a permit.
How comfortable are you with nailing the "it looks like it was always there" part of the project?Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSapp
Or, with getting to the most elegant (efficient) arrangement of spaces, in concert with the above?
Or, balancing the elegance/simplicity of the structural solution with the elegance/simplicity of the above?
[ie, can you itemize the elements that are crucial to creating this result?]
If these are important to you, then talk to someone who does a lot of remodels/additions.
I'd suggest 8% of construction cost for design help (with you doing your own structural) is pretty insignificant in the scale of the work. Might be worth it...it's likely less than the cost of your siding package. Might be less percentage wise since you aren't doing a kitchen type space with lots of interiors & cabinetry etc.
The GC is going to earn his percentage for valuable reasons. An architect will earn his money too.
Any industry architect friends who could give you notes for your current design? Might be a way to do it for a beer & dinner...[i'm actually doing this today for our structural engineer who is building his own house]
It also may not matter to you, and that's fine. Ultimately we've all got to make our own priorities. Just throwing it out there...
^^^^^
This. The design is what you will be paying to build, regardless and affecting your family's daily lives. Short term 'pain' for long term gain.....and to avoid the woulda, coulda, shoulda's.
The house is a mid 1960's 3/2, raised foundation. 2 of my neighbors have done renovations and had asbestos in the sheetrock, I'm assuming similar here. Current foundation cannot support the load of a second floor. Need to retrofit the current raised foundation to 18" deep and probably beef up a couple sections of the framing to get the load down. I drew up the full site plan with setbacks to start my floorplan drawings and that's when we realized we were shoehorned into our lot with practically nowhere to go but up. We cannot step outward with foundations, but the GC's I've talked to so far aren't scared of that. Tree drip line can be handled with $400 to the arborists.
I get this, and I've been upfront with every GC I've talked to that my idea is a box on top of a box (classic engineer design) and I DO need help to make it prettier by setting back 2nd floor areas, eves, etc. What I don't get is after I've stared at this for months is spending 15-20k for someone to say I need to set the 2nd floor back from the garage door, change the bathroom door location, not draw any plans for permitting and leave. I'd spend that if they drew the plans in full, signed and stamped, but not just for strictly architectural services. This house and neighborhood isn't the high rent district you dentists live in. This is a college town and I live near a good number of student rentals.Quote:
Originally Posted by acinpdx
As an engineer, I also have a natural disposition to hate architects. It's in the blood. :)
At what point of the remedial work you need to do would it be better to scrape it (or part) and start anew?
And, what is the ‘cost’ of keeping the tree vs considering better or more options if it was not a limiting factor?
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Yeah and unfortunately, Designers and Architects need engineers, too. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSapp
There is also a consulting approach where you can get some design input and you do the drawings. Hell, I'd do the drawings for less than half that cost....and in 3D.
Seriously, though, I've lost count on how many additions, remodels and new construction projects and mind boggling scenarios in which I've been involved. Not only from the design side but also the guy doing the work. Having another set of eyes looking over your shoulder and offering other 'what ifs', typically helps you get out of tunnel vision due to your being 'too close' to the project and not necessarily seeing longer view and other very good possibilities.
For a total replacement, I'd need to find a guy that would demo and rebuild a 2,000sf house in Northern California for $140/sf. If I did find that guy, I wouldn't hire him. That's at least $60-150/sf under the going rate. And the good builders are all eyeing insurance work in Napa/Sonoma/Paradise that is on the horizon, so prices are going up. I'm prepared that my kitchen will likely need to be removed, salvaged and reinstalled in place to facilitate the foundation work, but that is unknown at this time. We like the layout, granite, appliances and sink. The cabinets aren't great but they serve their purpose. Flooring is currently fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
The tree can be trimmed back for $500, and is probably due this winter for a visit from the arborist anyway for some thinning. The trunk is ~25' from the front of house with a couple major branches pointed toward the house, but nothing overhanging. Not a city tree so I can 86 it if necessary. I don't see how the tree would be limiting too much other than bringing in a truck crane to set some prebuilt trusses. It's right behind the sidewalk within the setback zone so I can't build there if I wanted to. I'm not going to maul a 60 year old tree so the framer can be done 3 days faster.
We have a 30's house with knob and tube and blown in insulation. The insulation is not asbestos, so don't assume yours is. (There's also some insulation consisting of old newspapers, 1933.) We do have asbestos on the ducts and the old gravity furnace which we have left in place. The next owner can worry about that. When we added a second story the electrician advised leaving the knob and tube for the lighting fixtures; he felt just as safe as replacing with Romex. We did add grounded outlets on the ground floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by knopfler
You've now spent months on it. And you're not dead clear on how everything relates?Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSapp
Your GC just wants to know what to do. While they're happy to offer opinions, they aren't necessarily trained for giving architectural ones. And you know how burdensome it is changing direction during construction.
You're going to spend six figures building this -- that's a vast expenditure, one you're not likely to make again...
don't you think it's worth getting it dialed before you build?
I know it's fun to dis architects, but they do more than provide a stamp or pretty pictures on "blueprints".
i don't know if it's the right number or not, but I'd expect a lot of work for $15-20k...
For a college town CA ranch, in a neighborhood with no other custom homes, an architect is overkill IMO.
However, they will make it look nicer than any GC winging it will, so pay the money if that is important to you. Sounds like you are going to have to spend something to get past permitting anyways so it might not be that much more expensive.
AC, I've been up front that I need some design help to make it look a bit better, especially the exterior. I also know what these folks cost per hour and giving them 8-12% of the cost should buy me a dude full time for 150 hours of work.
There is not 150 hours of architectural design work here. Say what you will about engineers, but I've seen enough floorplans to get 80% of the way there on an interior.
This is the exterior look that we're trying to match:
https://i.imgur.com/V0oOBTJ.jpg
This is my house, right there dead center of the picture and it looks like this 9 months of the year. Even more leaves during the summer as the branches sag down to the point they clip the top of the van.
This is my concept
https://i.imgur.com/afWbJHn.jpg
A box over the kitchen and garage, because that's where it works. Going over the back bedrooms will shade the pool full time and I don't want that. Staying on the ground and pushing the house forward makes a strange bastard lot piece between me and my neighbor. I need that backyard space on the right for the dogs.
Engineering design, yes, we will absolutely need that for a second floor addition in CA. Interior design, probably a bit of that so our finishes don't clash horribly. If you're calling that architecture, then sure, I need that. Beyond that, I need someone to review my floorplan and someone to come up with an exterior appearance that looks decent enough for January-March when the tree drops its leaves. The long and short is this isn't the Taj Mahal. I probably do need to get a consulting architect to get this across the finish line, but this isn't rocket science.
Big red flag there IMO. Builders and GCs are not architects. And architects are not builders either. Sometimes you find one who is both, architect by education and certification, and builder by experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSapp
Find an architect who's been 'doing this' for 25 or 30 years and compare the design work of the two, the architect's designs will come out on top all the time. Either that or you have a really bad architect, or a very rare exception of a builder.
DJ, imgs not showing in your post on the web?
(edit) see some on the app..."exterior look" image not showing in either one
Perhaps the biggest thing an architect can do is draw up specs on architectural details, materials and fixtures to be used, etc. and the contractor can bid the contract based on those specs That way you don't find out that the fixtures and materials the contractor uses are the cheapest, shoddiest available. That said, of the 4 remodeling jobs we've done (not including the one where we were the GC) not one of them had a contract that met all the requirements for a binding contract in CA.
With the last couple of jobs the contractor bid foundation, framing, closing in, and drywall, and left things like fixtures and cabinets up to us to provide, and the finish carpentry up to me to do. It's a nice way to do it--the contract is a lot less complicated and it allows you to make decisions on the finish work on the fly, and the finish work is fun for me. These were relatively small projects, though, so we were able to have a good idea what the stuff we were to provide would cost. I wouldn't want to do it for a whole house. (I wouldn't want to contract a whole house, period.)
I'm shocked by how bad the contractors I've worked with are at drawing up contracts that protect them. They seem to put an awful lot of trust in clients when they write contracts that they could legally get stiffed on.