+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Tear It Down

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default Tear It Down

    I'm just kidding, but this looks like another complete gut job. The web-cam does not seem to be working but it looks like the home is being stripped down to the studs. Not much of the original home is left.

    I know the purpose of the program is to show a home being remodeled, but if they were to approach this from an economic point of view, it would be cheaper to tear the building down and build a new home(s).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    I agree, What percentage of the original 1870 home will be left at end of show. From the first to second episode it has gone from 1 foundation wall replaced to 2, Firewall and stairs wwent from reused to replaced, bay window went from reused to replaced, the front entry was replaced, the original sheathing was ok to new sheathing covering original sheathing, the entire roof structure not just the roof was replaced. The original question was to the contractor was if it shouldn't be torn down, the decision not to looks more questionable by the episode. how do we influence the show to state the final percentage of the original structure remains at completion?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    7,193

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    I'm not a fan of old buildings either, but I understand why someone would try to salvage one. There are many reasons to work with an old structure over razing and building new, the first of which is that many historic provinces won't allow "new" construction, you can only rehab what is there AND it has to be done to period architecture, at least on the outside. Some folks love old structures and restoring them to their original glory. Old homes have a character to them, even when massively reconstructed, that new construction cannot simulate or replicate. The list goes on.

    BTW, I'd rather have a 100 year old home than any of the garbage that now passes for housing.
    I suffer from CDO ... Its like OCD, but in alphabetical order, LIKE IT SHOULD BE!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Great White North
    Posts
    4,045

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    Quote Originally Posted by A. Spruce View Post
    BTW, I'd rather have a 100 year old home than any of the garbage that now passes for housing.
    Yes and no.
    As the saying goes .... they don't build them like they used to ... is sometimes a good thing. Modern building techniques can be far better ( for the most part ) than some older methods. It depends on *who* is doing the work that makes the difference.
    "" an ounce of perception -- a pound of obscure "
    - Rush

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    And it doesn't have 100 years of use and neglect.when do you stop trearing out and start replacing

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shamokin, Pa.
    Posts
    645

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    Quote Originally Posted by canuk View Post
    Yes and no.
    As the saying goes .... they don't build them like they used to ... is sometimes a good thing. Modern building techniques can be far better ( for the most part ) than some older methods. It depends on *who* is doing the work that makes the difference.
    You beat me to the post !!!!!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    not sure if this would have applied to this project, but here in ottawa Canada, builders can often get around certain regulations by "renovating" an old house as opposed to ripping down and starting fresh. obviously, in some cases, getting permits and whatnot are a bit easier too.
    I.E. I've seen/heard of situations where setbacks/height or size restrictions etc have changed multiple times in certain neighborhoods, in one case being significantly reduced on one side of the house and being significantly increased on another side. In *most* cases, the setbacks/regulations in place at the time the specific portion of the house was built take precedence, unless it's obvious that it's clearly way over the property line/in violation of other key safety violations. We've seen it done in a few instances where a builder will rip down sections of a house where following the new setbacks/regulations will be an advantage, and leave one or two corners where the old setbacks/regulations will be beneficial.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    24

    Default Re: Tear It Down

    Quote Originally Posted by A. Spruce View Post
    I'm not a fan of old buildings either
    ...says the guy on the This Old House message board.

    (No reply needed - I'm not trying to be critical, I just saw some humor in the statement.)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •