Slashdot Mirror
Making a House That Will Last for Centuries?
tcyun asks: "The intro text from kaisyain's review brought up a thought that has been floating around in my head as I am a new home-owner. If one wanted to design a home that would last for hundreds of years, what would one have to do? I, and many of my friends, have recently/ purchased homes. As with all homes, some things are in good shape, others are not. Many items are the fault of initial design, many are due to poor upkeep and repairs. Looking around, it is possible to have a home last for hundreds of years (my family's ancestral home is about 400 years old and there are castles in Europe that are older). If one wanted to build/modify a home, what would one need to do to make sure that the home would still be standing, and usable, hundreds of years from now?" M : Wired suggests going underground.
"A few elements come to mind: structural integrity, usability, reparability, ease of upkeep, physical location (geology and neighborhood), technology, and aesthetics.
- Structural integrity: Rock lasts a long time, but has a variety of draw backs. Concrete (poured or cinder block) foundations are common where I live but wood is still the material used for most of the structure. Should steel cross-beams be considered for parts of the structure? I have heard good things about laminated/engineered wood.
- Technology: Folks on Slashdot have talked about wiring homes with cat-5/7/x and installing empty conduit 'just in case.' Is this really useful with the proliferation of wireless? Would it be more useful if a crawlspace was made available between the ceiling and the attic so that any type of ducting/wiring could be run into a room? Should all rooms have access to a central column through which wiring, plumbing and ducting were run?
- Usability: I have a small house with a small, combined living-family-dining room. I am fairly sure that 50 years ago the designers were not laying out the space to take into account book shelves, a large television, stereo cabinet, gaming consoles, and more in addition to a couch, chair and dining table. Simply making the room larger is one option, but cavernous space is not necessarily good for usability. What would be a good floor plan and how might different sized rooms be distributed to be useful over time for multiple purposes? Would it need a bathroom? (joke)
- Reparability: the previous homeowners made a number of DIY 'improvements' which are nice, until one needs to make a repair. Many items are installed in ways where the only option is to remove entire installations. What types of modular improvements can be made that allow for easy repair/replacement over time as needs change?
- Location: How would one choose where to build a home that would last for hundreds of years? Do you pick an existing neighborhood, space that is at the edge of a town/city or somewhere further out? Does one pick a neighborhood that has been economically/geologically/stable/safe over the longer term even if it is not in great shape at the moment. At first glance, cities in the United States like San Francisco, Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh have all gone through 10-20 years spells of nastiness, but have been fairly stable cities at the macro level for a hundred years.
- Aesthetics: Does one simply design/architect and deal with the fact that it will variously become attractive/unattractive over time?
And to complicate matters, how different are the options if one imposes a budget for initial construction (depending on your own idea of what a realistic budget is)."
If you are in California and you are really interested in the topic this person brings up, you need to stop by this place outside Victorville along the 15 freeway.
California Institue of Earth Art and Architecture.
Not exactly what you might be looking for. But I want one of these houses. Cool looking, Cheap, Enviromentally friendly, and they will last a long... long... long... time.
Ted
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Just make it from non-boidegradable plastics. Cleaning would be a breeze too. Just wash it out with a hose.
Michael Loves Me!
Yes, it has drawbacks, but if you want a house that will still be usable in three hundred years it's the only way to go. Not only are there many castles and the such still around that were made out of stone, but there's many stone houses as well. For instance, the old rock house on Moore Farm is almost 250 years old now, and still livable.
This comes from *CNN*. inet.porn.house.jpg WTF.
Google for it.
It's a mix of mud and straw commonly used as a building material throughout various times and places. There are houses in Ireland that have withstood centuries of weather and worse with little more than a renewed coat of lime every now and again.
I've used this material myself. It takes temps as hot as 2300F, becomes a more or less solid block once it set, can be built a vertical foot at a session. Amazing amazing stuff.
In space, no one can hear you moo.
A hundred years old, pah! My local pub is around 400 years old, admitedly it's the oldest pub in the city, but not the oldest building by quite a long way I'm sure. The city walls still look pretty good in places, so I'd say stone it is. Or maybe people just look after pubs better becasue they care.
Luke - Bristol, UK
You may be interested in How Buildings Learn - it's about how buildings are altered and adapt to changes (new occupants, new uses, new environment, new technology) over time.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
Here's an interesting product, Timbercrete made onsite from sawdust and cement.
It's cheaper and a better insulator than stone (and just about anything else for that matter).
I'd guess that, if sealed properly, it could last for hundreds of years.
Actaully, archaeologists in China recently determined that were no, (or very few at least) bodies in the wall. The dead laborers were buried in ditches and mass graves near the wall.
-Hudson
When concrete was first invented, someone built a bunch of houses with it as a proof of concept. They were about twice the price of a house of similar size, but required hardly any maintenance, and were inexpensive to heat and cool. Though they are a bit unattractive, almost all of them of them are still standing now, in excellent condition.
Modern concrete homes benefit from preformed window and door holes making them just as livable as conventional houses. They are still much cheaper to heat and cool, and things like brick veneer or vinyl siding make them hard to distinguish from other houses. They also use regular wood for walls and floors, so if you feel the need to remodel, or add wiring, it's just as easy as with a regular house. The only abnormal thing is having to bring new wiring in through a predetermined location.
Termites are a much lower concern, since the steel reinforced concrete has to crack enough for termites to get through. By the time a crack gets big enough for termites to get through, it's probably time to remodel the inside anyway (every 35-50 years). This is a good time to seal the cracks up. Even if they get in before you want to remodel, you can rest well knowing that they aren't eating the expensive outer shell of your house.
The real problem with concrete houses is that they still carry a significant price premium of at least 30%. They are somewhat popular as a hybrid though. Fully finished walk-out 'basements' are very popular nowadays. An entire floor with bedrooms and other living space lets out directly onto ground level in back of the house with lots of windows, and has concrete walls. Ground level for the front of the house is at the second floor.
Good point, if you use steel studs not only are they termite proof but they're fire resistant as well.
The problem with steel is once it gets too hot it loses all structural integrity very rapidly. IE it's fine at X degrees but at X+1 degrees your house just collapsed. A wood beam on the other hand will char on the outside and degrade slowly over time.
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
Ever hear of a heat recovery ventilator?
In colder climates where newer houses are 'super' insulated (e.g. R2000 homes in Canada and other northern climates), ventilation problems are handled by using heat recovery ventilator. These ventilators draw in fresh air from the outside, but extract heat from the stale and moist outgoing air and adds the recovered heat to the incoming fresh air.
This type of system works great if your house uses a forced air heating system. If however you use a radiant heating system (electric, hot water, ..), then you need a separate ventilation system to ensure adequate ventilation
Lexan fogs irrepairably. Plexiglass is probably a better solution.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
"our wood products now are much stronger/better"
Bullshit. Modern wood isn't milled the same way as it used to... they now get more board feet out of a tree, but the wood is also more prone to twisting and warping (they now cut it perpedicular to the grain instead of parallel, or vice versa, I can't remember which way is which).
Having worked in construction for 8+ years, and having worked with both old wood (from renovating old homes) and new wood, I *much* prefer the old stuff... much more solid.
- Jester
I have to agree with just about all of this.
I live in an apartment built 30 years ago and there is no insulation, the walls are paper thin, all windows and glass doors are single paned, and the appearance is hideous from the outside. From what I've been told, the main focus in Japanese architecture is to keep the construction as light as possible to prevent overheating in the summer. What this amounts to is sub zero temperatures inside during the winter and barely tolerable temperatures during the summer.
Likewise, the "puzzle" construction that the Japanese use to create joints is impossible to deconstruct and replace rotted wooden beams. In Western housing that uses metal joints, it is a matter of removing the beam and replacing it. In Japan, it requires a full rebuild or at the least an ugly patch. The wife's parents just went through this last year when they remodeled their home. Several beams were rotting and the cost-benefit analysis showed that simply tearing the room down and starting from scratch would be cheaper than trying to keep the older architecture intact.
Under the particle board, a Japanese house is a lesson in how not to build a house to last the centuries.
I have been pwned because my
The oldest church in South Carolina is made of rammed earth as well as the oldest church in the San Francisco area (towers that Hanibal built in Spain are also still standing). The new techniques of using rebar to tie the pad and rehinforcing top beam together is great. Here's a good book on it.
We're planning on having a rammed earth ground floor with a timber framed second story. The ground floor is going to be designed for additions to be added on as needed (large doorways in exterior walls).
For interior use, we're going to use a manifold system that will pipe water to where ever it's to be used. You can think of it as two hubs, one hot, one cold and flexible pcv/vinal lines that run, in the ceiling, from the hub to the faucet. This gives you flexibility in placing sinks and such or even repurposing rooms. For sewage, that'll run under the floor. This'll be accessable from the basement. We're looking into grey water recovery as we'll be doing this in New Mexico (not that any place can't stand some water conservation).
For networking, am going to be running hamster tunnels (smurf tunnels?) along the base of the walls as well as along the top of the walls, between ceiling and upper floor. Don't know about adding wireless access points/antennas to the system.
The layout of the house will also make use of berming along the north walls and a porch along the south walls that will block most of the summer sun but allow winter sun to heat the place. Some of this design will come from earthships being built in New Mexico. We'd like to be totally off the net, but our love of tech makes this a distant dream (unless low power laptops take over for just about everything).
I drank what? -- Socrates
It's on the Canadian Shield. Some of the most geologically stable land in the world. Few tornadoes also (well, at least in Duluth, its a giant hill so...) Very, very, very low chance of earthquakes (caused by the crust warping back up from the glaciers--about one millimeter a year, most of the quakes are in S MN though.) Not many big cities that could be a target in a war/terrorist situation. Lots of iron ore mines in the Arrowhead region though,take that as you see it. Or alternatively any Canadian province on the Canadian shield.
Plenty of Roman concrete (not 'reinforced' in the modern sense of internal iron structure, but cased with brick on the outside for better wear) survives and survives well. Some of it's still in use. Look at the Pantheon in Rome, which was built in the 2nd century CE with progressively lighter densities of concrete (the top of the dome is primarily pumice), and survives just fine. And unlike things like the Great Wall or the pyramids, Roman concrete architecture was used for everyday living spaces, including multistory apartment buildings, which survive (not quite livable though) in places like Ostia (the port at the old mouth of the Tiber).
Philadelphia is also home to the oldest continually inhabited street: Elfrith's Alley. Some of the homes there are all well over 300 years old.
The homes are all brick townhomes, about 4 stories tall. They have been kept in good repair for all of their existance.
Most of them started off as rental properties for Sea Captains and Trader's who frequented the city. They whole block narrowly dodged a fire in the 19th century, and were almost demolished to make room for I-95 in the 1950's. The only thing that saved them was a community organization and a historical designation.
I think someone about pointed out: having a house last hundreds of years is primarily dumb luck. Continual upkeep and habitation helps. After a while you need nothing short of a historical designation to keep it from being knocked over by progress.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
You know, that CRAPPY TRASH made of glue and sawdust/wood chips!
. html
And cut your own wood! Get a DIY sawmill, I mean really get one, they are not that expensive.
Measure some boards from the lumberyard and see why.
Measure a 2x4 and get back with me. Or measure a 2x12 and see what you get.
In the day of the 11ozs of coffee in a 16oz can consider that they are screwing you on wood.
Cut 8x8's or bigger. Go look at some of the old houses built during the 1600's and 1700's up in the northern states. They built those houses to last a LONG time, and they are still here 200 and 300 years later.. No chipboard or sawdust boards in those homes!
Or, just go buy a used castle. There are some islands for sale that have castles on them.
http://www.vladi-private-islands.de/home_e
There also used to be a rumor that skeletons were left inside of the Hoover Dam, but as this would have, if nothing else, greatly weakened the structure as the body decayed, no bodies were left behind (this is also why skeletons wouldn't have been left inside of the Great Wall).
I wonder why the oldest history book we have says that the Egyptians Imprisoned the Jews for work; slavery.
I suppose none of the labor on the Pyramids was slave labor?
You suppose correctly, actually- the pyramids predate Israelite captivity by centuries- the pyramids at Giza were built 400-500 years before Abraham, actually. The Israelites built a number of storage cities for the pharaohs, but no major pyramids. Also, I'm assuming that when you write "the oldest history book we have" you mean the Bible, which is incorrect- there are extensive Sumerian, Babylonian, Egyptian, and Chinese historical records that all predate the writings of the Pentateuch.
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
Actually Japan has very few old buildings. A huge number of them were leveled in WW2, major earthquakes like the one in 1923 and still more were lost to fire. This includes pretty much all major architectual landmarks as well as ordinary homes.
They were often rebuilt over the years in the same style so they "look" old. Osaka Castle for instance was originally built in 1586, but was destroyed in 1600. The castle was rebuilt and destroyed two more times. Finally in 1931 they rebuilt the castle from old paintings with concrete. The Imperial Palace was rebuilt 10 times due to fire and once due to being leveled in WW2.
Now that isn't to say there aren't any old buildings around, but it is nothing like say, China, Greece, Turkey, etc.
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
Whenever someone quotes the old testaments, you should remember that it was a collection of jewish memories for the use of the jewish people.
When the Bible speaks of the Jewish people being slaved to build pyramids, just remember that they forgot to mention that almost the whole of Egypt was working on the pyramids, and not just the jews.
Also, if you look at modern history sources, you will see that whole congregation of worker where wholly devoted to the construction of pyramids ALL YEAR LONG, and that this particular caste was living by the old pyramids... Think Generations of stonemasons passing knowledge...
The bible (old testament)is just ONE point of view from what happened at the time... the jewish one.
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker