Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is that typical of 50s houses? I think in the 50s I've been in (and lived in) it was installed with central heating. Older homes usually have radiators, I've seen rather old looking radiators in old houses that had to have been pre-1950s.
50s homes in New England and downstate NY rarely had central A/C. Homes with built in A/C didn't become the norm until maybe the 80s. Certainly most Massachusetts homes don't have central A/C, though most have room A/C. Probably most NYC apartment buildings from that era don't have central A/C either (all from the last 100 years had heat*). I think most, of not almost all, were built with central heating (radiators). I'd guess most didn't have built in garages.
*100 year old NYC apartment buildings seem to have too much heat rather too little. Windows open in mid-winter!
I've never heard of a 1950s house that did not have central heat. I'm also from Long Island and I've lived in four 1950s homes.
Long Island was rather late on adapting to central air. Perhaps we didn't need it as much as inland areas do.
My grandmother's apartment building in NYC was probably built in the late 1900-early 20s. I also remember those iron radiators. The embossing on them was Victorian.
The absolute worst house that I ever owned on Long Island was built in 2001. For us. It was high end, high priced and built like crap.
We had a problem with black mold because the basement leaked. The roof leaked also.
Want to talk about planned obsolesce? Within five years, several windows needed replacement. The floors were hardwood downstairs - but some very low grade of hardwood.
The oil burner "went" after ten years.
By the tenth year mark all of the homes were falling apart and the neighbors were complaining and selling. So were we. Very hard to do with black mold.
We were in the up-market North Shore, but as to quality, I'd have preferred a house in blue collar Levittown, any day in the week.
Now I live in a home built in 1918. It's warm in the winter and cool in the Summer. We have CAC and we seldom use it. It's layout is quite open and livable. Not a Victorian.
We specifically looked for either a custom built Mid Century modern house, or a pre WWII home.
These "life expectancies" you post are basically CYA stuff. Most things last longer than their stated "life expectancy", particularly windows, especially if you're going to add in "a few (?) dollars on materials, and a few hours of labor to refurbish them".
I can buy a quart of window glazing putty for about $11, I can buy a pack of 85 glazier points for less than $3, and I can buy 100' of sash cord for about $8. That's about $4.40 per window. Modern windows aren't designed to be serviced.
Quote:
Here is what your link said:
**The following material was developed for the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) Economics Department based on asurvey of manufacturers, trade associations and product researchers.Many factors affect the life expectancy of housing components and need to be considered when making replacement decisions, including the quality of the components, the quality of their installation, their level of maintenance, weather and climatic conditions, and intensity of their use. Some components remain functional but become obsolete because of changing styles and tastes or because of product improvements. Note that the following life expectancy estimates are provided largely by the industries or manufacturers that make and sell the components listed.**
Yes, some things will last longer, and some things will fail sooner.
I can buy a quart of window glazing putty for about $11, I can buy a pack of 85 glazier points for less than $3, and I can buy 100' of sash cord for about $8. That's about $4.40 per window. Modern windows aren't designed to be serviced.
Agreed! Why are replacement windows called "replacement windows"? Because you'll be replacing them again!!!
But seriously, reglazing is not that difficult. I know someone who spent 16K on all new windows and siding for their house in southern New England. Are they going to save that much in heating and cooling costs? I don't think so.
Previous generations were much better about fixing rather than replacing. I like to do that myself. Even when you look at things like appliances - Grandmas washer lasted over 30 years and I could've fixed it but was talked out of it. The one I bought to replace it has had more problems than hers ever did at less than 20 years (both Maytag), and the one I buy to replace that I know I'll be lucky to get 10 years out of.
I think that 100 years from now, houses built now will not have held up as well as houses built 100 years ago.
We live in a disposable society. Why should housing be any different?
A neighbor was telling me about his brother-in-law who built a new house. (he was thinking about buying and renovating a house in the neighborhood, but got scared off by the amount of work needed) The brother-in-law went away for a week or so. While he was gone, there was a plumbing leak, and every bit of sub-floor that got wet, had to be replaced.
I was also going to talk about this a little more. It's not so much that the neighborhoods are disposable, but that we live in a "throw-away" society. When problems develop in one's current neighborhood, most people believe it's easier to just move to a new neighborhood.
This is happening in Youngstown, and its southern suburb of Boardman. (and, to a lesser extent, its western suburb of Austintown, and northern suburb of Liberty) When I first joined this site, the anti-city regulars just told potential newcomers to be sure to live in the suburbs. But now, the same anti-city types tell people to live in certain parts of the suburb that are sufficiently far away from the city. This is because the problems caused by disinvestment (increased number of renters, increase in crime, etc.) are spreading into the suburbs.
Could you please tell me what that has to do with "disposable housing"? I have been helping first my dad, then my husband with building projects since the Kennedy administration. I don't get the significance. Every floor needs a sub-floor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C
Sure, but you asked for evidence in your last post, so I gave one example.
Well, OK, but I agree with nei here. It wasn't so much you, either that was referring to "certain people" as undesirable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
Rarely are the better off neighborhoods of decades ago decline so far as to become future ghettoes. You could probably find some examples, but it's not the norm and usually from some other greater regional or demographic shift. Generally, the cheapest neighborhoods are the most likely to decline.
The usual in the Massachusetts forum is tell people to always avoid Springfield, and then it has a few, often veracious defenders. A bit sad, but a bit understandable.
The expanding zone of decay is only common in certain cities. I was skeptical this situation really existed:
Perhaps this pattern is worthy of its own thread; it's already been mentioned in two separate threads.
On the Denver forum, there's always someone telling newcomers to avoid certain areas, generally Aurora. Then the Aurora defenders show up and say "Aurora is more than a ghetto", yada, yada.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 03-30-2014 at 11:47 AM..
Agreed! Why are replacement windows called "replacement windows"? Because you'll be replacing them again!!!
But seriously, reglazing is not that difficult. I know someone who spent 16K on all new windows and siding for their house in southern New England. Are they going to save that much in heating and cooling costs? I don't think so.
Previous generations were much better about fixing rather than replacing. I like to do that myself. Even when you look at things like appliances - Grandmas washer lasted over 30 years and I could've fixed it but was talked out of it. The one I bought to replace it has had more problems than hers ever did at less than 20 years (both Maytag), and the one I buy to replace that I know I'll be lucky to get 10 years out of.
I think that 100 years from now, houses built now will not have held up as well as houses built 100 years ago.
We live in a disposable society. Why should housing be any different?
I agree people are more inclined to replace some things than fix them these days. I just saw a line about that in a movie, something about fixing vs replacing a computer. And who takes their shoes to the shoe repair person like we used to in my family?
I do not agree however, that one can make a blanket statement that everything was built better "back then". And "replacement windows" are called replacement b/c you're replacing the old ones! We spent a rather large amount of money (I'm not going to say how much) getting new windows, and although we may not live long enough to see the payback, the house is more comfortable and they look a lot better and function a lot better than the previous windows. The sliders slide better, the cranks crank better, etc.
Could you please tell me what that has to do with "disposable housing"? I have been helping first my dad, then my husband with building projects since the Kennedy administration. I don't get the significance. Every floor needs a sub-floor.
Well, OK, but I agree with nei here.
On the Denver forum, there's always someone telling newcomers to avoid certain areas, generally Aurora. Then the Aurora defenders show up and say "Aurora is more than a ghetto", yada, yada.
In an old house, with a real wood (or even some better plywood) subfloor, replacement wouldn't have been necessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
I agree people are more inclined to replace some things than fix them these days. I just saw a line about that in a movie, something about fixing vs replacing a computer. And who takes their shoes to the shoe repair person like we used to in my family?
I do not agree however, that one can make a blanket statement that everything was built better "back then". And "replacement windows" are called replacement b/c you're replacing the old ones! We spent a rather large amount of money (I'm not going to say how much) getting new windows, and although we may not live long enough to see the payback, the house is more comfortable and they look a lot better and function a lot better than the previous windows. The sliders slide better, the cranks crank better, etc.
After being refurbished, the original windows in my current house look much better and operate much easier than the vinyl replacements in my previous house.
In an old house, with a real wood (or even some better plywood) subfloor, replacement wouldn't have been necessary.
After being refurbished, the original windows in my current house look much better and operate much easier than the vinyl replacements in my previous house.
How do you know that? How severe was the leak, etc?
It is a mixed bag. Insulation is better but doors are hollow. There are tougher requirements, but lower quality materials and less craftsmanship.
It isn't hard to get a solid door.
The question is why would you want a solid door? You can buy an insulated door (sound insulation) that does a better job of keeping noise out (big problem is still the cracks), uses less materials, weighs less, will last just as long.
Now, the solid doors are sturdier, so if you have a habit of trying to kick doors in to break the latches rather than using the door knob, a solid door is clearly a winner. I don't personally have a habit of doing that. I want a solid door on my front door for security reasons, but I would rather have a hollow door for the interior. It weighs less, costs less, does the same job.
Rarely are the better off neighborhoods of decades ago decline so far as to become future ghettoes. You could probably find some examples, but it's not the norm and usually from some other greater regional or demographic shift. Generally, the cheapest neighborhoods are the most likely to decline.
Typically the better-off neighborhoods only go in one direction, the "Favored Quarter" (typically upwind or on higher ground) while other directions prove less fortunate. It's actually pretty common where I live; a lot of neighborhoods that were considered quite fancy for the first few decades of their life have fallen into decay, especially as the high-tech industries and high-end shopping amenities around them proved less than permanent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
