On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:33:13 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 7:23 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:00:34 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 6:29 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
Please define "McMansion". I see people deriding them all over but no one can
define the term, other than "it's some house *I* don't like (usually for
unstated, possibly green-to-the-gills reasons)".


Wiki does a decent job of describing it.....

"In American suburban communities, McMansion is a pejorative for a type
of large, new luxury house which is judged to be incongruous for its
neighborhood. Alternately, a McMansion can be a large, new house in a
sub-division of similarly large houses, which all seem mass produced and
lacking distinguishing characteristics, as well as at variance with the
traditional local architecture.[1]"

"Variance with local architecture?" Well, I guess any new house in town is a
"McMansion".


What part of "as well as" do you not get?

SO if it only meets two of three of the above criteria, it's not a McMansion?

Hmm, you believe large houses in a subdivision of large houses are evil?


Wow, really? When did I say anything about evil?

Read on...

That definition reeks of silly envy.


I think you're inferring a lot.

Raead on...

and...

"The term "McMansion" is generally used to denote a new, or recent,
multi-story house of no clear architectural style,[8] with a notably
larger footprint than the existing houses in its neighborhood. It may
seem too large for its lot, closely abutting upon the property
boundaries and appearing to crowd adjacent homes. A McMansion is either
located in a newer, larger subdivision or replaces an existing, smaller
structure in an older neighborhood."

That definition is at odds with the first definition.


I don't see it being at odds, at all.

I certainly do. Or is a "McMansion" just any house you don't like?

What is *your* definition?


What's your agenda, here? You clearly have one and are trying to steer
me into it. So just get to it.

It's hard to understand you when there are no common words.

I think I made the reasoning behind my objection to these houses pretty
clear. There's no hidden malice or envy involved. I think they are f'n
ugly and completely lacking in style.

Your other posts in the thread belie this.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:50:54 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 7:36 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:06:39 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 7:00 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 7/26/12 6:29 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
Please define "McMansion". I see people deriding them all over but no
one can
define the term, other than "it's some house *I* don't like (usually for
unstated, possibly green-to-the-gills reasons)".


Wiki does a decent job of describing it.....

"In American suburban communities, McMansion is a pejorative for a type
of large, new luxury house which is judged to be incongruous for its
neighborhood. Alternately, a McMansion can be a large, new house in a
sub-division of similarly large houses, which all seem mass produced and
lacking distinguishing characteristics, as well as at variance with the
traditional local architecture.[1]"

and...

"The term "McMansion" is generally used to denote a new, or recent,
multi-story house of no clear architectural style,[8] with a notably
larger footprint than the existing houses in its neighborhood. It may
seem too large for its lot, closely abutting upon the property
boundaries and appearing to crowd adjacent homes. A McMansion is either
located in a newer, larger subdivision or replaces an existing, smaller
structure in an older neighborhood."



I found this image while goggling it. Comes from another critic.
Pretty funny....
http://xrl.us/mcmansion

That's pretty ugly, agreed, but hardly a definition. Just seems to me that
those using the term "McMansion" are just a little green. ...particularly
those who use derisive over-generalizations like;

"up to their eyeballs in debt, two paychecks away from bankruptcy,
because they are financing a bunch of stuff they don't want or need
to impress a bunch of people they don't like."


Over generalization? Not entirely. I live next to one of the richest
counties in the country. It also happens to be (was, perhaps) in the
top 10 counties for bankruptcies.

Yes, over-generalization. You assume that if it's a big house the owner can't
afford it and only owns it to try to impress you. That's absurd.

Really, why do you care what others have?


I don't.

Obviously you do. You certainly show animus towards those who have more than
you.

But I do care that so many people in this country are so far
in debt.

....and your derision for what people own changes that how?

It affects all of us. It affect our economy, or have you forgotten 2008
already?

If you can't see the over-generalization, you're blind.

-MIKE- wrote:
On 7/26/12 2:45 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:


Here's the deal. I studied architecture in college. Unfortunately,
though I studied enough to know that the style mixing I see is
horribly wrong, I didn't study enough to know how to properly
explain it. :-)

I can see where one might hold that opinion, but mixing styles has
taken places for longer than we're talking about. For hundreds of
years - thousands of years even. One might not like it, but to say
that any college could teach that it is wrong is only a reflection
of a given professor's view point.


For the record, I don't remember an instructor ever saying that...
it's my opinion.

My bad - I misunderstood your intent when I first read your comment.


--

-Mike-

-MIKE- wrote:

It affects all of us. It affect our economy, or have you forgotten
2008 already?

What the hell kind of question is that? Some of us here have trouble
remembering last week, and you're throwing numbers like 2008 out there?
That just ain't right...

--

-Mike-

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:26:37 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

-MIKE- wrote:

It affects all of us. It affect our economy, or have you forgotten
2008 already?

What the hell kind of question is that? Some of us here have trouble
remembering last week, and you're throwing numbers like 2008 out there?
That just ain't right...

;-)

On 7/26/12 7:57 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:50:54 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 7:36 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:06:39 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 7/26/12 7:00 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 7/26/12 6:29 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
Please define "McMansion". I see people deriding them all over but no
one can
define the term, other than "it's some house *I* don't like (usually for
unstated, possibly green-to-the-gills reasons)".


Wiki does a decent job of describing it.....

"In American suburban communities, McMansion is a pejorative for a type
of large, new luxury house which is judged to be incongruous for its
neighborhood. Alternately, a McMansion can be a large, new house in a
sub-division of similarly large houses, which all seem mass produced and
lacking distinguishing characteristics, as well as at variance with the
traditional local architecture.[1]"

and...

"The term "McMansion" is generally used to denote a new, or recent,
multi-story house of no clear architectural style,[8] with a notably
larger footprint than the existing houses in its neighborhood. It may
seem too large for its lot, closely abutting upon the property
boundaries and appearing to crowd adjacent homes. A McMansion is either
located in a newer, larger subdivision or replaces an existing, smaller
structure in an older neighborhood."



I found this image while goggling it. Comes from another critic.
Pretty funny....
http://xrl.us/mcmansion

That's pretty ugly, agreed, but hardly a definition. Just seems to me that
those using the term "McMansion" are just a little green. ...particularly
those who use derisive over-generalizations like;

"up to their eyeballs in debt, two paychecks away from bankruptcy,
because they are financing a bunch of stuff they don't want or need
to impress a bunch of people they don't like."


Over generalization? Not entirely. I live next to one of the richest
counties in the country. It also happens to be (was, perhaps) in the
top 10 counties for bankruptcies.

Yes, over-generalization. You assume that if it's a big house the owner can't
afford it and only owns it to try to impress you. That's absurd.

Really, why do you care what others have?


I don't.

Obviously you do. You certainly show animus towards those who have more than
you.


More than me? That's a big assumption on your part.


But I do care that so many people in this country are so far
in debt.

...and your derision for what people own changes that how?

It affects all of us. It affect our economy, or have you forgotten 2008
already?

If you can't see the over-generalization, you're blind.


Hey man, if you live in one of these monstrosities, I'm sorry I offended
you. I suggest you get over it. Get your panties out of the wad and
ignore me.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:44:14 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:46:31 -0500, basilisk
wrote:

Stumbled on this while wandering around.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/4235348...3918900066/in/
set-72157622229110201/

Hey, I like those flat-roofed styles.

Jeeze, look at the build price. I'll bet Swingy couldn't do one for that
today.

I'll bet he wouldn't get out of bed for that paltry sum

Just think of that price on a thirty year fixed note, especially after
the inflationary '70's. (providing you managed to still have a job)

basilisk






--
A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:34:24 GMT, basilisk wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:44:14 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:46:31 -0500, basilisk
wrote:

Stumbled on this while wandering around.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/4235348...3918900066/in/
set-72157622229110201/

Hey, I like those flat-roofed styles.

Jeeze, look at the build price. I'll bet Swingy couldn't do one for that
today.

I'll bet he wouldn't get out of bed for that paltry sum

Just think of that price on a thirty year fixed note, especially after
the inflationary '70's. (providing you managed to still have a job)

The '70s is when you wanted a thirty-year fixed note! ;-) ...sorta like
today. ;-)

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon wrote:

I remember my father getting irritated when he was looking for a brick
house and the real estate guy tried to sell him one with brick veneer -
times have changed.


How long ago was that????

Somewhere between 1945-1955 - that's as close as I can remember.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:34:24 GMT, basilisk
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:44:14 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:46:31 -0500, basilisk
wrote:

Stumbled on this while wandering around.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/4235348...3918900066/in/
set-72157622229110201/

Hey, I like those flat-roofed styles.

Jeeze, look at the build price. I'll bet Swingy couldn't do one for that
today.

I'll bet he wouldn't get out of bed for that paltry sum

Just think of that price on a thirty year fixed note, especially after
the inflationary '70's. (providing you managed to still have a job)

I always think of mortgages as doubling the cost of the house, so
that's about $40k, or $111.11 a month. That's easily doable today by
most people, eh? snicker

--
It takes as much energy to wish as to plan.
--Eleanor Roosevelt

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:




Out of curiosity, do any of you know of a builder who's actually building
brick houses today? For the young'uns among you I'm talking of double
wall brick with *no* wooden frame involved.



How long ago was that????

I lived in three of them in my life. Built in 1898, 1948, 1950. All
are still in excellent condition. It was a very popular form of
construction when I lived in Philadelphia but it did give way to frame
and veneer. Mostly a cost and insulation issue.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 22:42:01 -0400, "
Obsessed? Hardly. I've already stated my objection, though you seem to want
to run away from your "statement". Fine.

I agree with your assessment of the architecture but your conclusions are
absurd and condescending.

Typical asshole response. Every message you post is just one looking
for conflict. You really do like being an asshole don't you?

On 7/26/2012 9:57 PM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 22:42:01 -0400, "
Obsessed? Hardly. I've already stated my objection, though you seem to want
to run away from your "statement". Fine.

I agree with your assessment of the architecture but your conclusions are
absurd and condescending.

Typical asshole response. Every message you post is just one looking
for conflict. You really do like being an asshole don't you?


I haven't been here that long, but it didn't take long to figure him out.

Oh well, everybody is wrestling with at leas one dragon. This guy has
a few extra after him. And they are winning!

On 7/26/2012 9:17 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:

I always think of mortgages as doubling the cost of the house, so
that's about $40k, or $111.11 a month. That's easily doable today by
most people, eh?snicker

--


Yes. But look at the price of rent these days!

Dallas average:
http://www.apartmentratings.com/rate...Price&msa=1922

A two bed-room apartment (usually second or third floor) is more than
my brand new mortgage.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:




Out of curiosity, do any of you know of a builder who's actually building
brick houses today? For the young'uns among you I'm talking of double
wall brick with *no* wooden frame involved.



How long ago was that????

I lived in three of them in my life. Built in 1898, 1948, 1950. All
are still in excellent condition. It was a very popular form of
construction when I lived in Philadelphia but it did give way to frame
and veneer. Mostly a cost and insulation issue.

St Louis is full of them. I've never seen so many bricks in my life ...
close your eyes at night and you see bricks on the backs of your eyelids.

--
www.ewoodshop.com

"Richard" wrote:

Yes. But look at the price of rent these days!

Dallas average:
http://www.apartmentratings.com/rate...Price&msa=1922

A two bed-room apartment (usually second or third floor) is more
than
my brand new mortgage.

-----------------------------------
Here in SoCal, that would be the low rent district.

Lew

Swingman wrote in
:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:




Out of curiosity, do any of you know of a builder who's actually
building brick houses today? For the young'uns among you I'm
talking of double wall brick with *no* wooden frame involved.



How long ago was that????

I lived in three of them in my life. Built in 1898, 1948, 1950. All
are still in excellent condition. It was a very popular form of
construction when I lived in Philadelphia but it did give way to
frame and veneer. Mostly a cost and insulation issue.

St Louis is full of them. I've never seen so many bricks in my life
... close your eyes at night and you see bricks on the backs of your
eyelids.

Google "prinsengracht amsterdam" Go to streetview anywhere on the map.
Brick, pure brick ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
eb.com...

--------------------------------------
Last of the "Full Brick" construction (Concrete block inner, brick
outer) was built in the late '40's.

After that, "Brick Veneer" construction (Frame inner, brick outer) was
the standard offering.

This would have been the NE Ohio market.


My wife and her sister came into this house [
http://www.pbase.com/speedracer/image/79076095 ] about 30 miles from San
Antonio in 2002 and we soon bought her sister's half. It was built after
WWII and prior to 1950. Exterior walls are a hollow yellow clay tile block
with a full brick veneer; wall thickness is ~8-3/4 inches. At all the
window openings the interior side of the wall tile blocks are wider by four
or five inches a side to allow for the rope and pulley window weights.
Replacing the 35 X 36 kitchen window required the 'brick-to-brick'
measurement to fit the new unit between the brick and then boxing in and
reconfiguring the interior trim. Otherwise, you'd be looking a four of five
inches of the backside of the brick veneer.
There is a centered, load-bearing stud wall [front-to-back] and a
handful of partition walls that connect with the exterior walls and
everywhere there is contact between the two has seen drywall tape come
undone. I've done away with the tape altogether. Thankfully, there is
Liquid Nails or, I theorize, Loc-tite adhesive since I can get away without
sealing the color down prior to painting. I'm guessing the rate of
expansion/contraction eventually pulls the two walls apart. The Liquid
Nails fix has shown new cracks where the central, load-bearing wall meets
the exterior walls at both ends - front and back. So far [three years down
the road] the cross-walls are holding in the corners. Several years of
drought conditions, I believe, are a contributing factor. I wish I knew
what kind of footing(s) those walls are sitting on.

Dave in Texas

"Han" wrote in message ...

Swingman wrote in
:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:




Out of curiosity, do any of you know of a builder who's actually
building brick houses today? For the young'uns among you I'm
talking of double wall brick with *no* wooden frame involved.



How long ago was that????

I lived in three of them in my life. Built in 1898, 1948, 1950. All
are still in excellent condition. It was a very popular form of
construction when I lived in Philadelphia but it did give way to
frame and veneer. Mostly a cost and insulation issue.

St Louis is full of them. I've never seen so many bricks in my life
... close your eyes at night and you see bricks on the backs of your
eyelids.

Google "prinsengracht amsterdam" Go to streetview anywhere on the map.
Brick, pure brick ...


Were they built on wood pilings like many of the buildings I saw there?
Like this one: http://www.pbase.com/speedracer/image/116048429

Dave in Texas

"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

Dave in Texas

"-MIKE-" wrote in message ...

On 7/26/12 12:24 PM, Swingman wrote:
I doubt that ... most of those tract and custom plan houses built in the
fifties to mid sixties were well built with a skilled labor pool, if a
bit shy or room sizes and ammenities, and much of the framing lumber was
old growth and higher quality than today's plantation grown material.


I agree. Keep in mind that those houses had to be put up very quickly,
due to the fact that the boomers were being born and suburbia was
exploding. What allowed them go up quickly was that simply design, not
any shortcuts and lack of skill by the carpenters of that time.


Hey, Swing, think Sharpstown or Oak Forest as post-WWII tract-housing
booms.

Dave in Texas

"Dave in Texas" wrote in
:

"Han" wrote in message
...

Swingman wrote in
:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:47:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:




Out of curiosity, do any of you know of a builder who's actually
building brick houses today? For the young'uns among you I'm
talking of double wall brick with *no* wooden frame involved.



How long ago was that????

I lived in three of them in my life. Built in 1898, 1948, 1950. All
are still in excellent condition. It was a very popular form of
construction when I lived in Philadelphia but it did give way to
frame and veneer. Mostly a cost and insulation issue.

St Louis is full of them. I've never seen so many bricks in my life
... close your eyes at night and you see bricks on the backs of your
eyelids.

Google "prinsengracht amsterdam" Go to streetview anywhere on the
map. Brick, pure brick ...


Were they built on wood pilings like many of the buildings I saw
there?
Like this one: http://www.pbase.com/speedracer/image/116048429

Dave in Texas

As I understand it, all those houses were built on wood pilings,
centuries ago, and are still standing. Some modern construction is (at
times) damaging them, such as the metro construction. This is because
pumping out water to allow construction makes the mud settle and compact
....

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

We were discussing tract homes built in the 50's to mid 60's. Those did
not have post tension slabs, which are the majority of the slabs that
Olshan specializes in. PTI slabs became ubiquitous in this area in the
late seventies, and are the one's that pay Nolan's fees. Almost every
tract home built in this area since then has a PTI slab.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

"Swingman" wrote in message
...

On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

We were discussing tract homes built in the 50's to mid 60's. Those did
not have post tension slabs, which are the majority of the slabs that
Olshan specializes in. PTI slabs became ubiquitous in this area in the
late seventies, and are the one's that pay Nolan's fees. Almost every
tract home built in this area since then has a PTI slab.

You are right about the high failure rates for post tension slabs and I
will certainly take your word that those are Olshan's bread'n'butter. I
well remember Tom Tynan preaching the the negatives of the post tension
foundation when he blew into Houston back in the early 90s (?) all the while
he was selling Du-West Foundation Repair. I grew up in a 1953 tract house
(South Post Oak and Willowbend) that years ago acquired a slew of concrete
piers (before they started driving the round concrete blocks into the gumbo)
and my current 1957 [non-tract] NW Houston, one-story ranch has 23 piers
under it, done before I bought it in 1990 (me bad for buying into that).

Dave in Texas

On 7/28/2012 9:19 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Swingman" wrote in message
...

On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

We were discussing tract homes built in the 50's to mid 60's. Those did
not have post tension slabs, which are the majority of the slabs that
Olshan specializes in. PTI slabs became ubiquitous in this area in the
late seventies, and are the one's that pay Nolan's fees. Almost every
tract home built in this area since then has a PTI slab.

You are right about the high failure rates for post tension slabs
and I will certainly take your word that those are Olshan's
bread'n'butter. I well remember Tom Tynan preaching the the negatives
of the post tension foundation when he blew into Houston back in the
early 90s (?) all the while he was selling Du-West Foundation Repair. I
grew up in a 1953 tract house (South Post Oak and Willowbend) that
years ago acquired a slew of concrete piers (before they started driving
the round concrete blocks into the gumbo) and my current 1957
[non-tract] NW Houston, one-story ranch has 23 piers under it, done
before I bought it in 1990 (me bad for buying into that).

Post tension slabs are theoretically great for this expansive clay in
Houston, but the spec's have to be religiously followed. Since most of
the developers now use subs who do turnkey slab work, and who do nothing
else, they should have the science down, so now they are generally much
better slabs than they used to be.

Although I will not build with a PTI, if you do things correctly you
should have a pretty good slab. However, most don't builders around here
don't bother to get out of their air conditioned Lexus, take their
blazer off, and follow through.

Biggest problem is getting the concrete at the spec'ed mix (not as big a
problem as it used to be), and in a timely manner (a traffic jam on a
particular day can be the cause of a slab failure years later). A "hot"
load, or one that has to be watered, will develop stress cracks before
the spec'ed time to tension the slab, which does not forebode well for
the future.

When it comes to foundation slabs, I'm on of the few builders around
here who requires test cylinders for every load, has an engineer's tech
on site during the pour, and one of the rarer ones who actually has the
cylinders tested at 7, 14 and 30 days to insure they meet the
compressive strength requirements of the Foundation Plan. (the old
builder trick is to put the concrete contractor on notice that you're
taking test cylinders for the pour, but then either don't take them, or
don't bother to have them tested if you do).

Since the above generally adds about $800 to $1K to the cost of the
house, no modern tract home builder is going to go to that expense in a
subdivision.

In all the times I've done cylinder testing, it saved my bacon on only
one occasion, but it was worth all the money previously spent on
testing, guaranteed.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 7/28/2012 6:20 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"-MIKE-" wrote in message ...

On 7/26/12 12:24 PM, Swingman wrote:
I doubt that ... most of those tract and custom plan houses built in the
fifties to mid sixties were well built with a skilled labor pool, if a
bit shy or room sizes and ammenities, and much of the framing lumber was
old growth and higher quality than today's plantation grown material.


I agree. Keep in mind that those houses had to be put up very quickly,
due to the fact that the boomers were being born and suburbia was
exploding. What allowed them go up quickly was that simply design, not
any shortcuts and lack of skill by the carpenters of that time.


Hey, Swing, think Sharpstown or Oak Forest as post-WWII
tract-housing booms.

Dave in Texas


That area, Sharpstownish, 59 Bellaire, Fondren is loaded with these
type homes.

On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

Dave in Texas

Actually foundations are a problem all along the Texas gulf coast.

On 07/28/2012 08:33 AM, Leon wrote:
On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

Dave in Texas

Actually foundations are a problem all along the Texas gulf coast.


....and in the Arizona desert when poured on top of the caliche soil.


--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill

"Doug Winterburn" wrote in message
.com...

On 07/28/2012 08:33 AM, Leon wrote:
On 7/28/2012 6:17 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

Dave in Texas

Actually foundations are a problem all along the Texas gulf coast.


....and in the Arizona desert when poured on top of the caliche soil.


Isn't caliche wonderful stuff? Especially when wet.

Dave in Texas

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:17:21 -0500, "Dave in Texas"
wrote:

"Leon" wrote in message
m...

Well you either knew how to build homes or you did not. These homes in
the Texas area still look relatively good. You seldom see any
indication of foundation problems or cracks in the brick. I have
probably helped to repaint the interiors of a dozen of these homes and
they still look great, no cracks in the sheet rock.

That would explain why I see Nolan Ryan pitching Olshan foundation
repair every time I turn on the tube.
Actually, foundation failures are very common in the Houston area.

Dave in Texas

My in-laws built houses in Houston. Once one of them said they
were going to just build houses with the slab already cracked and
design around it.

Nice pictures. Musta been a lot of indians there that forgot
their paintbrushes.


It now takes me all day long to do
what I used to do all day long.

The Quartermaster

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 10:30:49 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 7/28/2012 6:20 AM, Dave in Texas wrote:
"-MIKE-" wrote in message ...

On 7/26/12 12:24 PM, Swingman wrote:
I doubt that ... most of those tract and custom plan houses built in the
fifties to mid sixties were well built with a skilled labor pool, if a
bit shy or room sizes and ammenities, and much of the framing lumber was
old growth and higher quality than today's plantation grown material.


I agree. Keep in mind that those houses had to be put up very quickly,
due to the fact that the boomers were being born and suburbia was
exploding. What allowed them go up quickly was that simply design, not
any shortcuts and lack of skill by the carpenters of that time.


Hey, Swing, think Sharpstown or Oak Forest as post-WWII
tract-housing booms.

Dave in Texas


That area, Sharpstownish, 59 Bellaire, Fondren is loaded with these
type homes.

Frank Sharp specials we used to call 'em.


It now takes me all day long to do
what I used to do all day long.

The Quartermaster