5 ms·

This article seems to be putting on some strong rose-colored glasses. It appeals to the idea that people in the past all lived in beautiful, long-lasting buildi

by NickM 8y ago

This article seems to be putting on some strong rose-colored glasses. It appeals to the idea that people in the past all lived in beautiful, long-lasting buildings. The reality is that the long-lasting buildings are the only ones that still exist. Well sure, but at least some houses used to be beautiful and long-lasting; nowadays, even large, expensive mansions are typically built in a cheap, slapdash manner, using techniques and materials that are not nearly as long-lasting or durable as the ones that would've been used to build a nice house a century ago. For a really obvious example, just look at roofing materials; a good slate roof can last over a century with minimal maintenance, but nobody builds houses with slate roofs anymore. Instead, even high-end homes use asphalt shingles that last 20-30 years tops.

peteradio 8y ago
Steel roofing is becoming more and more common. Wonder what the expected life expectancy is on those bad boys.
- chrisco255 8y ago
  50+ years.
  - matthewaveryusa 8y ago
    Driving through Eastern europe and in the Alps I noticed that they are very popular -- was wondering if it was a cost thing or if they are simply better in colder/harsher climates -- my guess is both.
    - dublinben 8y ago
      Steel roofs are particularly well-suited to areas that receive heavy snowfall. The snow tends to slide right off, instead of dangerously accumulating on an asphalt roof.
      - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        Have steel roof, can confirm. It makes a satisfying sliding then silence then thump noise. It makes shoveling a path adjacent to the house kind of a pain because you have to shovel it after snow falls and then again after the snow falls from the roof. Shoveling snow is also a lot more interesting when you have to listen for the sliding sound and GTFO or hug the house if you hear it. Overall 10/10.
        rconti 8y ago
        Or a popping, followed by an entire-house-shaking moment of terror. This one wasn't actually that bad from a shaking standpoint, but still caught me off guard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjDKoiwUk1M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjDKoiwUk1M
pixl97 8y ago
>So one hard or soft slate for each square foot of your house times $1,500 will be total cost of a new slate roof. Asphalt shingles have a total cost around $200 per square. Well, yea slate roofs cost 7X as much. No wonder people don't.
- NickM 8y ago
  Well yeah, nowadays contractors can charge through the nose when hardly anyone even has the necessary skills to maintain existing slate roofs anymore, much less install new ones. It didn't always used to be like that, though. The material cost is more, of course, but not nearly 7X more.
darkerside 8y ago
So you oppose the democratization of luxury?
- linkmotif 8y ago
  Haha I think the point is you can’t democratize luxury. That’s a shill, an oxymoron. What you get is literal vuglarity.
  - darkerside 8y ago
    That's an overload of the term luxury. Is air conditioning a luxury? Depends on what you mean by it. What I mean by it in this case is, we are able to support economically many more people having mansions than we used to. The trade-off is they rightfully earn the prefix of Mc.
    - linkmotif 8y ago
      > we are able to support economically many more people having mansions than we used to I don't think that's true... the environmental cost of supporting this is huge and already unsustainable. Air conditioning is a great example of this.
kazen44 8y ago
is this actually true though? Most older long-lasting buildings seem to either be build for industrial/economic use or are goverment/public project kind of works. Also, most normal housing was of dubious quality all throughout history, there is a reason many european cities decided to level vast parts of their working class housing districts after ww2. Mainly because it was far easier to start over (thanks to ww2 damage) and because most of these housing where simply to cheap to be worth restoring.
- NickM 8y ago
  Yes, absolutely. I live in a city with a ton of old freestanding houses that were built around 1900, and they're incredibly sturdy. You can see this all throughout the construction: The frames are built from really thick wooden beams that can take a beating. I had a large tree fall on my house earlier this year, and the trunk bounced/slid off, doing only superficial damage to the roof and siding; I talked to multiple contractors and insurance people who said a newer house built using modern construction standards would've been flattened, or at least suffered serious structural damage. Things like windows are built to last too. The original wooden sash cord designs are still functioning 100+ years after they were built, with the exception of a couple windows that needed the cords replaced, but that's relatively cheap and easy. I expect the same windows will continue to work another 100 years as long as they're cared for and maintained. This isn't about "the democratization of luxury", as another commenter suggested. Cheap construction costs more in the long term. This is about a cultural shift toward favoring short-term over long-term thinking. Long-lasting wood sash cord windows would not be expensive to build in this day and age, and they could be quite energy efficient too with modern glass and weather stripping, but people don't think or care about the long term the way they used to, and so they'd would rather settle for cheap, shiny vinyl windows that yellow and crack and fall apart in a matter of decades.
  - Jarb 8y ago
    Slight rant, but those types of windows were one of the first things that bugged me when I moved over from Europe. IMO, not only are they not as practical, but they also leak more energy than what we had in Germany. You can't poke your head out all the way and need to bend over awkwardly to get some fresh air. It would be one thing if it was only on older houses, but new ones use them as well. By contrast, even my grandparent's house, built in the 50s, had windows that swung open like a door or leaned inwards at ~10°, if you only wanted a little bit of a breeze. They even had windows built into the roof that could be opened either in the middle or from the top, thanks to dual hinges. Best part, the "Rolladen", aka roll-up blinds built into the walls that helped with heat-retention in the winter, provided sound-dampening, and could be automated by a timer. Maybe it's just the area where I live, but I get the feeling that for many architectural features in the states we decided about 100 years that everything is good enough as it is and the only continued innovation was geared towards cutting corners and getting cheaper materials to work. /rant 0 https://goo.gl/images/QS5oJj https://goo.gl/images/QS5oJj https://goo.gl/images/1nRYHt https://goo.gl/images/1nRYHt https://goo.gl/images/kDVPkv https://goo.gl/images/kDVPkv https://goo.gl/images/TfDtoK https://goo.gl/images/TfDtoK
ticmasta 8y ago
Tile is also a long-lasting option that's cheaper than slate. The issues are not purely material costs though but supply, specialized labour, environmental factors, etc.
- jandrese 8y ago
  Isn't tile a problem in an area that gets hailstorms?

by NickM 8y ago

peteradio 8y ago

Steel roofing is becoming more and more common. Wonder what the expected life expectancy is on those bad boys.

chrisco255 8y ago
50+ years.
- matthewaveryusa 8y ago
  Driving through Eastern europe and in the Alps I noticed that they are very popular -- was wondering if it was a cost thing or if they are simply better in colder/harsher climates -- my guess is both.
  - dublinben 8y ago
    Steel roofs are particularly well-suited to areas that receive heavy snowfall. The snow tends to slide right off, instead of dangerously accumulating on an asphalt roof.
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      Have steel roof, can confirm. It makes a satisfying sliding then silence then thump noise. It makes shoveling a path adjacent to the house kind of a pain because you have to shovel it after snow falls and then again after the snow falls from the roof. Shoveling snow is also a lot more interesting when you have to listen for the sliding sound and GTFO or hug the house if you hear it. Overall 10/10.
      - rconti 8y ago
        Or a popping, followed by an entire-house-shaking moment of terror. This one wasn't actually that bad from a shaking standpoint, but still caught me off guard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjDKoiwUk1M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjDKoiwUk1M

pixl97 8y ago

>So one hard or soft slate for each square foot of your house times $1,500 will be total cost of a new slate roof. Asphalt shingles have a total cost around $200 per square. Well, yea slate roofs cost 7X as much. No wonder people don't.

NickM 8y ago
Well yeah, nowadays contractors can charge through the nose when hardly anyone even has the necessary skills to maintain existing slate roofs anymore, much less install new ones. It didn't always used to be like that, though. The material cost is more, of course, but not nearly 7X more.

darkerside 8y ago

So you oppose the democratization of luxury?

linkmotif 8y ago
Haha I think the point is you can’t democratize luxury. That’s a shill, an oxymoron. What you get is literal vuglarity.
- darkerside 8y ago
  That's an overload of the term luxury. Is air conditioning a luxury? Depends on what you mean by it. What I mean by it in this case is, we are able to support economically many more people having mansions than we used to. The trade-off is they rightfully earn the prefix of Mc.
  - linkmotif 8y ago
    > we are able to support economically many more people having mansions than we used to I don't think that's true... the environmental cost of supporting this is huge and already unsustainable. Air conditioning is a great example of this.

kazen44 8y ago

is this actually true though? Most older long-lasting buildings seem to either be build for industrial/economic use or are goverment/public project kind of works. Also, most normal housing was of dubious quality all throughout history, there is a reason many european cities decided to level vast parts of their working class housing districts after ww2. Mainly because it was far easier to start over (thanks to ww2 damage) and because most of these housing where simply to cheap to be worth restoring.

NickM 8y ago
Yes, absolutely. I live in a city with a ton of old freestanding houses that were built around 1900, and they're incredibly sturdy. You can see this all throughout the construction: The frames are built from really thick wooden beams that can take a beating. I had a large tree fall on my house earlier this year, and the trunk bounced/slid off, doing only superficial damage to the roof and siding; I talked to multiple contractors and insurance people who said a newer house built using modern construction standards would've been flattened, or at least suffered serious structural damage. Things like windows are built to last too. The original wooden sash cord designs are still functioning 100+ years after they were built, with the exception of a couple windows that needed the cords replaced, but that's relatively cheap and easy. I expect the same windows will continue to work another 100 years as long as they're cared for and maintained. This isn't about "the democratization of luxury", as another commenter suggested. Cheap construction costs more in the long term. This is about a cultural shift toward favoring short-term over long-term thinking. Long-lasting wood sash cord windows would not be expensive to build in this day and age, and they could be quite energy efficient too with modern glass and weather stripping, but people don't think or care about the long term the way they used to, and so they'd would rather settle for cheap, shiny vinyl windows that yellow and crack and fall apart in a matter of decades.
- Jarb 8y ago
  Slight rant, but those types of windows were one of the first things that bugged me when I moved over from Europe. IMO, not only are they not as practical, but they also leak more energy than what we had in Germany. You can't poke your head out all the way and need to bend over awkwardly to get some fresh air. It would be one thing if it was only on older houses, but new ones use them as well. By contrast, even my grandparent's house, built in the 50s, had windows that swung open like a door or leaned inwards at ~10°, if you only wanted a little bit of a breeze. They even had windows built into the roof that could be opened either in the middle or from the top, thanks to dual hinges. Best part, the "Rolladen", aka roll-up blinds built into the walls that helped with heat-retention in the winter, provided sound-dampening, and could be automated by a timer. Maybe it's just the area where I live, but I get the feeling that for many architectural features in the states we decided about 100 years that everything is good enough as it is and the only continued innovation was geared towards cutting corners and getting cheaper materials to work. /rant 0 https://goo.gl/images/QS5oJj https://goo.gl/images/QS5oJj https://goo.gl/images/1nRYHt https://goo.gl/images/1nRYHt https://goo.gl/images/kDVPkv https://goo.gl/images/kDVPkv https://goo.gl/images/TfDtoK https://goo.gl/images/TfDtoK

ticmasta 8y ago

Tile is also a long-lasting option that's cheaper than slate. The issues are not purely material costs though but supply, specialized labour, environmental factors, etc.

jandrese 8y ago
Isn't tile a problem in an area that gets hailstorms?