Repair/Remodel of abandoned house

[Arcal]

Just received an application for a permit to place a foundation under an existing structure. Not understanding the nature of the building I went out to the site and found a 600+ square foot building sitting on the ground. It appears from what I saw that it has not been used as a residence for quite some time. The applicant wants to place it on a foundation and then get a permit to repair it. It has next to no plumbing, electrical, insulation or heating, although at one point it had some plumbing and electrical. A lot of the floor joists, sills plates and some studs are rotten. I have no problem with the plumbing, electrical and heating, that has to be current, but do I require a vapor barrier on the exterior walls, insulation, and energy effecient windows, a remodel normally would not require these items. I tend to be leaning towards just making sure all health and safety issues are corrected. I have no idea how they are planning to jack it up when it is so rotten.

View attachment 1804

View attachment 1805

View attachment 1806

View attachment 1804

View attachment 1805

View attachment 1806

/monthly_2013_06/572953e97d4c5_1230OldArcataRoad003.JPG.96f506647598931feff73500163687e1.JPG

/monthly_2013_06/572953e980645_1230OldArcata.jpg.bcc6baaf9d07715e3089f97d0586d97a.jpg

/monthly_2013_06/572953e984cee_1230OldArcataRoad.jpg.5e7f968bbd914c50ae98647cbfcee74c.jpg

 

[fatboy]

Last time I had one of these, the structure fell completely apart when the contractor attempted to jack it up. Ended up scraping it, and building competely new from scratch.

 

[ICE]

I have no idea how they are planning to jack it up when it is so rotten.

Neither do they.

Once they get to doing it, they should conclude that it's not worth doing.

 

[kilitact]

Some of these older buildings are worth saving, for a host of reasons, some to do with planning, How does the installation of a foundation translate into all of the requirements your listing other than because you said so.

 

[ewenme]

Reality assessment is needed. But then, some folks do have more money than brains. IMHO.

 

[Arcal]

I found out that the reason they are going this route is that the City (Historical Committee) will require them to do a complete historical assessment report (expensive), if they tear it down or change any of the exterior features. I heard that they have a plan, can't wait to see what it is.

 

[pwood]

I found out that the reason they are going this route is that the City (Historical Committee) will require them to do a complete historical assessment report (expensive), if they tear it down or change any of the exterior features. I heard that they have a plan, can't wait to see what it is.

i would call that structure a diamond in the rough.

 

[mtlogcabin]

I found out that the reason they are going this route is that the City (Historical Committee) will require them to do a complete historical assessment report (expensive), if they tear it down or change any of the exterior features

Wait a few more years and there may not be anything to assess but a pile of wood

 

[peach]

Historic Preservation Boards see things thru different glasses than the rest of us do. Did Lincoln sleep in this place at some point? It's a fugly building that probably, really needs to go.

 

[Jobsaver]

I found out that the reason they are going this route is that the City (Historical Committee) will require them to do a complete historical assessment report (expensive), if they tear it down or change any of the exterior features. I heard that they have a plan, can't wait to see what it is.

A more practical solution is to have a local artist create some paintings of this historical building in all of its glory . . . paintings to be on permanent display in municipal buildings . . . and let the termites or bulldozers take over from there.

 

[peach]

maybe it'll just fall down during the process and resolve the issue itself.

 

[electriclese]

A more practical solution is to have a local artist create some paintings of this historical building in all of its glory . . . paintings to be on permanent display in municipal buildings . . . and let the termites or bulldozers take over from there.

Agreed. I despise historic designation of deteriorating structures. Makes it cost prohibitive to do anything with it, leaving a hazardous situation. Stupid is as stupid does. If a structure is beyond reasonable repair the committee should waive the issue.

 

[MASSDRIVER]

Neither do they.Once they get to doing it, they should conclude that it's not worth doing.

Not that I'm for saving old crap, but I have saved old crap before due to the same assinine historical reasons.

There is not a whole lot of weight there, so you attach the lifting beams to the outside of the house with lags and just lift it up, like it has handles. You can stick it 3 feet in the air, do the foundation, build the floor, plus whatever else needs to be done, and set it down.

Complete waste of time and somebody's money, but what do the "historians" care?

Reasonable people would let them just rebuild in kind or close to it with modern practices.

Brent.

 

[Paul Sweet]

I would think a historic structure report would cost less than a new foundation, especially if this is just a structure contributing to a historical district. If it is historical in its own right (childhood home of a famous person, etc.) things could get more involved.

Unfortunately people sometimes deliberately let older buildings decay because they think it will give them an excuse to knock them down and build something bigger, fancier, and completely out of character with the district.

Historical committees are a lot like building inspectors. If you know what you're doing and try to work it through with them, they may not be as hard to work with as feared. Onthe other hand, they get very stubborn if you try to bully your way past them.

 

[Alias]

Looks like a few of the houses that I inspected when I was in Alturas. Most of the homes there were from the 1920's and built to house either mill or railroad workers. One was demolished, the others were "recycled". I couldn't understand why the owners threw the money they did at a house that should have been leveled and rebuilt. There were no historical requirements for the owners.

One house I remember they removed all of the floor (including the plates & joists), excavated down 3', then installed the foundation and rebuilt from there.

Sue