Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

To renovate or not to renovate (Patreon)

Published:
2018-09-05 14:08:15
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

My latest op-ed for Curbed about making compromises on renovating historic homes. 

Files

Previews only

To renovate or not to renovate?

The discussion around whether or not one should renovate an old house feels like a raging battle between "history is sacred" and "tear out everything HGTV style." This all-or-nothing framework-a product of long-running debates over which types of housing are worthy of attention-is unhelpful at best and detrimental at worst.

Comments

Anonymous

I bought a neglected but renovatable 1905 foursquare some years ago and very much enjoyed tearing out the carpet over the original hardwood floors, popcorn ceilings off the original coved ceilings, retained interior wood columns and stair rails, paneling and picture or plate rails, etc. I did rewire it entirely though, but then replastered the walls rather than tear it all out for drywall. New kitchen but not ultra-modern. Bathroom subway tile, mostly white with black elements, almost period-appropriate. I made a couple of mistakes: I stripped the woodwork upstairs (which had many layers of white paint) to bare wood and finished that, but it wasn't of finish quality, especially after decades of hardware additions and removals, and ultimately it would have been better to strip and then repaint. The stripping was because I was concerned about paint chips with lead - I know the advice on lead is to paint over, in my experience in old houses the thick paint layers make chipping unavoidable, and provided the paint was stripped in a safe way (chemicals and hand stripped, no sanding, careful containment and disposal) I thought better with small children to remove all of it before we moved in. I also tried to re-use the original door hardware but that was probably a fool's errand. It was antique-copper finished, but over steel not brass, and the finish wore off in many cases during the very time-consuming process of stripping paint from the hinges etc. The doorknob hardware was also a lost cause, and in fact many of the original doors, having been converted from mortice to knob-locks (it was rented room-by-room for a long time), had been so damaged they would have been better off just being replaced altogether rather than trying to find odd combinations of hardware and fill large voids. So ultimately I would have been better off buying all new reproduction hardware in solid brass instead. Similarly for the built-in cabinets and drawers it would have been better to replace entirely with new-built rather than try to repair things that were warped, missing hardware, and not that well-built in the first place. I certainly learned that not everything old is solid and reliable (I know about survivorship bias, yes, but it's another thing to look at something 110 years old and think "they really did this on the cheap"). The other big failure was lighting. I mostly went with the 1 ceiling fixture/room model that it had originally, but though I don't like the look of recessed lighting, without it the house was very dark, especially with dark (also period-appropriate!) wall colors. My new house has recessed lights and I reluctantly admit that they work very well, although I still plan to supplement in the larger rooms with centerpiece ceiling fixtures at some point. A fun project. Had to sell it though. The house I bought after was an 1885 Victorian with a moderately-original exterior - much of the smaller trim pieces had been removed, but the overall lines are still there - but the interior was completely gutted, not a trace left behind. That was at least two renovations earlier, and the latest was very 2015 - grey walls, minimalist wide white trim, dark prefinished hardwood floors. It's not what I would have chosen, but it was a good deal and while I lament the loss of whatever interior woodwork it once had, the open floor plan through kitchen/living/dining rooms does work well. It was probably a crime to tear it out, but once done, well, it's our house now. I have been replacing the cheap and ugly square brushed-nickel modern door & drawer hardware they used with simple ball-tip brass hinges in polished nickel, with bevel-edged doorplates and switch and outlet hardware. It is not specifically "1885", but it works with the way they did the trim and doors and takes the "so 2015" edge off the overall look. I have contemplated door casings, baseboards and other interior trim in a more complex style that would suit the house better, but it's tricky, it has to still work with the overall design and especially the flooring which is attractive but nothing like what other Victorian floors look like. There are a ton of Victorians where I live in Alameda CA, and some are genuine restorations outside or inside or both. The outside I always appreciate; the restored interiors, though, are dark and gloomy, with impractical floor plans and ugly wallpapers, and if the furniture matches they have the ambiance of a museum, not a house where people (especially rambunctious children) live. So I have more interest in restoring some of the exterior trim and perhaps making the exterior paintwork more interesting - while knowing that the "painted lady" style is not necessarily original either, but it is pretty - than in making major interior changes now. Unfortunately they put in vinyl replacement windows everywhere. It looks... ok. Function is not great, they are cheap, and they put in picture windows to replace some that should have been double-hung or double-double-hung, which is both ugly from the outside and inconvenient since you can't open them. And the others are at best single-hung so again, not ideal especially with very high ceilings because you cannot open them at the top. However, replacement with wood double-hung would be expensive and I am concerned about the impact of disposing of a bunch of PVC, though perhaps Habitat for Humanity or another arch recovery place could use them.

Anonymous

I live in a National Historic District. Exterior changes must be approved by the historic commission, but owners can do whatever they like with the interior. I do not understand the people who gut the interior down to the bare walls and completely rebuild, even moving staircases. If you want a new house, buy a new(er) one! We've kept all the plaster walls, windows, woodwork, and hardware of our 1850s house, even if the floorplan isn't ideal. We love living in a house that wasn't designed for the 21st century! We did gut and redo the kitchen and bathroom because they were from the 1970s (the kitchen is an addition from the 1950s), but we've aimed for fixtures that look evoke the early 20th century, when plumbing and electricity were probably added. It's a matter of respecting the house.