Thinking about Houston   

It is very sad to witness the suffering of people in Texas due to Hurricane Harvey in recent days, and even sadder to overhear a comment this morning that the Trump Administration will be using this disaster as a funding source for "the wall".  Can this really be true?  or is this a "conspiracy theory"?

Anyway, it got me thinking about houses that are raised to create spaces below, how these spaces could just be for storage and a safety barrier for such disasters, and the possibility of providing extra funding to people who decide to raise their houses in the upcoming efforts to rebuild in Houston.

If a house which is not totally damaged can be saved from the floor joists up, this might be a viable solution for rebuilding in place with a more resilient building, ready to resist the next storm and flood more easily.  Next time the waters rise, the owners will be able to ride out the storm "high and dry." Although some of their stored possessions will be destroyed, as long as there are no living spaces on the ground floor area, they have packed their refrigerator, and don't lose electricity too much or too often, their house will be able to keep them safe and comfortable.

Of course every solution creates more problems but some of the potential problems can be foreseen. The most immediate that comes to mind is that a taller house is more vulnerable to high winds, so there will be a need for retrofit efforts at the roof level and tie-downs along walls and foundations. The whole structure will need to be analyzed by an engineer to determine what will be needed.

Just something I've been thinking about the last few days...  In the photo I have attached, if this house were 7' higher all that water would be below the floor joists!

Unique Entry Solution for House Raised about 5.5 Feet.

Once upon a time long ago, I had a blog that I tried to write in at least once a month.  Since my last post, I've gotten more Building-Beneath and House-Move projects, each one with unique and challenging characteristics.  One in particular, in the "flats of Berkeley", has been on my mind to add to this blog, but somehow I never get the time to write.  

Here's a photo of the house before we started.  

The Entry and stair presented a major challenge because the bottom step was quite close to the sidewalk, the lot is small - under 4,000 sq.ft. - and the owner did not want to encroach on the size of the back yard.  The typical entry design that would meet the challenge would be to raise the house in place and create a ground-level entry at the new first floor level, not a solution that was appealing to this particular homeowner.  

The solution was to raise the house without raising the front porch!  This would allow the proportions  of elements in the front elevation to fit well together from the outside and would provide an entry that would be closer to the common areas on the inside (Living Room, Dining Room, Kitchen).

Here's a photo of the completed front view.      

Of course the front porch didn't really stay in place while the house was raised.  

     It was totally rebuilt.  

The end result is a 2,420 sq.ft. Four-Bedroom / Three-Bath house, with a good sized Family Room downstairs (from a 1,115 sq.ft. 3B/2b house).

There - I finally got this blog entry ready for publication.  Hopefully the dam has broken and I'll write something here more often in the coming months.

Two BB projects to juggle - this is exciting!

For a long time I have had only one project at a time.  This year is opening with two at once, both Building Beneath projects.  Actually both of them are more than just development of the lower areas.  The one in Rockridge also includes reconfiguration of the Main Level Bath, with its connections to Master Bedroom and Hall.  The one in Trestle Glen also includes an Attic Conversion, a Bathroom Addition at the lower level, and changes at the main level for circulation to all three levels (new stair opening up a room) and including a waterproof deck over the new Bath below.

These houses will not be lifted more than an inch, just enough to remove framing elements, because ... well for different reasons really.  The Trestle Glen house is on a downslope lot, so there is no need to lift it - there is already direct access to grade and the new excavation will increase this accessibility (to a large but presently hard-to-get-to rear yard).  Also, it is a rather well-proportioned cottage from the street and looks "right" the way it sits now.  The Rockridge house is a beautiful Craftsman (pg. 61 in "The Bungalow", by Paul Duscherer & Douglas Keister), and lifting it more than a few inches would ruin the present proportions.

Then the cost/benefit question arises.  There is some benefit for natural light - the higher the windows the more natural light can be brought in.  This is a major concern for basement spaces, which tend to have a cave-like feel, dank and dark. For this particular house, we'll have to reverse the slope of the driveway to bring it gradually down to a side door into the basement area.  Drainage will need to go to a sump and pumped out to the street.  Raising the house could reduce the amount of downward slope in the driveway and/or make it possible for a higher ceiling.  However, the extra cost, for 8 or 10", might not make this worthwhile, as some of the existing foundation seems to be usable.  If an entire foundation is all shot, perhaps even without any bolting, there is more incentive to capture those extra inches.

We are hoping the sewer line is deep enough that we have choices, but in some cases there is no way to hook into the sewer without an ejector pump.  Reliance on pumps is not ideal.  They tend to break down just when one is away for an extended vacation or upon deciding to rent the house out while on sabbatical! And, of course, there is the question of electricity.  Will the solar system be strong enough in an outage?

So ... there you have it.  Two projects to juggle.  This is exciting ... maybe there really will be a change in the economy soon.  In the heyday I had at least three to juggle continuously for years.  Wait and see.  Hide and watch.  Relax and flow.

Concrete Floor with Hydronics

The Delaney House I mentioned a few posts ago, a house that was lifted and moved on its own lot, in order to 1) make room for the Cheney Cottage to be move there from the UCB Campus and 2) make more space below the main floor level.  Actually, in this project the main floor level became the bedroom level and the more public spaces were moved downstairs.

With the Delaney House in its previous location, there was about 5-1/2 or 6 feet of headroom, so the house only went up about 3-1/2 feet.  The old foundation was completely removed and the new foundation was poured in two parts:  First the perimeter foundation and isolated piers for beam support were put in place.  Then, about a week ago, the Slab-on-Grade (SOG) was poured. 

Oftentimes, with S.O.G. floors there is a heating system, that pushes warm fluid around in tubes, embedded in the concrete.  We discussed this possibility at length, deciding to nix it because of the expense, then changing course and including it after all.  However, the tubes (called pex tubing) were not embedded in the concrete pour done last week.  They will be in a topping slab.  This is the way I prefer to do this kind of heating (called hydronic heat) because a barrier can be installed between the two slabs, and the lower slab, which is more massive, won't have to be heated up each time the thermostat kicks on.

One of the drawbacks to hydronics embedded in the main slab is that there is a long delay time between when the hydronics kick in and when the room actually starts to feel comfortable, because the slab is still warming up.  Even some of the gravel and soil beneath the slab get warmed up in those circumstances.  Not to get your hopes up too much, the topping slab also takes a while to warm up, but the lag time is reduced noticeably by the separation.

In this particular project, since this is a house with a history (built circa 1888), my clients preferred to have a hardwood floor.  So the hydronics will heat up the topping slab, which is on top of a barrier that also forces the heat upward, away from the slab below and up through the hardwood floor.  Typically, I prefer to let the topping slab be the walking surface, but the decision was that this would be too modern for this house.  So we'll be getting the best of both worlds - a traditional floor with modern heating.

The upstairs, which formerly was the only floor, will have radiators running on the same system.  This is still a Single Family Residence, just twice as large as before.  With hydronics, different areas, even ones that don't have doors separating them, can be zoned to heat separately.  This way, if the lifestyle of the occupants is such that the upstairs is only used at night, the radiators can be scheduled to warm up only in the evening.

In closing this post, one thing to mention about this form of heat is that the mechanics take up much less space - there is no need for ductwork or return-air plenums and the boiler can be small, about half the size of a forced-air unit.  There is a need for a room with valves spread along a wall, but that room can also be used for other storage or utilities.  And, the water heater can double as a heat-exchanger to power the hydronic system.  There are many ways to configure these systems, including the use of solar heat.  The extra expense is worthwhile in the long term and if you want to be green add this to your expansion plans.

3-D classes

The 3-D modeling continues apace.  However, I'd be totally lost if it weren't for the classes I've taken at the San Francisco Institute of Architecture (SFIA).  Dylan Steeze has helped me avoid many pitfalls, though much of what he showed us is still to be included in my practice.  Practice, practice, practice - haven't done enough of that.  So - back to the virtual drawing board.

Before signing off, I have to add that I still really have a lot of resistance to this way of working.  Drawing by hand is so much more rewarding!  Why is that?

Landscape & 3-D Modeling

One of the main reasons I want to learn 3-D Modeling is to show existing and proposed grade changes.  On certain projects these are critical.  Trying to learn to do this in both Revit and Sketchup has been a real challenge, but I've decided to attend a class on Sketchup at the SFIA (SF Institute of Architecture).  I think this is going to help.

It turns out Sketchup is more sophisticated than it initially appears to be, and this is a 6-week class, so my progress in Revit is put on hold for the next 5 weeks.

Two of the critical issues I'm dealing with on the project mentioned before are 1) the slope at the front of the building, and 2) the height of the building relative to the grade.  The slope at the front turns out to be greater than 20% (the rise is more than 20% of the run) which, in Oakland, allows us to build within the normal front yard setback, which is 20' in this particular case.  Because of the steep slope, we can build up to 5' from the front property line instead.  This makes a huge difference in terms of potential design solutions.  In this zone, the height of the building is not allowed to exceed 24', measured from the actual and interpolated grade.  This means there is a limit to how much we can lower the grade, as well as how high we can pitch the roof.

You can see that an understanding of existing and proposed grades is critical, and equally important is the ability of an architect to depict them for a client.  For this reason this luddite has finally bitten the bullet on 3-D Modeling.  This is not to say that I'll give up hand drafting, but I do think it is wise to add some more tools to my toolbox.  Here's a somewhat successful attempt:


(Don't look closely - a lot is out of control here.)  The Entry and the room over the garage are new, as well as a basement area excavated for bedrooms and a bath.