[Greenbuilding] Fwd: Re: The five hundred year house

[Alan Abrams]

<<<<<<<<
I thought you were about to go off in a different direction here -- that a
"compromise" solution might be a durable shell/structure that could last
longer, with interiors made of materials and systems designed to be recycled
or biodegraded so that they could change with "fashion" or living styles or
new technology.

As an example, though without the recycling or use of biodegradable
materials, that's what's happened with much of the industrial building stock
here in NYC: it's been repeatedly renovated, often going from manufacturing
to storage to makeshift residential (artist spaces) to high end residential.
If only the design and construction had better anticipated the renovations
so the deconstruction and reconstruction were less wasteful, it would have
been closer to an ecologically viable process (putting aside the issues of
gentrification and loss of urban manufacturing).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Excellent points-in at least one way we're moving backwards-the use of
sprayed in place foam insulation, which renders the framing members of the
envelope difficult to salvage.  The tradeoff is improved thermal performance
and moisture control, and not subjecting construction personnel to
fiberglass.  OTOH, a lot of what we are doing now involves hybrid framing,
with a partial post and beam skeleton using PSL stock, and conventional
framing infill-which goes to "How Buildings Learn" effect referred to above.
And with good rainscreen detailing-shingle lap flashings and drainage plane,
furred siding, generous overhangs (tuned for passive solar performance) the
shell should survive two or three mortgages without egregious maintenance.

 

We're also trying to build smaller-which in a way is the greenest practice
of all.

 

-AA