PRESERVEMIDTOWN.com

[Rose]

OST,
That may be right in some cases but I know several of the builders of high $ homes don't use it.  I think is was banned back in the 80's -- I think it was anyway.  John Bumgarner's building and the houses (I know one of the homeowners)right there on Utica are 100% stucco.  

I don't think Double A is as knowledgeable about construction as he thinks he is.  

I tried telling him that I don't live in a historic preservation district -- I would NEVER buy there because of all the problems.  I think also, HP homeowners ARE required to obtain permission for exterior paint colors, among other things.  I know of an HP drum banger who painted his house a very dramatic color and got away with it.  

Double A - I love my neighbors. I don't think any one is unsophisticated for appreciating historic beauty.  I do think we are lacking in appreciation for more sophisticated styles and progress.  Podunk was unfair -- I'm sorry.

Infringing on any homeowner's rights is unacceptable and I'm not playing that game.  Follow the rules - no problem.
 

[Townsend]

Long low whistle noise

[pfox]

Dryvit is Dryvit, (EIFS) as far as I can tell, Double A.

EIFS is not 'stucco' in the sense of the word stucco. Traditional stucco is often called Portland Cement Plaster, and is a centuries-old non-insulating material. Stucco consists of sand, Portland Cement and water, and is a hard, dense, thick, non-insulating material. EIFS is a modern, lightweight synthetic wall cladding that includes foam plastic insulation and thin synthetic coatings. There are also specialty stuccos that use synthetic materials but no insulation, and these are also not EIFS either. A common example is what is called one coat stucco, which is a thick, synethic stucco applied in a single layer (traditional stucco is applied in 3 layers). There is also an EIFS-like product called a Direct-Applied Finish System (or DAFS), which is essentially an EIFS but without the insulation - this product is also not EIFS either, and has quite different characteristics.

EIFS are proprietary systems of a particular EIFS producer and consist of specific components. EIFS are not generic products made from common separate materials. To function properly, EIFS needs to be architecturally designed and installed as a system.

There are a number of versions of EIFS, as described below. The most basic and common EIFS is called a barrier EIFS (also known as a traditional or conventional EIFS). Another type is called an EIFS with Drainage, which is a barrier EIFS to which a water drainage capability has been added.

A basic EIFS includes only the insulation and EIFS materials (coatings, adhesives, etc.). Other types of EIFS may also include plastic or metal edge trim, water resistive barriers, a drainage cavity, and other accessories. The technical definition of "an EIFS" does not include wall framing, sheathing, flashings, caulking, water barriers, sheathing, windows, doors, and other wall components. However, as of recently, architects have begin specifying flashings and caulking as being a part of the EIFS scope of work, essentially requiring EIFS contractors to carry out that work as well.



Stucco is a material made of an aggregate, a binder, and water which is applied wet, and hardens when it dries. It is used as a coating for walls and ceilings and for decoration. In Europe the term render is more commonly used. Stucco may be used to cover less visually appealing construction materials such as concrete, cinder block, or clay brick and adobe.

Modern Stucco usually consists of 1 layer of wire lath and 2 layers of portland cement-based plaster. This is due to its rapid strength development and durability. However, cement's crystalline structure cannot accommodate significant movements in the building structure (as lime does) and is thus prone to cracking. This is why an additional acrylic finish on top is often applied. It adds flexibility for surface movements and waterproof.

First a wire mesh is attached to vapor permeable, water-resistant "tar" paper if stucco is being applied to a wood framed structure or light-gauge steel frame structure. The paper protects the sheathing and interior of the wall from outside moisture intrusion without trapping moisture vapor in the wall. A wide variety of accessories such as weep screeds, control and expansion joints, corner-aids and architectural reveals are sometimes also incorporated into the lath. Wire lath is used to give the plaster something to attach to and may be expanded-metal lath, woven-wire lath, or welded-wire lath. In Europe, wire lathing with fired clay an integral "brick-mesh" is used in many applications instead of expanded metal lathing.

The first layer of plaster is called a "scratch coat", consisting of plastic cement and sand. A brush is used to scratch the surface horizontally or in a criss cross pattern to provide a key for the second layer.

The next layer is called the "brown coat" or leveling coat. It also consists of sand, cement and lime. It is leveled with tools called "Darbys", "Rods" and "Federege" scraped smooth, and floated to provide a nice even surface onto which to apply the finish coat. It is then allowed to dry (cure) for 7-10 days minimum to allow "checking" (shrinkage)and cracking to take place. Sometimes the dry surface is sprayed with water for one or more days to speed up the curing process.

The exterior stucco layer is the final layer and is referred to as the "finish coat". There are 2 different recommend types of finish coats:

1. Color Coat, is a colored sand, cement and lime mixed finish and is typically 3 mm (1/8") thick. A base coat of stucco is applied over the 2nd coat of cement (brown coat). This then can be floated with water for a sandy finish or later textured over with a trowel to create various styles of troweled finishes. Pre-mixed stucco is what's mostly used and comes in coarse graded sand and finer graded sand for creating a very smooth troweled finish. It also comes made in a variety of colors.

2. Acrylic Finish, is an acrylic based finish from 1,0 mm to 4,0 mm thick. It can be applied in any from Traditional stucco known way and is the most recommend finish for long lasting quality. It also can be ordered in any color.

3. Hard Coating, is a not recommend method of adding a finish to the stucco wall. back in the 60's and 70's mostly, people throw all kind of material like glass chunks, stones or marbles (calcium carbonate finishes with crushed natural marbles (Marmalrino)into the wet stucco wall. Not only is this kind of finish coat very heavy and inflexible but also hard to repair.

Hope that helps you, my friend.

[Rose]

pfox,
That was good -- VERY efficient.  I thought Double try's dryvit thing was off base.  

Ask your dad if he uses dryvit.  I'll bet my youngest child that he doesn't.  I don't think Jack Arnold does either.  

I think it caused moisture problems and was not a very good long term choice.  Though, now a person can obtain dryvit insurance (just looked it up on internet).

BTW -- love the river plans!  100% support here!

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by Rose

pfox,
That was good -- VERY efficient.  I thought Double try's dryvit thing was off base.  

Ask your dad if he uses dryvit.  I'll bet my youngest child that he doesn't.  I don't think Jack Arnold does either.  

I think it caused moisture problems and was not a very good long term choice.  Though, now a person can obtain dryvit insurance (just looked it up on internet).

BTW -- love the river plans!  100% support here!

                                               He uses whatever his clients specify like a smart businessman should. I doubt if his clients decided to use dryvit instead of stucco he would put up much of a fight. None of this is a negative reflection on him-he's just doing his job, but his clients. The problem is we have plenty of architects, zoning attorneys, and developers who misrepresent dryvit as stucco when they are pitching their projects to the citizens seeking their approval. So Rosie the Riveter, what do you know about construction? Can you do it?(he,he) BTW, I like the pfox's sig line but it would be more accurate if it read-  "Our uniqueness is overshadowed by our inability to preserve what makes us unique." As a matter of fact, it should be plastered across the welcome wagon when the National Trust for Historic Preservation convention comes to town.

[pfox]

quote: He uses whatever his clients specify like a smart businessman should. I doubt if his clients decided to use dryvit instead of stucco he would put up much of a fight.

I honestly can't think of a building or house designed and built by him in which it has been speced...but who knows. I seriously doubt it.  Knock yourself out trying to find one.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by ost

Waterboy,

It is not about style preference?  If I want to build a modern house in midtown how is that for financial gain?  By the way I am the son of a Doctor so I am qualified to perform surgery on you at any time.  So you feel that framing and concrete are the only things that qualify a house as cheap?  How about windows, heating and cooling, lighting,doors, appliances, exterior materials, cabinets etc.  There are a large number of old homes with serious deficiencies in this area.  It all boils down to the fact that you don't like new homes.  Move to a communist country and you will fit in nicely.

My gawd. Is it possible to have a decent conversation on this forum without namecalling, heritage questioning and bull headed attitudes? Elite Fascist Pig! Okay, your father is better than mine. He's a doctor so you can operate, that's so cute. I guess working around carpenters, bricklayers, sheetrockers, roofers and electricians for years means nothing because I don't make my living at it. I roofed my 90 year old hip roofed house, repaired its eaves, I painted it, I plumb it, I add and delete circuits but I just don't understand like you or Pfox.

I'll educate you about any of those subjects you listed and how they are inferior in todays average homes. Windows: hard to beat double hung real wood windows with a good set of storms to create a buffer. But go ahead and buy some of those aluminum sliders that are so easy to hang. You may not like the wavy glass on those old windows but it is revered among old home enthusiasts. Heating and Cooling: Yes most old homes have been updated but if not, H&C guys are well versed in how to add it to your old home. Mine had huge ducting that accomodated gravity flow so I had to have a larger fan and additional ducting. Same cost and quality as new homes. Lighting: get real. Home Depot, Lowes, a variety of replacement lighting available just like out south. Same with appliances and cabinets. I wish I had never taken out my solid pine cabinets with inch thick concrete covered with tiles but, live and learn. Exterior? I guess you could go find some of that "hardboard" exterior or throw up some stucco if you feel that wood or brick is not suitable. Same cost as Southie town. Solid oak flooring: Oh, yeah, you could replace that with some Pergo like out south or spend big bucks to get some used oak out of one of the houses you want destroyed so badly. Foundations: why do you think they moved away from concrete block foundations,basements, maple and oak flooring and front porches? Do you think it was because of demand? There was plenty of materials available. It was economics. Most of the first slab homes are not holding up. Even later when stressed post construction was the obvious solution, it was not incorporated in average homes. Too expensive and the builder will be forgotten before the slab cracks. So you get homes sliding down hills in Silver Chase. Expensive piering has little effect.

So the homes in Tulsa built from the late 1960's on suffer from aluminum wiring that vibrates loose, cracked slabs that break the cheap gray plastic plumbing inside them and cheap wood replacement products that last a fraction as long as real wood. They solved most of those problems but not the slabs. And materials are getting cheaper and cheaper.

Nonetheless, I love the style, the convenience and the luxury of new homes. You are absolutely wrong that I don't like them. I worked on many upscale homes in Southern Hills, Bolewood Acres and all the way up to around 71st & Yale. I've seen many of the new mini-castles too. They have their place and the upper end examples are pretty well constructed but you'll never convince me that the average new construction home is as well built as the average pre-fifties home.

Move to a mobile home. I'm sure you'll be quite happy.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by pfox

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

These signs are popping up all over midtown.  Excellent!

The dilemna for legacy homeowners is whether to bother fixing up their properties before putting them on the market (particularly in high-interest neighborhoods).  If the real value is the property and not the house, when the house is going to be demolished anyway, why landscape, fix it up at all? Legacy homes just deteriorate.

Repeat after me: 'Tuscan architecture is eeeeeeevil, Tuscan architecture is eeeeevilllll . . .'

Preserve Midtown

Yes, they need to tear down that nasty Philbrook immediately. Completely out of scale with the homes next to it and that gawd awful "faux Iitalian" knock off look is wearing thin.

Funny thing happened today.  Finished driving a friend around downtown and telling him about this and that building, was headed south on Utica, stopped at the 21st and Utica intersection.  He points at that "faux italian monstrosity" so many people on here seem to hate and goes "Oooh what building is that? Its very nice." I think he must have thought it was an actual old building or something.  I laughed remembering how so many on here have spewed scorn at it. Just think, soon there will be a whole generation of young people who wont remember the gas station that used to be there and will think of that building as being part of the familiar natural charm and beauty of the area. lol

First, it's probably no secret to anyone here that my father is Pat Fox.  So, obviously, I have my own biases toward his projects.  I am not posting here in order to get anyone of you to "like" the buildings and homes he, or any other architect designs.

Architects like Pat Fox, the late Stephen Turner, Jack Arnold, Alan Madewell, James Boswell, and Brian Freese have collectively designed hundreds of homes in Tulsa, and specifically in Midtown Tulsa, some of which are not offensive to the eye, many of which have become part of the fabric of Midtown which is so cherished.  I will also say that each of these architects is allowed to practice their craft primarily because they are commissioned to do so on a regular basis, meaning someone is paying them for thier talents.  So those somebodies must like their work.

Like it or not, these architects represent the here and now of Tulsa architecture.  In 50 years, I can assure you that people will be just as passionate about many of the structures being built today by these talented people as they are about the homes built by Forsythe and Dilbeck.

I appreciate your comments on that building, Artist.  It is my opinion that it has visually enhanced that intersection in a postive manner.  In fact, my dad received an AIA Honor Award for the design of that building. In response to the "faux italian" comments, the materials used are as authentic as possible and the proportions are appropriate for the style.  Real stucco.  Real clay tile roofs.  It is a modern take on a traditional form of architecture and construction for sure, but "faux"? I don't agree.  Furthermore, it employs many of the modern "new" urbanist values placed on architecture and planning: up to the street setback, hidden (underground and behind the buildng) parking.  It could be a strip center or a QuikTrip.  Would that be more appropriate?

I will also disclose that I was, at one point, on staff at the Tulsa Preservation Commission.  It was one of the most rewarding and interesting jobs I've ever had.  I consider myself a preservationist.  It is my experience that there are a few very educated citizens that understand the philosophical underpinnings of the Preservation movement, not just in Tulsa, but nationwide.  It is also my experience that there is a lot of misinformation out there regarding the Preservation movement.

That being said, what is not happening in this whole thing is an actual discussion regarding the future of the neighborhoods in question.  Websites, signs, petitions, accusations, assertions, and downright slander (most developers are evil? Come on. Enough with the hyperbole.) is all I have seen come of this.  It is my opinion that this aggressive, internet bravado ridden technique does not advance civil, intelligent discussion about this important issue.  It only serves to place people on one side or the other.  It is divisive and it hurts our community.

So, what I am saying is that, while you may not be able to convince everyone that your idea is right and that they should agree with you or else, you (the collective you) may actually learn something from your neighbors and come to some sort of compromise, if not consensus about this, or any other issue.  That technique is a whole lot harder than slapping up a website and sticking signs in a yard, but the result is far better.

So, while I agree that appropriate infill in our legacy neighborhoods is an important issue, I will suggest that there is probably more than one opinion about what that means, and certainly a better way of having that discussion.

Now, I live very close to one of your dad's constructions which is also across from a re-habbed home that Rose or Ost would have razed.  It was pathetically maintained, but at its core was sturdy. These two projects serve as a good contrast to what will happen and what can happen. As it turns out both co-exist visually on the same street quite nicely.

The re-habbed home is a traditional two story. Your dad's buildings are whatever you call this new stucco design he's so fond of. Tuscan? Easy to build and certainly un-offensive, and of course, walled off from the public, which is exactly what South tulsa is all about. The rest of the street is a typical mixture of brick and wood bungalows, an old farm house and a huge three story brick.

The neighborhood fought him putting two zero lot line homes on one lot. We lost. Your dad is pretty good at working the system. His builder encroached on the neighbors property and made many new enemies when he preferred to go to court and lose. Accomodations were made.

I watched closely both homes being built and the older home re-habbed. I won't comment because some may know of the locations and flame me. Lets just say my opinion of average new construction was not altered. The only resulting difference in the two projects is that whereas the re-hab was approved by Maple Ridge and just about everyone else and will sell for around $300K, the Tuscan homes are  force fit, angered the neighborhood and each one will sell for $300K on a similar sized lot. Do you get the picture yet?

I'm ready for an intelligent conversation about the issues of infill.

[ost]

Waterboy,

You started the name calling by the way.  Communist.  This still all boils down to your personal opinion and you wanting to dictate what type of home is built.  I love old homes.  I grew up in one that was built in the 20's.  But everyone has the right to build and live in what they want.  If you don't like it you can move to an historic district which do serve some purpose.

[waterboy]

My apologies to Pfox. I mistakenly lumped him into a response to Ost and Rose. Since he didn't call me a Communist or challenge the right to trash existing neighborhoods with "anything I want" he seems to be a civil poster. Refreshing.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by ost

Waterboy,

You started the name calling by the way.  Communist.  This still all boils down to your personal opinion and you wanting to dictate what type of home is built.  I love old homes.  I grew up in one that was built in the 20's.  But everyone has the right to build and live in what they want.  If you don't like it you can move to an historic district which do serve some purpose.

Well, I re-read all my posts. I called you a "homeowner". Was that offensive and incorrect?
You may also note that I already live in a historic district. The original one.

Everyone does have the right to build and live in what they want, just not where they want. I challenge you to take the 1930's home design that you live in and try to build it in one of the South Tulsa gated communities that require wood roofs and specified styles by covenant. You won't get in the front gate so to speak.

[tim huntzinger]

I am intrigued by the rebuild at 35th and Utica across from the Tuscan disaster.  The builders tore the top off and are using the same foundation.  Better yet, the design does not look like it is a wanna-be 'Italian.'
Shall I hurl invective at those two new mausoleums at 29th and Utica? Yes! Dreadful! Ugh!

Having been on the brunt end of an evillllll developer, infill and new builds are not without impact on the existing homeowners.  Sort of like being bit by a dog, makes you kind of leery of any of them.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

My apologies to Pfox. I mistakenly lumped him into a response to Ost and Rose. Since he didn't call me a Communist or challenge the right to trash existing neighborhoods with "anything I want" he seems to be a civil poster. Refreshing.

Whoa, called a socialist and communist in roughly the same week.

Tough crowd. []

[pfox]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger


Shall I hurl invective at those two new mausoleums at 29th and Utica? Yes! Dreadful! Ugh!

lol

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

My apologies to Pfox. I mistakenly lumped him into a response to Ost and Rose. Since he didn't call me a Communist or challenge the right to trash existing neighborhoods with "anything I want" he seems to be a civil poster. Refreshing.

Whoa, called a socialist and communist in roughly the same week.

Tough crowd. []

In '69 I was considered a moderate. Thought Nixon was OK but voted McGovern in '72. By '76 I was called a moderate liberal, thought Carter was OK. By '80 I was considered confirmed Liberal and was amazed that Reagan got elected. In '92 I was confirmed as a tree hugging liberal, thought Clinton made sense. By 2000 it became clear I had Socialist tendencies, actually liked Minnesota and voted Gore. Now it appears the handwriting is on the wall, I'm a Socialist/Communist. Funny thing is, I have the same views and beliefs I did in '69. Go figure!