Closing Bell: Grand Avenue Haunted House Losing Its Skin

This here folks is the infamous "BRICK-FILLED FRAME". Look at it. Remember it. If the question ever comes up again on here, refer them to this pic. If they still don't get it, tell them that "'brick-filled frame' means a frame house filled with brick afterward in between the studs"--DUH. As for the reason, I think it was a cheaper construction (wood-frame and crappy ugly bricks) that could act as a better fire-retardant than a just a frame house where flames travel up those gaps between the studs. Anyone else with input on this?

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 4:48 PM

All frame houses have fill between the studs. Just a question of whether it's rubble or brick.

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 5:09 PM

The Vinnie Chase Impact.

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 5:29 PM

a lot of people pull out the bricks, re-insulate with a nice r-value fiberglass, screw up plywood (for rigidity), and then cover the ply with 1/2 to 1" foam board, then they re-side. frame houses don't need the brick infil, i believe it was first put in there as a fire retardant, but that was when siding options were wood only.

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 5:59 PM

The older frame homes typically do.

AClintonHillLady

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 8:07 PM

building a frame house and then filling in the gaps with some kind of masonry or plaster is one of the oldest western building traditions. The fact that the brick may have provided a little insulation and a little strength was almost secondary. The important thing was that it tapped into a way of building that spanned back centuries. It was tradition. stuffing bricks between wall studs really makes little construction sense just as carving big notches out of square timber beams makes little sense, but it was the way it done until somebody invented a better system.

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 8:21 PM

Great old house. I hope it turns out nice. It was an inspiration for local artist/Spiritualist...look at...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brienfoy/483068184/

Posted by: guest at February 5, 2008 9:35 PM

Nogging!!! I love all the wisdom here. Thanks.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 7:45 AM

Our frame house was exactly the same. Over the years the mortar has dried out completely and had begun to crumble; as I removed the exterior siding the bricks often tumbled right out. Also of interest was the fact that the studs were tenoned and fit into mortises in the joists; no nails were used at all.

I did exactly as the above described: R19 insulation, 1" Ply sheathing, Tyvek, 1/2" fanfold foam, and finally cedar clapboards. The difference in warmth/draftiness this winter is indescribable. The brick fill was worthless when compared to the fiberglass. Of course, it's 60 degrees outside right now...

I wanted to use denim insulation but the cost was somewhat prohibitive. Also the 'bales' are HUGE; it doesn't compress like fiberglass.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 8:57 AM

Last time I saw this building posted here I belive someone was telling me how it would have more cost effective to restore that a total gut renovation and I didn't know what I was talking about. The depicted water damage was minimal. Looking at this shot, I guess the owners didn't agree either.

" 2:49.
you know not of what you speak.
even in bad cases like this you may only have to replace twenty or thirty percent of the total joists. No need to throw out good joists. In addition, most of the partion framing will probably be OK. I agree that most if not all of the plaster and lath should be thrown out. But portions can be kept to cast replicas. Most of the casework will need to be replaced but sometimes the humidity does the stripping for you and leaves perfectly good casework. the old wood was remarkable. It is a case by case thing. You don't walk in assuming that you will need a hundred percent replacement of all structure and trim. That's silly."

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 8:58 AM

So does anyone know if this changes the description of the house from a "Frame" to a "Brick"??

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 9:16 AM

No, because the brick is not structural.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 10:04 AM

I hope they don't overdo the demo phase. Sometimes it is hard to rein in contractors when they start demolishing. They probably did not have to take down the Mansard framing to such an extent. This does not look like a restoration job to me it looks like an overzealous contractor.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 10:59 AM

I think it's cool Adrian Grenier is so passionate about the blue jeans in his walls of his green house. If it helps him get laid then all the better. Spread the word, it's incentive for more green building.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:38 PM