I have both california closets and easyclosets in my house. I used california for the master and child closets -- the efficiency ideas of the designer were extremely helpful. I subsequently used easyclosets for coats and utility. They were pretty basic and I hyad an idea of the layout that would work for my family. An important aesthetic decision is whether you like board or wire shelves. I think Elfa has wire shelves only.

Posted by: keep at November 27, 2007 10:20 AM in response to Closet Fix Up

What is the contact (phone or website) information for The Organic Gardner? I would love for him to design my backyard. It is clearly in the BEFORE stage.

Posted by: keep at December 13, 2007 3:55 PM in response to Inside Third & Bond: Week 17

I'm convinced! I want to keep my original old drafty windows. Who do you recommend to repair them?

Posted by: keep at January 17, 2008 2:09 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

We used California Closets. A bit pricy, but their customer service is great and they are really good about optimizing your space, no matter how big or small.

Posted by: guest at November 28, 2007 11:54 AM in response to Closet Fix Up

i did california closets. yeah, it's not so cheap but really quite headache-less and looks very nice.

Posted by: dianabanana at November 29, 2007 10:52 AM in response to Closet Fix Up

www.castleclosets.com (by far the most affordable closet systems in the tri-state area) and they use all the same materials as the big guys!! check them out!

Posted by: charlie at January 7, 2008 9:24 AM in response to Closet Fix Up

Marvin

Posted by: guest at January 17, 2008 2:48 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

Yeah, so focus on insulating your roof first before you start throwing out your old windows.
The spring mechanism in new style windows is prone to fail after about 20 years (that's why you see so many newer windows where the upper sash has to be propped up or it slides down, since the spring is worn out by always being streched unless the window is fully open in the summer). And in that case it's often quite expensive to replace. The weight, pulley and cord or chain mechanism of old windows is much more easily repaired. And double pane sealed glass units are easier to fix than single pane?
As for the boiler argument: I said, 'An argument could be made..' to illustrate that there are many other sources of energy loss in the house that one should be more concerned about, and that sometimes a short-sighted move to 'save energy' could worsen the problem of energy loss. Yes, boilers can be sized to the current heat loss of the house and not automatically the same size as the old boiler. But, I see more people focussing on new windows and fewer on appropriate boiler sizing, which is why I mentioned it. Now what's ridiculous and nihilistic about this argument?

Anyways, I was trying to be nice, but sometimes it can be so difficult. Vampire? Really? That's what I am if I keep the curtains drawn on hot summer days?

Posted by: ohiise at January 17, 2008 3:45 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

Keep: A lot of it is DIY, or you could hire a good handyman. I suppose if there were enough demand for it, there would be more people who would fix them, just like there are so many new window installers now.

Posted by: ohiise at January 17, 2008 3:58 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

Ohiise, I'm still with ya! For those who didn't look at the link I posted somewhere up there...days ago...If your old windows are in bad disrepair and need full restoration, you're looking at $1000 per window ala Park Slope Glass. So, it's a DIY job. Time consuming, but not rocket science. We went with Allied Storm, the "invisible" storm and they look fine. Our windows have wavy glass, great wood patina and original hardware. That's one house.

On our brownstone, the windows were probably replaced in the 80's. They are drafty vinyl shite. We haven't replaced them yet due to cost, but we had to do some major insulation work as the previous owners took out the weights,etc and left gaping holes. They didn't even caulk the exterior.

Posted by: rh at January 17, 2008 4:16 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

One thing not often considered about double glass insulated windows is that they have a very limited lifetime. The seals between the layers of glass last five to ten years or maybe a little more, and then become permanently clouded with condensation. Most people don't figure in the cost of frequent replacement.

An old weight balanced sash window should last about 100 years before the chain needs replacement. Our company has repaired many windows that are over 250 years old, that will outlast any double insulated glass window existing today.

The longevity of the old wood windows is due in part to superior rot resistance of old growth pine (compared to any other wood used commercially in windows today). The world was a much colder place 100 years ago, and the pine trees took 30 - 40 years to grow an inch in diameter. Today, even in northern Canada, pine grows an inch in six to ten years, and possesses little resistance to rotting, even with preservative treatment. Homeowners who buy the expensive Marvin or Pella windows will discover these lessons too soon. Better woods to use in windows, if you are replicating old windows, are Spanish cedar or quarter sawn white oak.

The other aspect of old wood windows superiority to double insulated windows is that the weight balance system has a lifetime counted in centuries, with changes of sash chain or cord when needed. The sash springs in double insulated windows lose their tension in anywhere from a year or two, to maybe five years, and are then extremely difficult to operate. A weight balanced window is as easy to open (if not painted shut) in 100 years as the day it was put in.

If you would like to look into restoring your old windows or having them replicated, contact:
Olek Lejbzon & Co., see www.oleklejbzon.com
lejbzon@verizon.net
Peter Triestman
973-615-1257

Posted by: guest at January 19, 2008 10:22 PM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

Please note that Federal law does not require you to comply with the provisions of maintaining a historically accurate house unless you are receiving federal money.

Compliance is honorary.

Most state laws duplicate the federal law stating that unless state money is being used on the project, you are allowed to do as you wish.

The problem occurs at the local level when people don't understand this concept. If the local government is not providing any sort of economic compensation for you to surrender your rights on how you should repair your house, you do not have to comply with these provisions. However, be warned--you will have to fight a large amount of ignorant and very arrogant people.

As for historical windows being better, here is a very simple test. Take a propane torch and raise the temperature of a new double pane argon gas filled window to about 150 degrees. Then take a CO2 cartridge (most computer air dusters) and freeze the opposite window pane till it frosts. You will notice that the frost DOES NOT MELT from the heated glass less than a half inch away. The frost will dissipate from room temperature. Then I dare you to try this experiment with a historical window.

It is very important to keep the balance of being a historical preservationist and environmentalist in check. Right now, there is a very severe energy problem in the United States. From what I have seen in Indiana, it is more important to waste natural resources to preserve dilapidated interesting, but not historical homes. You can't be a bunny hugger is you kill all the bunnies as a result of excess greenhouse gas emissions to heat the house.

I agree with the other authors insulating your house is something you should be doing regardless of the type of window you have. If you are trying to be historically accurate, you would be using sawdust, shredded newspapers, socks, etc, as opposed to fiberglass as insulation.

Posted by: guest at January 25, 2008 2:03 AM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency

Some thoughts on Replacement Windows:
________________________________________
Barbara Campagna, Director of Architecture for the National Trust’s 29 historic sites, wrote in Preservation Nation, the news letter for the National Trust For Historic Preservation , a ‘tirade’ (her words) on Vinyl Replacement Windows. I suggest anyone contemplating an historic window replacement read the article.

http://blogs.nationaltrust.org/preservationnation/?p=233#comment-1504

Of particular interest is a comment in the article by Mike Jackson (Chief Architect of the Illinois State Historic Preservation Office); in which he characterizes replacement windows touting no maintenance as “No Maintenance required” really means “can’t be repaired” - so they end up in the landfill much sooner than say a wood window which can be repaired and repaired and repaired, or recycled.

First of all: consider this disclaimer to my point of view. I’m not a disinterested party. As President and CEO of The Woodstone Company, I’ve been manufacturing wooden historic replicate windows for 30 years.

That being said, there is more to window replacement than meets the eye and much of it is over-simplified or ignored altogether by design, building and manufacturing professionals for a variety of reasons. I, for example, want to promote Woodstone services and would like to indulge your opinions on historic window replacement projects; not only to promote my company’s services, but to provide you a forum on which you can expand your perspective.

Several issues have been noted in the commentary listed above, from the efficiency of storm windows to the accuracy of divided lite fenestration to the high cost of custom historic high performance wooden windows when compared to the more generic replacement windows; be they vinyl, fiberglass, aluminum, clad or semi-custom wooden windows.

As an enticement for your indulgence in this forum please consider the following query. If you could replace your existing windows, be they the original landmark historic one’s or more recent replacements installed, perhaps years ago, but in the interim, with accurately replicated high performance wooden windows and cost was not an issue, would you be inclined to do so?

Again, consider Architect Jackson’s perspective…”… a wood window which can be repaired and repaired and repaired, or recycled”.

If you purchase a window designed to last for 20 years with no maintenance and compare it to the cost of a window designed to last for 100 years or more with efficiently planned maintenance, what cost/benefit considerations come to mind?

I’ll try to visit this forum on a weekly basis at least and respond to as many inquiries or points of view as I can. In the meantime, I’ll address one other concern already listed here.

With regard to storm window efficiency; the reason storm windows are not as efficient as windows with sealed insulating glass (IG) is not only because the storm window allows air infiltration, but because there is an optimally efficient air space. When the air space between two pieces of glass reaches a certain dimension and ambient temperatures change, the air sandwiched between the panes of glass begins to circulate more in direct correlation with the increased size of the air space, be it in a sealed IG sash or separate storm sash. When air circulates, its temperature conductivity increases and energy efficiency decreases.

For those of you who’ve reached the end of this missive, I thank you, and I look forward to future discussions on historic window restoration and replication.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:13 AM in response to A rant about replacing historic wooden windows in the name of energy efficiency