| << . 1 . 2 . |
| Author |
Message |
Don_P
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2016 04:47pm - Edited by: Don_P
Reply
Fair enough 
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2016 10:46pm - Edited by: MtnDon
Reply
The question does remain... "If I was to want to erect one of these in an area that enforces the IRC building code, would one of these structures be accepted?" That is I believe a fair and reasonable question and that is more or less what Don_P's questions are concerned about.
Just because something is being sold does not mean that it meets all regulatory rules. That applies to plans being sold on the internet that won't pass my local building department inspection to shed shells being converted to residential use, to any number of other items.
So the basic question I would ask, if I was planning on spending thousands of dollars, would be whether or not the kit could be built on my land, and be inspected and passed under the standard IRC rules as implemented in the state of NM, Sandoval County? Not to mention the IECC. Where I am, if you want to live in "it", even a part time recreation property has to meet code.
A fair enough question IMO. I've been down a similar road with a company that promotes its foundation product as being suitable for myriad uses, including "Homes". However, when all the questions I had and all the answers they supplied were over and done with it could all be distilled down to two sentences from them, "I think the only way you are going to get this approved is to hire a structural engineer who is qualified with Pier construction to design your foundation. We are unable to supply a stamped drawing by a qualified engineer."
So, I need reassurance that all the i's are dotted, the t's crossed, the drawings stamped, etc.
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2016 11:16pm
Reply
Darnit Don, I made some popcorn before advancing to page 2 of this thread and all I get is a "fair enough?"  
In all seriousness, I realize that you have valid concerns and I appreciate your wisdom that I have personally benefited from in other threads. I think drb777 also has a point however. If I invested in a certain building that serves me perfectly and is something that I'm proud of and a random "expert" comes on a thread about my building (or one like it) and basically says 'these things are probably crap' I would resent it a little as well.
MtnDon: Yes, you are right, just because something is sold doesn't mean it's good. In my particular case, WHATEVER I purchase and/or build will not be required to meet any codes because of my location and the laws of this particular area. That doesn't mean I don't care about such things however. After all, this research has been going on for two years now.... I can't even describe how much reading I have done about every building method imaginable. This certainly doesn't make me an expert in anything, but I can assure anyone concerned that I will research as thoroughly as necessary for me to feel comfortable with whatever I choose to build. I've had the time to do so while we remodel the current house and get it ready to sell. I think this is the year however in which we finally pull the trigger on something.
Tapani at Allwood has communicated with me and answered around 10 questions that I have asked about the Eagle Point model. I will continue that conversation via email as I now have a few more questions. So far I have been quite pleased with the answers. 
|
|
drb777
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2016 11:56pm - Edited by: drb777
Reply
MtnDon, I would agree that no matter what one may decide to erect, an outhouse, cabin, garage or anything else, there may, or may not be local regulations that need to be considered. Doesn't everyone know that is the case? And hasn't that been repeated again and again on this forum? So what's new or different in this topic thread?
Both myself and Jabberwocky, that has expressed an interest herein, happen to live in a state and county that doesn't restrict rural cabin structures with codes. Frankly, I couldn't be happier that restrictions don't infringe on my rights to enjoy and use my land as I see fit. And actually I feel sorry for those that don't have the same rights.
I guess this is just my opinion, but I've never found restrictive governmental interferrence in personal property rights to be truly beneficial to society in general in the long run. So I'm glad that the overriding attitude of the landowners in my state is that to each his own as long as one doesn't infringe on your neighbors.
I have no specific problems with buildings codes as such, and I'm aware they are based on best and safe practices as determined by some association or commission. But what the imposition of those regulations causes tends to be counter-productive. Everytime I've pulled a permit in the city where I live, it's common knowledge that it's purpose is to generate permit fees and alert the county assessor to raise your real estate taxes. Yes, the city flunky comes out and slaps a little sticker on wall or stud, but actually they couldn't care less and rarely spend more than a few seconds inspecting anything.
I guess I just don't agree that it's government's responsibility or authority to regulate & restrict what I do with my property. Safety first no doubt, but regulators don't dictate my property rights, at least not where my cabin is located.
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Jan 2016 08:53am
Reply
Just a quick update for anyone who is interested.... After speaking with Allwood I found out what the name of the cabin is in the European market. Still no pictures of it in the wild, but I did find a Youtube video which gives a MUCH better understanding of the cabin than what the small illustrations show. Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cn7lcroiiIg
MY first impressions... my wife and I are in love with the design. The stairs however are... um... adventurous to say the least! (You'll see what I mean)
Also we are concerned with ceiling height on the low end of the top floor.
|
|
drb777
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Jan 2016 09:54am
Reply
Thanks for the youtube link. I see what you mean about the stairs, sort of Victorian steep. I'd think that would not be too difficult to modify, but you would end up consuming more floor space.
As in life, cabin designs always seem to end up being a series of compromises, with some aspects simply not acceptable. My sister & her MD husband will not accept hardy any compromise in their million+ dollar home. They're now on there second, and they seem to be driving themselves crazy with the extreme fuss. I don't see how that makes a "life well lived".
Just continue to take your time to gather all the data available. Lots of choices out there, try to enjoy the chase. It's good you're not in a hurry.
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Jan 2016 12:30pm
Reply
Yes drb, the stairs and ceiling height are not deal breakers for us - after all, I came to the SMALL-cabin forum for a reason... we have often considered the tiny-home route.
I agree with you that refusing to compromise is not the hallmark of a happy or balanced life. I meet people in my line of work every day who are 'mad at the world,' and it seems for no other reason than the fact that 'the world' doesn't share their individual standard of perfection.
Of course, sometimes it's good not to compromise... one of life's great arts is to be able to distinguish between the times to do so and the times to refuse.
|
|
drb777
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Jan 2016 01:53pm
Reply
Just one more thought relative to interlocking log structures. I can say with a high level certainty/experience, that assembly of these cabins can be greatly facilitated when weather conditions are the dryest. My preference would easily be to accept delivery in say July, and begin assembly as soon as possible thereafter. And I would plan to get roofed-in w/o delay, as much as possible. While rains during assembly don't necessarily cause any harm, the dryer the better for several detailed reasons.
|
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Jan 2016 09:25am
Reply
drb777
That would be my preference too. Unfortunately there are too many unknowns at the moment. We still have to sell our house, buy property, order the cabin, etc.. so who knows when this'll go down.
The first order of business is to sell the current house. That'll give us the money to buy land. We'll live with my folks for a few months while we find property and build. The foregoing is why the quick construction of a cabin appeals to us, and also why we can't spend 3 years tinkering with stick building all of it ourselves on the weekends, which is of course, the cheapest route to take, but perhaps not the best one for long-term peace of mind.
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Jan 2016 06:15pm
Reply
drb777
Another question I thought of today that you might be able to help with: Since I don't have any experience with log cabins, I just can't quite get my head wrapped around the concept of the logs moving. I mean, obviously all buildings settle and move, but I realize that it takes on a new level of concern with such a structure. I've seen, or at least I think I've seen, conflicting photos which make me more confused...
I've read that the flooring must 'float' and not be attached to the side walls at all. This makes sense to me, but as such, the wife is concerned about creepy-crawlies coming up through the gap at the edges. Also, I see baseboard trim in many photos, but I can't figure out how it is attached without creating problems.
I saw an official installation video today that shows the flooring butting right up to the wall and base trim mounted tightly to the wall, which contradicts what I've read.
I'll explain what I'm thinking, and maybe you can just confirm or correct me? I'm thinking that the floor and base trim CAN be connected to the bottom run of logs because they themselves need to be fastened to the floor joists, so that run of logs isn't going anywhere. It's the logs above that are going to move around... Is that correct?
It's my understanding that anything that is fastened to the wall, be it cabinetry, shelving, showers, or what-have-you, must either be connected to one individual log or use slotted sleepers of some sort. Is that also correct?
Many thanks!
|
|
drb777
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Jan 2016 07:32pm - Edited by: drb777
Reply
While it's true that the subfloor T&G boards are not nailed to the sidewall logs, they are firmly nailed to the pressure treated floor joists. And yes, the first course of wall logs also are firmly attached to the floor joists. With this type of structure, there is no requirement for a "floating" sub-floor or surface floor, at least with the Louman/Lillevilla products. The supplied (sub) flooring is 3/4" x 3" (approx.) T&G nordic spurce.
On my cabin, I finished-out the floor by adding a floating laminate system (poly/foam/interlocking laminate), but that was simply optional, and done for it's practicality and aesthetics.
Base trim to close-up the very small gap between the flooring and the walls is included as part of the package. And as normal, the trim is nailed the sidewall only, not the flooring.
As with all log-type structures, moisture from the air during the different seasons can and will cause a bit of swelling/contraction of the walls. Frankly, these kiln-dryed and fully machined logs have negligible movement if you do the proper exterior sealing. Best I can tell, after 3 years, my cabin walls have contracted only about 1/4". As prescribed, I simply tightened the steel corner tension rods and that was that.
And yes, verticle attachments to the walls need to account for the slight movement, but it's very easy once you learn a few little tricks. The photo below shows the corner shower I installed that did require substantial verticle wall attachment. As shown, I simply framed-up a limited corner wall providing the necessary static structure.
These type of cabins don't really flex/move any more than any other conventional wood frame construction. In fact, considering how tightly every individual log fits at the corners and interior wall junctions, the entire structure is extremely solid and stable.
Corner Shower application
|  | | |
|
|
Jabberwocky
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Jan 2016 08:43am
Reply
@drb777: Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation. Based on your shower photo, that's pretty much what I envisioned, I was just confused on the flooring part. This has been a busy month for us, but after things get settled, we would really like the opportunity to see your cabin in person before we actually pull the trigger on a kit home. I will email you... maybe next month sometime to see if we can work something out?
Tapani at Allwood was able to track down actual photos of the Eagle Point (a.k.a Mekong). I'm posting the link here for everyone's benefit:
https://www.gartenhaus2000.de/ratgeber/holzhaus-aufbau.html
The real photos help immensely. Right now this is our front runner for potential options. The wife loves all of the windows, and I am impressed with the perceived build quality. The rafters are twice as thick as I expected. Also, it's difficult to tell for sure, but it appears to us that the stairs are not as steep as shown in the 3D rendering. After two years of searching, it's obvious to both of us that this particular cabin encapsulates our style/design preferences closer than anything else to date.
Tapani is hunting down answers to a few more specific questions I still have, but yeah.... we're fired up about this one.
|
|
| << . 1 . 2 . |
