Sign in or 

| Mike, Daryl Thanks for the email. Sorry about the typo in my email address. I never got Daryl's reply until now; so thanks for following up. In addition to building my own house, I am a member of ReCode Portland, which is a project to review the laws of Portland as they affect the construction and operation of permaculture communities. The objective is to work with the city officials and, using the best practices, become more sustainable as to food and housing, use of land, and sustainable in terms of using "natural" housing construction concepts. Straw bales fits one of the methods. I am also collecting ideas will how cities' and countys' regulations affect us when the economic meltdown from Peak Oil really hits hard. I know at the building official level, you are executing policy, not making policy. However, it is a starting point and quickly sets the parameters for cost of housing, for example: I spent four years in Montana and built a modular residence. Montana has no permit, no inspections, no stardards if one wishes to build his or her own residence, yet most houses are built professionally or by amatures to national code. Thus there is a wide range of "policy" as it affects affordable house. Corvallis is more typical of most jurisdictions. My take on policy is that every city and county should have a set of " typical" plans and specifications for simple straw bale houses -- both load bearing and non-load bearing, and thus by-passing the need for an architect or engineer -- a build by prescription. In the energy field requirements, most all jurisdictions provide "build by prescription" methods. So why not do the same for strawbale construction? I need to have a copy of the ordinance which approved the building codes for use for residential housing, and a copy of Appendix R. I am especially interest in Daryl's statement that I and my friends can build a house as long as the labor is "free" but I cannot pay a friend to help me build a house. That makes no sense to me; so there must be some more to the issue of who builds a self-built house. Jefferson County in Washington, for instances, allows a self-builder to do all of the electrical system work, but requries the person doing the work to pass a test such as would be given a person who wishes to become an apprentice electrician. That person can be the owner or an employee of the owner, or a volunteer/friend. That idea could take root and the city or a local college could give courses on all aspects of building a house to code, test the student and issue a certificate which would be honored by cities and counties in Oregon (and elsewhere). This approach would make housing more affordable as opposed to the current system which favors maintaning the current state license restriction on "who" can build, rather than "what" a person can build. If the structure is designed to code, is built to code, and is inspected to code, what difference could it possibly make as to "who" does the work? In the coming melt-down of our economy because of Peak Oil, we need to conserve energy to heat homes. Properly built straw bale houses have the abiliity to conserve heat inside in the winter with an R-50 value. That plus a wide eave will protect the walls and give shade in the summertime, thus reducing or eliminating the need for electric heat pumps for air conditioning. I would rather see cities and counties become pro-active in adopting this "new" construction method (it's only 100+ year old), rather than fighting the concept and putting extra burden on those who would want to create their own affordable housing. What is the URL for Appendix R? Best regards, Jim Miller |
| Mike, Daryl Thanks for the email. Sorry about the typo in my email address. I never got Daryl's reply until now; so thanks for following up. In addition to building my own house, I am a member of ReCode Portland, which is a project to review the laws of Portland as they affect the construction and operation of permaculture communities. The objective is to work with the city officials and, using the best practices, become more sustainable as to food and housing, use of land, and sustainable in terms of using "natural" housing construction concepts. Straw bales fits one of the methods. I am also collecting ideas will how cities' and countys' regulations affect us when the economic meltdown from Peak Oil really hits hard. I know at the building official level, you are executing policy, not making policy. However, it is a starting point and quickly sets the parameters for cost of housing, for example: I spent four years in Montana and built a modular residence. Montana has no permit, no inspections, no stardards if one wishes to build his or her own residence, yet most houses are built professionally or by amatures to national code. Thus there is a wide range of "policy" as it affects affordable house. Corvallis is more typical of most jurisdictions. My take on policy is that every city and county should have a set of " typical" plans and specifications for simple straw bale houses -- both load bearing and non-load bearing, and thus by-passing the need for an architect or engineer -- a build by prescription. In the energy field requirements, most all jurisdictions provide "build by prescription" methods. So why not do the same for strawbale construction? I need to have a copy of the ordinance which approved the building codes for use for residential housing, and a copy of Appendix R. I am especially interest in Daryl's statement that I and my friends can build a house as long as the labor is "free" but I cannot pay a friend to help me build a house. That makes no sense to me; so there must be some more to the issue of who builds a self-built house. Jefferson County in Washington, for instances, allows a self-builder to do all of the electrical system work, but requries the person doing the work to pass a test such as would be given a person who wishes to become an apprentice electrician. That person can be the owner or an employee of the owner, or a volunteer/friend. That idea could take root and the city or a local college could give courses on all aspects of building a house to code, test the student and issue a certificate which would be honored by cities and counties in Oregon (and elsewhere). This approach would make housing more affordable as opposed to the current system which favors maintaning the current state license restriction on "who" can build, rather than "what" a person can build. If the structure is designed to code, is built to code, and is inspected to code, what difference could it possibly make as to "who" does the work? In the coming melt-down of our economy because of Peak Oil, we need to conserve energy to heat homes. Properly built straw bale houses have the abiliity to conserve heat inside in the winter with an R-50 value. That plus a wide eave will protect the walls and give shade in the summertime, thus reducing or eliminating the need for electric heat pumps for air conditioning. I would rather see cities and counties become pro-active in adopting this "new" construction method (it's only 100+ year old), rather than fighting the concept and putting extra burden on those who would want to create their own affordable housing. What is the URL for Appendix R? Best regards, Jim Miller |
jimmiller5417@gmail |
Latest page update: made by jimmiller5417@gmail
, Sep 30 2008, 3:56 AM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by jimmiller5417@gmail
2750 words added view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
None
More Info: links to this page
|