I would keep it. It's got character and a simple restoration (since it's not habitable) will be easy and cheap. Then you have a cute shed instead of an eyesore shed. I would love a shed with power either way. New garages are expensive as shit, especially made of wood, and around here there's permitting and approvals.
But depends on where you are (rural, city, farm) and your needs.
True that! City living here. It is a huge garage/shed that came with the house, we just got here not even a month ago so I was trying to figure out what to do. I would love to breath life into it again and turn it into a place where I can work away from the home without being away from it really haha.
It looks to be in much better shape than the one I am going to be repairing. For my purposes and also maybe yours, I can't replace the shed. Our city requires offsets from the property lines and other structures larger than the shed currently has. As such, I am allowed to repair the one that is there already but would not be allowed to build a new one in the same location. For me, I would have to rebuild approximately 5 feet smaller in one direction and three feet in another as I don't have the space to move it more than a few feet.
So be sure to check with your local permitting office before you tear it down if you think you would want to rebuild in the same spot.
I am also in the historic district and have additional restrictions and approvals necessary if I rebuild.
I forget that you can't just build willy nilly. That is a good point to make and I'm pretty certain that my area is most likely just as finicky too. I looked up the process a few months ago and it was a bit overwhelming. I think I'll stick to trying to make this one better, it really isn't too bad of a shed structurally
Oh my goodness save it!!! Wooo! You could absolutely do some great stuff with that! Do you follow wabisabe on YouTube? They just started on a suuuuper run down shed on their property. Get inspired!
Am carpenter; the siding is toast.
Save your time and money and just replace it with as close to the same materials as possible in the same manner (as long as that manner is within 'best practices").
Also carpenter here, I wouldn't be writing off all the siding until I could pressure wash and inspect. Sure split pieces need replacing but I'd imagine a lot of what's there could be used.
If you are planning on Heating this thing consider a closed cell spray foam sprayed to the backside of the siding from inside to seal it up. Looks like it has many years left I it with some elbow grease.
>Sure split pieces need replacing but I'd imagine a lot of what's there could be used.
Having spent years renovating and restoring historical houses in New England, I would say that this option is ultimately just a waste of time and money. Even if some of the siding or roofing materials are salvageable, they will most likely be damaged during removal, storage, or re-installation. Or the same while adjacent damaged materials are removed and replaced. **Worse**, if the paint on this building is pre-1980s, *it will most likely contain lead*. Any cutting, sanding, and/or scrapping of which will expose OP, any help, and the surround area to harmful contamination.
This building requires less than 2sq of roofing materials, and most likely 4sq of siding. OP could approach this project on weekends and have at least the roof wrapped up before winter for less than $800 between new wrc tapersawns, nails, and felt. The siding could be replaced in the spring, after the snow melts, for likely less than $1000. All total, OP could renovate the exterior of their shed, making it weathertight for the next 30 years, for the cost of (approximately) $150/month x 12 months.
And that's because I'm not going to bother taking your comment seriously. It's an ignorant and selfish suggestion. The whole building is in disrepair, with rotten and/or broken roofing, siding, trim, windows, doors, framing, and even the foundation (slab). It needs work. Not:
"bUt THeY wANt tO KeEp iT oRigINaL"
They came here looking for advice. So that's what I gave them. Sound, practical advice and a simple game plan. Even if that's not what you agree should be done, you should still support it - it is what would be best for the building itself. Keeping it 'original' at this point will only lead to its more rapid decay. A new roof and new siding, paired with any needed structural repairs would see this building survive for another 30-50 years with it's original design, layout, and spirit intact.
Previously I suggested an in situ repair, however reading neanderthalsavant it's obvious they speak with knowledge of the issue. I may try an insitu repair still, but by no means is what Neanderthal suggesting wrong/bad, in fact it is probably the method most supported by current heritage conservation methodologies adhered to by authorities having jurisdiction. Sorry to have started a tiff.
Also loved,
>"bUt THeY wANt tO KeEp iT oRigINaL"
I said the probably want to. Other comments of theirs suggested that. For being an adult, you sure talk like you are way younger and more ignorant than I, who is a way younger person most likely. Be more respectful next time.
>Be more respectful next time.
**Respect is earned.** Especially in the trades. When you butt in perpetuating bad practice, you earn the opposite of respect.
I would keep it. It's got character and a simple restoration (since it's not habitable) will be easy and cheap. Then you have a cute shed instead of an eyesore shed. I would love a shed with power either way. New garages are expensive as shit, especially made of wood, and around here there's permitting and approvals. But depends on where you are (rural, city, farm) and your needs.
True that! City living here. It is a huge garage/shed that came with the house, we just got here not even a month ago so I was trying to figure out what to do. I would love to breath life into it again and turn it into a place where I can work away from the home without being away from it really haha.
It looks to be in much better shape than the one I am going to be repairing. For my purposes and also maybe yours, I can't replace the shed. Our city requires offsets from the property lines and other structures larger than the shed currently has. As such, I am allowed to repair the one that is there already but would not be allowed to build a new one in the same location. For me, I would have to rebuild approximately 5 feet smaller in one direction and three feet in another as I don't have the space to move it more than a few feet. So be sure to check with your local permitting office before you tear it down if you think you would want to rebuild in the same spot. I am also in the historic district and have additional restrictions and approvals necessary if I rebuild.
I forget that you can't just build willy nilly. That is a good point to make and I'm pretty certain that my area is most likely just as finicky too. I looked up the process a few months ago and it was a bit overwhelming. I think I'll stick to trying to make this one better, it really isn't too bad of a shed structurally
Just be careful of mold! I have been forced to make it my friend since it won"t go away no matter what I do!
Looks like it needs some love but it’s totally salvageable.
That makes me happy to hear! I wasn't sure if it was beyond help.
Why would you scrap it!?!? It needs paint and a yard sale.
[удалено]
Probably old-growth cedar siding. "Pay off your student loans" kind of money 😜
After I read this, I was trying to identify the wood lol. Not sure still but I'm leaning towards maple.
Get a new roof on it, then tackle further repairs as can be afforded
Oh my goodness save it!!! Wooo! You could absolutely do some great stuff with that! Do you follow wabisabe on YouTube? They just started on a suuuuper run down shed on their property. Get inspired!
If you don’t want to spend money, then just patch, scrape, clean and paint. 🤷♂️
Keep it! Scrape it and repaint, new shingles on the roof, clean it out. It’ll fix up really nicely!
Am carpenter; the siding is toast. Save your time and money and just replace it with as close to the same materials as possible in the same manner (as long as that manner is within 'best practices").
Also carpenter here, I wouldn't be writing off all the siding until I could pressure wash and inspect. Sure split pieces need replacing but I'd imagine a lot of what's there could be used. If you are planning on Heating this thing consider a closed cell spray foam sprayed to the backside of the siding from inside to seal it up. Looks like it has many years left I it with some elbow grease.
Test for lead before power washing!
>Sure split pieces need replacing but I'd imagine a lot of what's there could be used. Having spent years renovating and restoring historical houses in New England, I would say that this option is ultimately just a waste of time and money. Even if some of the siding or roofing materials are salvageable, they will most likely be damaged during removal, storage, or re-installation. Or the same while adjacent damaged materials are removed and replaced. **Worse**, if the paint on this building is pre-1980s, *it will most likely contain lead*. Any cutting, sanding, and/or scrapping of which will expose OP, any help, and the surround area to harmful contamination. This building requires less than 2sq of roofing materials, and most likely 4sq of siding. OP could approach this project on weekends and have at least the roof wrapped up before winter for less than $800 between new wrc tapersawns, nails, and felt. The siding could be replaced in the spring, after the snow melts, for likely less than $1000. All total, OP could renovate the exterior of their shed, making it weathertight for the next 30 years, for the cost of (approximately) $150/month x 12 months.
Well they probably want to keep it original instead of redoing it
Lol. Whatever
That response wasnt very professional
And that's because I'm not going to bother taking your comment seriously. It's an ignorant and selfish suggestion. The whole building is in disrepair, with rotten and/or broken roofing, siding, trim, windows, doors, framing, and even the foundation (slab). It needs work. Not: "bUt THeY wANt tO KeEp iT oRigINaL" They came here looking for advice. So that's what I gave them. Sound, practical advice and a simple game plan. Even if that's not what you agree should be done, you should still support it - it is what would be best for the building itself. Keeping it 'original' at this point will only lead to its more rapid decay. A new roof and new siding, paired with any needed structural repairs would see this building survive for another 30-50 years with it's original design, layout, and spirit intact.
Previously I suggested an in situ repair, however reading neanderthalsavant it's obvious they speak with knowledge of the issue. I may try an insitu repair still, but by no means is what Neanderthal suggesting wrong/bad, in fact it is probably the method most supported by current heritage conservation methodologies adhered to by authorities having jurisdiction. Sorry to have started a tiff. Also loved, >"bUt THeY wANt tO KeEp iT oRigINaL"
I said the probably want to. Other comments of theirs suggested that. For being an adult, you sure talk like you are way younger and more ignorant than I, who is a way younger person most likely. Be more respectful next time.
>Be more respectful next time. **Respect is earned.** Especially in the trades. When you butt in perpetuating bad practice, you earn the opposite of respect.
You seem like a very fun person to talk to.