I recommend calling Universal Floors. They refinished our original heart pine floors and I LOVE the way they look. They are true experts. At least they could have a look and tell you whether your floors are salvageable or beyond repair. We are thinking of moving and I think our current floors may be the feature I miss the most!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DON"T buy a house if you don't like the 'period' look such as floors, bathrooms, etc. New floors in an old house would kill it.

Nonsense. Many older houses have crummy wood flooring that adds nothing to their appeal, and even with floors that were originally in good shape, there is a limit to the number of times you can refinish them. You can use beautiful reclaimed wood to replace your floors. Replacement doesn't need to mean shiny, plastic-looking blond wood.

+1 Our house only dates to 1930s and most of our floors are original, except in one room which was a 1950 add-on. I purchased reclaimed wood floors online from a place in Virgina (with varying plank size) and they're gorgeous. Everyone comments on them.

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP. This thread has made me realize that our house doesn't really have any preserved "period" features, other than the facade and the floor, and maybe some older windows. Everything else has been renovated over the years. But thanks to all the posters who responded that they value the floors -- we'll definitely be keeping them for now, but will probably redo the kitchen in a few years.

OP, we just bought an 1880s Victorian. It has all the original wood plank floors, which we adore, EXCEPT in the kitchen, where there is white porcelain tile. We like the tiles in the kitchen...I wouldn't say we love them, but then again the whole kitchen was renovated in 1984 so it all really needs to be redone again. It never would have dawned on me not to like / buy the house b/c the floors had been replaced in the kitchen. I wouldn't worry about that, if I were you, partic. if you are replacing while renovating the kitchen, which will increase value. Now if you were talking about replacing grand old hardwoods in the living room, that's a different story. I wouldn't ever remove them unless you HAVE to b/c they are so damaged, or have been sanded so many times that there is no life left in them. GL.

I love old houses (though mine is "only" 1942) and I love when they've been faithfully restored. BUT I figure there is more than one type of buyer. There's the buyer that wants the original everything. And then there is the buyer that would be ok with all the period details but with really nice floors. I wouldn't mind being that buyer - I like a nice floor. My current house has wood throughout the first floor. The wood in the bedrooms is not in great shape. The wood in the main rooms has been replaced and it's gorgeous and doesn't detract from the rest of the house.

Vessel sinks really are a joke though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just moved into our c. 1900 townhouse in dc. We love the house, but we don't know what to think about the floors. The agent told us that we shouldn't dream of replacing them because they are very valued on the market, but to us they just look old and worn, with gaps and patches here and there. Overall I guess they are in decent shape, but they are undeniably old. We don't have the money now, but a few years down the line would like replace them - but we won't do it if they are truly a prized feature of older homes.

You may not be the old house type. A lot of people think they are but when it comes down to it, they'd be better off and happier in a Ryan Home in Springfield. Your question leads me to believe that you are probably one of these people and don't really appreciate the history, charm or character of a fine old home and may have bought the place because it was the cool thing to do. Sell it to someone who truly loves old homes and embrace your repressed love of all things Franconia.

Thanks for your helpful response, bee-yotch.

She may be a bee-yotch, but what she says is true. DON"T buy a house if you don't like the 'period' look such as floors, bathrooms, etc. New floors in an old house would kill it.

Well, the thing is that people in old houses don't "really" leave the period fixtures as is. They get replaced with things that look kind of sort of the old thing, but aren't really. I mean, you don't *really* leave the Victorian bathroom as it was a hundred years ago, right? You probably wouldn't put a, I don't know, minimalist-looking vessel sink into that space, but if you say you leave the old fixtures and plumbing as is, I would have to not believe you. I doubt a Victorian-age kitchen in a Victorian house would add much value to it.

Thank you! And I'm sure people also enjoy modern air conditioning and cookong gas, instead of sweltering and using dirty coal.

I have also read that older pine floors were actually intended to be subfloors, with carpeting over them, by the original builders. So it's not necessarily true that they are an authentic feature of the home's aesthetics.

I love my new house & feel lucky to live in such a well preserved historic urban neighborhood. But I don't feel obgligated to turn my life into that 1800s House reality show ....

There's a big difference between keeping a house "period correct" (lighting fixtures, molding, flooring, doors, hardware, bath fixtures, etc.) and going back to coal. An asinine statement such as that is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about and should refrain from giving further advise on this topic. Try going to The Brass Knob or Second Chance in Baltimore instead of Home Depot and you might learn something. And ditch that stupid looking vessel sink, it looks like a freakin' pasta bowl and people are laughing at you.

Not PP but I'm laughing at YOU for trying to make someone feel bad about their SINK. Get a life.

Re tension between "period correct" and updating that a PP mentioned, I'd draw the line elsewhere.

I don't make irreversible changes (or hard-to-reverse changes) like ripping out original fixtures and finishes unless there's a compelling reason.

But if the original fixture is already gone, I don't have a problem putting something modern in style in. (In fact, I personally like the contrast between original architectural details and minimalist modern furnishings.)

So I'd say if the Victorian bathroom no longer exists, you can put in whatever you want. Not a Home Depot fan at all, but there's probably a fabulously expensive vessel sink from some specialty store that would look beautiful.

I have only two walls of original tile remaining in my 1912 bathroom, with no other original elements. I'm not sure what to do with it, actually, because it goes against my grain to remove it and start over, and any alternative is never going to look "finished".

Anonymous wrote:I live in an old house too, circa 1912, with parquet flooring (inlaid borders) that cannot be sanded again. Are there any artisans out there who know how to repair missing sections and guide me as to how to better care for our floors? I do find the floors charming, but there are sections that are really in need of love. I have never seen anyone replace these floors - at least not in a way that is tasteful or sympathetic to the rest of the house.

I don't have experience with this personally, but I'd say there's certainly a way to make sympathetic repairs... for a price!

It's hard to find people who are really experts in old building finishes, but see whom you can find in your area and talk it through with them.

Also, do some research yourself. There are a lot of historic preservation resources online. You can look for technical bulletins put out by the National Park Service or GSA. The National Trust has a great Preservation Nation blog that may have some leads (haven't looked recently).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just moved into our c. 1900 townhouse in dc. We love the house, but we don't know what to think about the floors. The agent told us that we shouldn't dream of replacing them because they are very valued on the market, but to us they just look old and worn, with gaps and patches here and there. Overall I guess they are in decent shape, but they are undeniably old. We don't have the money now, but a few years down the line would like replace them - but we won't do it if they are truly a prized feature of older homes.

You may not be the old house type. A lot of people think they are but when it comes down to it, they'd be better off and happier in a Ryan Home in Springfield. Your question leads me to believe that you are probably one of these people and don't really appreciate the history, charm or character of a fine old home and may have bought the place because it was the cool thing to do. Sell it to someone who truly loves old homes and embrace your repressed love of all things Franconia.

Thanks for your helpful response, bee-yotch.

She may be a bee-yotch, but what she says is true. DON"T buy a house if you don't like the 'period' look such as floors, bathrooms, etc. New floors in an old house would kill it.

Well, the thing is that people in old houses don't "really" leave the period fixtures as is. They get replaced with things that look kind of sort of the old thing, but aren't really. I mean, you don't *really* leave the Victorian bathroom as it was a hundred years ago, right? You probably wouldn't put a, I don't know, minimalist-looking vessel sink into that space, but if you say you leave the old fixtures and plumbing as is, I would have to not believe you. I doubt a Victorian-age kitchen in a Victorian house would add much value to it.

Thank you! And I'm sure people also enjoy modern air conditioning and cookong gas, instead of sweltering and using dirty coal.

I have also read that older pine floors were actually intended to be subfloors, with carpeting over them, by the original builders. So it's not necessarily true that they are an authentic feature of the home's aesthetics.

I love my new house & feel lucky to live in such a well preserved historic urban neighborhood. But I don't feel obgligated to turn my life into that 1800s House reality show ....

There's a big difference between keeping a house "period correct" (lighting fixtures, molding, flooring, doors, hardware, bath fixtures, etc.) and going back to coal. An asinine statement such as that is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about and should refrain from giving further advise on this topic. Try going to The Brass Knob or Second Chance in Baltimore instead of Home Depot and you might learn something. And ditch that stupid looking vessel sink, it looks like a freakin' pasta bowl and people are laughing at you.

I live in an old house too, circa 1912, with parquet flooring (inlaid borders) that cannot be sanded again. Are there any artisans out there who know how to repair missing sections and guide me as to how to better care for our floors? I do find the floors charming, but there are sections that are really in need of love. I have never seen anyone replace these floors - at least not in a way that is tasteful or sympathetic to the rest of the house.

OP, have you been told that the floors can't be refinished, or do you just like the look of brand new floors?

What are you planning on putting in the kitchen. You make me nervous, because you seem to be stuck in a house that really isn't your style (I can relate; I love my current house but some of the previous ones, no), and that makes it hard to make good decisions.

Anonymous wrote:This is stupid old wood is only worth something if it had historical relevance like the wood desk made from a slave ship or a historical building.

You have a painfully limited concept of "historical".

This is stupid old wood is only worth something if it had historical relevance like the wood desk made from a slave ship or a historical building.