On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:51:26 -0800, Mark Thorson >
wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:
>>
>> Right, the article basically says the return on a kitchen remodel
>> improved from negative 40% in 2002 to negative 10% in 2005.
>> But since 2005 was the middle of the boom, any sort of return
>> measured that year is inflated. The historical number and
>> long-term average is probably more like the negative 40% figure.
>
>I should write an article explaining that defrosting
>your refrigerator returns minus 10% of the value of
>a typical person's labor, while cleaning the toilet
>returns an astounding minus 40%. :-)

no wonder we have to import illegal immigrants.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
Charlene Charette > wrote:

> Giusi wrote:
>
> > You've had lots of opinion, practically no experience. You might want to
> > try a site where people don't HAVE to say something whether they know the
> > answer or not. There must be some compaison sites somewhere.
>
> No kidding. I was hoping for "we have soapstone countertops and we
> love/hate them because...". This was a place to start. We're in the
> planning stages for the new house and this is just one of many research
> items on my list.
>
Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. If it
can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
certainly stand up to kitchen spills. It's probably cheaper than other
stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. The
problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
durability.

Cindy, former lab life

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

In article >,
jay > wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:48:53 -0800, sf wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:23:02 -0500, "Dee.Dee" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Half of our house now is papered. AFAIC, I don't care if it ever gets
> >>re-papered. I'm sure not going to be helping or even supervising it.
> >
> > Thank your lucky star that wallpaper is not the current craze.
> >
> >
>
> In our area the faux finishes are being painted or papered over. Very
> expensive wallpaper with texture is becoming popular.
>
> jay

Dear Holy Mother, not the flocked stuff! Years ago I bought a house and
repapered the kitchen. The previous owner redecorated at the drop of a
hat, and would just paper over her previous color schemes. The lower
layers were utterly grisly...

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

Cindy Fuller wrote:

> Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. If it
> can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
> certainly stand up to kitchen spills. It's probably cheaper than other
> stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. The
> problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
> black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
> durability.

I'm more worried about dings than stains. As far as cost, it's
comparable to Silestone. The untreated stone isn't black, but it will
turn dark gray or black from use or with treatment. There will be lots
of compromises with the husband on this house. I'm personally leaning
towards Silestone (or equilavent), but I promised to research the
soapstone for him.

Thanks for your input,
--Charlene


--
A no smoking section in a restaurant is like a no peeing section in a
swimming pool.


email perronnellec at earthlink . net

On Dec 13, 1:58�pm, Cindy Fuller
>
> Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. �If it
> can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
> certainly stand up to kitchen spills. �It's probably cheaper than other
> stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. �The
> problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
> black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
> durability.

Soapstone stands up to acids and heat better than any other material
which is why it's used extensively for lab benches but it is also the
softest stone (it's essentially talc) which necessitates special care
or it would not stand up well to the rigors of typical kitchen use.
If you like its appearance and are willing to exert precautions in use
then by all means choose soapstone. Personally I think soapstone is
much more attractive than granite but in the same way silk is more
attractive than denim... soapstone is the silk of stone countertops
and requires the same degree of care, whereas granite is tantamount to
dungaree denim. Actually soapstone is considered by some a gemstone,
whereas granite is just common rock. I'm very careful and diciplined,
especially with kitchen chores, so soapstone would work for me, but if
you're a klutz and a slob forget it.

SHELDON

"Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
news:cjfullerSPAMORAMA-
>>
> Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. If it
> can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
> certainly stand up to kitchen spills. It's probably cheaper than other
> stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. The
> problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
> black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
> durability.
>
> Cindy, former lab life
>

Just a note. When I was choosing types of counter-tops, most verbal
information given to me was that Soapstone was quite pricey -- more than
engineered quartz, which can cost as much as granite.

I didn't look further because of its limitation of color; the same as
marble.
Dee Dee

"Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
news:cjfullerSPAMORAMA->
> Dear Holy Mother, not the flocked stuff! Years ago I bought a house and
> repapered the kitchen. The previous owner redecorated at the drop of a
> hat, and would just paper over her previous color schemes. The lower
> layers were utterly grisly...
>
> Cindy
>


Dear Holy Mother II. When we were re-doing the kitchen floor a month or so
ago, there was a height problem because flooring had been put over the first
layer of probably a lineoleum. We were advised to leave that first layer
down because it had the under-layment on top of it (for the installation of
the second layer.) But the first layer, OMG, even though our house was
built in the 70's, it looked like a 50's pattern, bright yellow with acqua
and avocado paisley in one small place where the previous owner had
installed a compactor. (Thank God that compactor is gone now.

I think this color scheme must have coincided with the avocado toilet in one
of the bathrooms. But it's here to stay as I understand the new ones are
all water restrictive (smaller amount of water used). This avocado toilet
matches the plastic avocado shower. (I have put a cotton eyelet shower
curtain and use the shower space to store things in.)

Time marches on.

Dee Dee

On Dec 13, 4:24�pm, "Dee.Dee" > wrote:
> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
>
> news:cjfullerSPAMORAMA-
>
>
>
> > Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. �If it
> > can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
> > certainly stand up to kitchen spills. �It's probably cheaper than other
> > stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. �The
> > problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
> > black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
> > durability.
>
> > Cindy, former lab life
>
> Just a note. �When I was choosing types of counter-tops, most verbal
> information given to me was that Soapstone was quite pricey -- more than
> engineered quartz, which can cost as much as granite.
>
> I didn't look further because of its limitation of color; the same as
> marble.

Prices vary but not very much. It seems typical cost averages about
$75 sq ft installed, comparable to granite/marble. It's really not
very expensive, I don't understand everyone making such a big todo
about the exclusivity of stone counters... seems my 30 sq ft of
counter would probably run about $2,500, not so much different from
the price of Formica installed. Seems half the cost for any counter
material is for installation labor.

http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/13524.shtml

SHELDON

Janet Baraclough > wrote:

>from sf contains these words:

>> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> I tried it [wallpapering] once and was disappointed to discover
>> that it's a lot harder than people would like you to believe.

> I've done it scores of times, no trouble at all. I loved
> wallpapering when I still did that kind of decor. Measure twice
> and cut once, (on a proper wallpapering table; they are dirt cheap)
> and use a plumbline and sharp scissors.

In my one attempt I face the following problems when wallpapering
a kitchen: the walls themselves were uneven; they had residual
gunk from the previous stripped-off wallpaper; the wallpaper
changed shape as it dried, affecting the appearance of the seams;
less than total adherance afterwards. I think the choice of
vinyl-y kitchen wallpaper, while being washable, also subtracted
from the appearance. Next time I would use standard wallpaper
even in a kitchen. However, there won't be a next time.

(I was also under time pressure, trying to do it between plumbing
and flooring contractors, and installed it in one 12-hour
stretch.)

Steve

Goomba38 wrote:
>
> I just can't get my head around the idea of using poured concrete for
> counters. What a mess that'll be if ever you want to redo, huh?

It's not supposed to be the type of concrete used for driveways and
sidewalks, you're supposed to use terrazzo.

It's no more difficult to redo than any other counter material, it's
fabricated off site and installed.

http://www.precastart.com/

http://www.stonesoupconcrete.com/portfolio.php?d=35

SHELDON

Janet Baraclough > wrote:

>from (Steve Pope) contains these words:

>> In my one attempt I face the following problems when wallpapering
>> a kitchen: the walls themselves were uneven;

> the wallpaper
> changed shape as it dried, affecting the appearance of the seams;

> You stretched it. This can happen if you paste more than one drop at a
> time, or if you leave the pasted sheet too long before hanging it
> Starting at the top, just gently brush it onto the wall with a dry
> brush to eliminate air but avoid stretching; use a tiny roller
> (carefully) to iron down the seams, neatly wipe off any paste which
> escapes.

You're correct that I stretched it, even though I was aware of
all of the above advice at the time.

>> I think the choice of
>> vinyl-y kitchen wallpaper, while being washable, also subtracted
>> from the appearance.

> They are much more steam splash and splatter resistant though

It's not bad; I've washed it several times since, and in our kitchen
after a few years there will be a fine layers of grease on the
walls, requiring cleaning. But the thickness of the vinyl stuff
means it is more sensitive to losing adhesion and deforming around
the seams, I think.

> Next time I would use standard wallpaper
>> even in a kitchen. However, there won't be a next time.

> Some time if you have an empty wall and an old roll of paper, have a
> practice (very easy to peel straight off again while wet)..it
> really is pretty straighforward. Especially if you have
> experience in cutting and fitting fabric for dressmaking or curtains.

I may not have mentioned the entire rest of the house came
with painted-over wallpaper... the kitchen was the only potentially
wallpaperable room.

Thanks for the advice --

S.

Sheldon wrote:
> On Dec 13, 1:58�pm, Cindy Fuller
>> Soapstone is the standard countertop material for laboratories. �If it
>> can stand up to what can get spilled in a chemistry lab, it can
>> certainly stand up to kitchen spills. �It's probably cheaper than other
>> stone countertops, but heavier and more pricey than Formica. �The
>> problem is that it doesn't come in pretty colors, so you have to like
>> black. I would consider soapstone for a kitchen counter because of its
>> durability.
>
> Soapstone stands up to acids and heat better than any other material
> which is why it's used extensively for lab benches but it is also the
> softest stone (it's essentially talc) which necessitates special care
> or it would not stand up well to the rigors of typical kitchen use.
> If you like its appearance and are willing to exert precautions in use
> then by all means choose soapstone. Personally I think soapstone is
> much more attractive than granite but in the same way silk is more
> attractive than denim... soapstone is the silk of stone countertops
> and requires the same degree of care, whereas granite is tantamount to
> dungaree denim. Actually soapstone is considered by some a gemstone,
> whereas granite is just common rock. I'm very careful and diciplined,
> especially with kitchen chores, so soapstone would work for me, but if
> you're a klutz and a slob forget it.
>
> SHELDON

I figure I'd be the first to ding soapstone in no time. He's partial to
using 12" and 14" cast iron skillets. Because they're heavy, I
sometimes bump them when I'm in a hurry. Same reason I've convinced him
that an induction cooktop is not the way. I like the ease of cleaning,
but I'm sure we'd crack it in no time.

Thanks to all for your input. I'm sure I'll come up with other
kitchen-y questions as we roll along.

--Charlene

--
A no smoking section in a restaurant is like a no peeing section in a
swimming pool.


email perronnellec at earthlink . net

"Dee.Dee" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
> Just a note. When I was choosing types of counter-tops, most verbal
> information given to me was that Soapstone was quite pricey -- more than
> engineered quartz, which can cost as much as granite.
>
> I didn't look further because of its limitation of color; the same as
> marble.
> Dee Dee

As I recall the soapstone used in the kitchen I used it in was less than
granite by some.

I don't get what you mean by limitation of color in marble. There are many
more colors of marble than granite. With marble you can just about name
your color. Whether it is the material for a particular person or not
depends on other things, but not color.
--
http://www.judithgreenwood.com

On 9 Dec, 15:27, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 17:34:01 -0600, "jmcquown" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Sheldon wrote:
> >> On Dec 8, 12:21?pm, "Strange Brew" > wrote:
> >>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >>>> Charlene Charette wrote:
> >>>>> We're building a new house next year and are currently in the
> >>>>> design phase. ?I was all set to put in Silestone countertops when
> >>>>> the hubby suggested soapstone. ?Does anyone here have soapstone
> >>>>> countertops? How do you like them? ?My main concern would be if
> >>>>> they scratch easily.
>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> --Charlene
>
> >>>> Soapstone is relatively soft. ?I wouldn't use it for countertops
> >>>> ?Granite, maybe. ?Marble? ?Yikes, it chips! ?Even Corian has
> >>>> problems. ?The thing that
> >>>> seems to last longest and is the least pretentious is formica.
> >>>> ?Trust me, this stuff isn't going anywhere. ?But of course, that
> >>>> can't be seen in an oh
> >>>> so never used for cooking kitchen.
>
> >>>> Jill
>
> >>> I'm guessing that you know more about counter tops than the people
> >>> that build and install them.
> >>> But, then again, you are the expert on everything.
>
> >> Actually even if she didn't know and just guessed she still guessed it
> >> all correctly.
>
> >I wasn't guessing. I've lived in a lot of houses in my lifetime, in many
> >different places. All with different types of counter tops. Soapstone is
> >the last thing I'd have installed in my kitchen.
>
> >Jill
>
> yeah, that's what we say here. 'old jill, she's been around the
> butcher block a few times.'

Butchers block. Now *that* would make a nice worktop.....

Doc

On Dec 14, 8:12Â*am, jay > wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:32:02 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:
> > On Dec 12, 3:47�pm, Janet Baraclough >
> > wrote:
> >> The message >
> >> from jay > contains these words:
>
> >>> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 19:06:47 GMT, Janet Baraclough wrote:
> >>> > The message
> >>> > >
> >>> > from rosie > contains these words:
>
> >>> >> Most homes today are built with either granite or
> >>> >> some sort of corian type material.
>
> >>> > � �Really? �Which planet are you posting from?
>
> >>> > � � Janet.
> >>> You must not get out much. �Even in the UK they have some granite don't
> >>> they?
>
> >> � �Of course; but �that's a long, long way from claiming "MOST homes
> >> today are built with either granite or corian " kitchen surfaces, as the
> >> OP did. Those materials are too expensive here, to be fitted in MOST
> >> homes.
>
> > Â*Most people in the US don't own their
> > own home, most rent and I haven't seen any ordinary working folks
> > rentals with designer kitchens. Â*And of those who do have their own
> > homes the vast, vast majority are very ordinary abodes, typical cookie
> > cutter tract homes are the norm... kitchens are functional but nothing
> > to put in House Beautiful.
>
> The latest US Census Bureau report doesn't agree with YOU. Â*According to
> the 2000 US Census Bureau report there are about twice as many owners as
> renters.
>
> http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet..._id=01000US&-q....

The census report is highly inaccurate, its data is voluntary. You
obviously have never owned income property or you would realize that
most every owner of second home income property answers "owner
occupied" even though it's "tenant occupied*, in order to qualify for
a lower rate owner occupied mortgage and to hide the rent money.
There are as many illegal rentals in the US as legal, perhaps more.
Many people invest in condo units but never live in them, they rent
them and pocket the money tax free. The majority of condos purchased
in the US within a couple of years become rentals... if you
contemplate buying a condo for your home keep in mind that very few of
your neighbors will be the owner. And of course the number of illegal
appartments in private homes is huge. And in many poorer
neighborhoods the majorty of private homes are occupied by two, three,
and more families, typically illegals. I believe that there are far
more illegals in the US than the Govt. estimate of about 12 milion,
from my own personal experience as a bonafide admitted slum lord,
conservatively I'd triple that figure... illegals never mail in a
census form, they don't document anything that would expose their
existance, they operate soley with cash, no bank accounts of any kind,
no checking, no plastic... they pay their rent in green money... they
transfer scads of cash out of the US through the mail by US postal
money order, that leaves no traceable paper trail. If the US Govt.
truly wanted to crack down on illegals the first thing they'd do is
outlaw money orders, they serve no other purpose except to hide
mischief.

SHELDON

jay wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:32:02 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:

> > Most people in the US don't own their own home, most rent

> The latest US Census Bureau report doesn't agree with YOU. According
> to the 2000 US Census Bureau report there are about twice as many
> owners as renters.


Wait a minute, Sheldumb was wrong? Inconceivable. As usual, he thinks
New York is the whole damn country. Well, I use "thinks" in rather
loose terms.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Sheldon wrote:

> The census report is highly inaccurate, its data is voluntary.

My county lists homeownership/residency as 82%.
Number of housing units in 2005 39,919.
Percentage of housing units in multi-unit structures was 6.5 % in the
year 2000
Median household income is 61,466. in 2004