Windows like you are describing are quite common for your house design. I suggest you try to find copies of books describing and picturing this style in the Hudson Valley; I think in a house as old as yours choosing the right style of dormer to go with the pitch of your roof would be very important to the look. I live in mid 19th c. house in the upper Hudson Valley so I am always interested in our local houses; I would be glad to post a list of books about Hudson River architectural styles, if you'd like. Inside, the windows will never be conventional (by modern standards that is) but will look just fine. I think you will find decorative treatments for these windows if you look for decorating books with pictures of English cottages, which often have low-ish second stories. You might find that casement windows work well for the sash design. FWIW, my second floor windows are only 22 inches from the floor, although they are full, double-hung windows in a full height room. (My house is Greek Revival with a deep entablature along the eaves which actually covers part of the room's height.) I kind of like my low windows, I like being in bed and looking out and slightly down at the outside world. And my cats think they are great, too. One thing to keep in mind, though, may be the inescapable code requirements if these rooms are to be used for bedrooms. There are building code formulas that require certain sized window openings (or windows) for each sleeping space. In my experiece these code dimensions are sometimes not compatible with historic proportions (they are much larger and squarer). But historic house-lover that I am, I am also a former volunteer firefighter. We had a tragic incident in our town where children were trapped in attic bedrooms in a 19th c. 1 1/2 story house with only the typical "eyebrow windows". They couldn't get out through the small openings, but neither could firefighters in turn-out gear and breathing packs get in to save them. So even if you have a lax code enforcer or are inclined to ignore this, I urge you make sure there is sufficient means of escape. Another issue you will need to consider is how you insulate under the roof down to the knee walls. You can't just slap some insulation against the underside of your roof cladding, you'll need to make sure there's some air space there. Molly~

"In the end, I would make the decision based on the estimated risk the pipe becoming energized." Chris, There is legitimate discussion about the need to bond the hot water to the cold at the water heater since until recently it was connected by other means and it isn't specifically called for in the NEC. Your statement that "They probably already are bonded through a shower valve in the house" leaves open the possibility that they aren't - which is the whole point here. Bonding is not the same thing as using the piping for a grounding electrode. The NEC is very clear that all piping must be bonded to the electrical system. It's not an option to decide if you want to bond the piping to the electrical system. Most certainly you don't get make a decision that "you don't think it will become energized, therefore you aren't going to bond it" as suggested by your last sentence. Think of the implications if an un-bonded water pipe comes in contact with an electrical wire and then you go to take a shower, or do dishes, or any number of other things. If it's bonded to the electrical system, it causes a breaker to trip. If not, everything it touches is energized.

It seems like you can have a wide range of lip-thicknesses with steel, because, I assume, the metal sheets themselves are a standard thickness (which is measured in tiny increments like milimeters). So, given that you have the work surface at at sturdy, recommended thickness for stainless steel, you can probably do anything you want with the lip. In working on my 1928 kitchen, it has been sometimes hard for me to let go of what is "standard" in kitchens. What is standard now wasn't standard them. With a lot of things, we can do whatever the heck we want in our kitchens! I recall agonizing over the finish of my faucet, and pendants, in relation to the finish on my 1955 stove and antique cabinet hardware. It somehow got past just being what looks nice to my eye, to "But the faucet has to match the pendants have to match the stove have to match the 1928 latches have to match etc.?" Rightt?? Um...No. Unless you want it to. The kitchen won't implode because the counters aren't standard, or the finishes are different. How liberating!! I can't wait to see your counters! I don't think I've ever seen stainless with a farm sink before. How awesome it sounds! :-) francy

I have the 1 ½ and I love it. The large side fits all of my biggest sheet pans, roasting pans, etc. I've never not had anything fit in the large side. I like to be able to have dirty dishes in one side and have a separate, clean side to use for other things (draining pasta, washing fruits and vegetables, discarding food scraps down the disposal, etc). I have also been using a nifty roll up drying rack (as suggested by romy!) which lays across the large bowl so as to not take up any counter space, gives me access to the large bowl underneath since it only goes halfway across, leaves me the small sink for other tasks, AND rolls up and stores neatly under the sink when not in use! (photo from Bed, Bath, & Beyond...not my sink)