Keith Jackson
Hero Member
Sorry about that. I have had both types of masons in my family. Operative on my mother's side and Speculative on my father's.
Templar Vault Chamber located in New Ross, Nova Scotia
- Thread starter FinderKeeper
- Start date
- Status
If it is over 200 square feet you are not legally using a 12" footer.Now if you consider a 10' X 20' single story building "large" your statement is correct but here is the Michigan state building codes and a copy and paste if you don't want to scroll down thru the whole thing.
42" deep footer is what is needed to pass code in Michigan for buildings over 200 square feet.
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/lara/lara_bcc_2015_residential_code_502813_7.pdf
R 408.30522 Minimum depth.
Rule 522. Section R403.1.4 of the code is amended to read as follows:
R403.1.4. Minimum depth. All exterior footings and foundation systems shall extend 42
inches below actual grade. Where applicable, the depth of the footings shall also conform
to section R403.1.4.1 of the code.
Exception:
Upon evidence of the existence of any of the following conditions, the building official
may modify the footing depth accordingly:
(a) Freezing temperatures (freezing degree days).
(b) Soil type.
(c) Ground water conditions.
(d) Snow depth experience.
(e) Exposure to the elements.
Buildings under 200 square feet are not held to these requirements.
No inspector is going to go from 42" to 12" unless you are sitting on bedrock and I still doubt it then.If you hit good solid rock that requires a breaker to excavate around 30" they will often let that go but most likely will make you drill and rebar into that rock before pouring a footer.There is not a snowballs chance in **** are you getting away with only digging a foot deep.
I have some experience with building design and construction also and knew right away something was off about 12" footers in a frost area.
Last edited:
How do you like this type of house?
I'll bet it saves a ton of money in the winter but does it stay cool enough in the summer?
Also do you have any problems with dry air?I wouldn't be surprised if you had to run a humidifier while most people are using a de-humidifier
I was in one underground house and it was really a cool design.You don't see many of these in my area.
lokiblossom
Bronze Member
Maybe I was wrong about you. I live in Traverse City and you are talking about some other Michigan area. Here foundation code calls for 24" below grade footing, unless it is an unattached garage which can get by with a 12" footing (read the book, this area is all sand). I used to be in the Ann Arbor and they do require the depths that you mention. Like I said I have been a builder here for 30 years.
You knew right away something was off eh, lol.
Cheers, Loki
Last edited:
NewAge....
We haven't built it yet, slated to start this spring...but I too have been in many and worked on several....and..... mine will be different to avoid many of the problems with mold/dampness etc they have.
First it won't be ground coupled anywhere except the floor...will have a separate roof over the excavation and then the house built below that, walkway all the way around the perimeter with the only connection to the roof at the front facade. This gives it a tempered air space to take advantage of most of the benefits of an in ground house without the associated moisture problems. Plus allows full size windows for egress in case of fire and a path out. The under roof exterior space around house will also contain our water storage system as we will be on full solar off grid, plus a wind generator or two, which I have done before. 600 foot well, 2hp pump is hard on solar, so pump to storage, then surflo pump to house. It is something I have thought through for the past 5 years and is a viable design to me, unlike any other that I know of.....but then I have built some things in the last 45 years that i was told "that won't work" and did....so not to worried about it....
One of the other requirements I am putting on myself...is to build it 'seat of the pants' very little planning, except for needed plumbing runs etc...just a general idea with rooms measured by the "Yeah, that'll work" method and level, plumb by eye (though after 45 years building I have a pretty good eye) except for things like hanging doors...So a very much freeform style, with recycled and natural materials in a lot of it...Almost a Hobbit house look, the roof will also be natural grass covered.. Steel beams will support the roof over the excavation of around 50 feet, (I have built up to 72 foot clearspan to my own design, 72x240 inside horse riding arena, all fabricated and welded on site by me, 28 years ago, still in use today with no problems,so this shouldn't be a problem)...several different alternative materials, from strawbale, to cob, to adobe, rammed earth, and bottle walls..No tires though...LOL
The idea is to have it look like the natural top of the hill it is going on, except for the front facade that will be visible. Lot of glass and large overhang as we will be facing near due south to take advantage of the whole town view below...and wooded hills and valleys also visible from this vantage point.
We haven't built it yet, slated to start this spring...but I too have been in many and worked on several....and..... mine will be different to avoid many of the problems with mold/dampness etc they have.
First it won't be ground coupled anywhere except the floor...will have a separate roof over the excavation and then the house built below that, walkway all the way around the perimeter with the only connection to the roof at the front facade. This gives it a tempered air space to take advantage of most of the benefits of an in ground house without the associated moisture problems. Plus allows full size windows for egress in case of fire and a path out. The under roof exterior space around house will also contain our water storage system as we will be on full solar off grid, plus a wind generator or two, which I have done before. 600 foot well, 2hp pump is hard on solar, so pump to storage, then surflo pump to house. It is something I have thought through for the past 5 years and is a viable design to me, unlike any other that I know of.....but then I have built some things in the last 45 years that i was told "that won't work" and did....so not to worried about it....
One of the other requirements I am putting on myself...is to build it 'seat of the pants' very little planning, except for needed plumbing runs etc...just a general idea with rooms measured by the "Yeah, that'll work" method and level, plumb by eye (though after 45 years building I have a pretty good eye) except for things like hanging doors...So a very much freeform style, with recycled and natural materials in a lot of it...Almost a Hobbit house look, the roof will also be natural grass covered.. Steel beams will support the roof over the excavation of around 50 feet, (I have built up to 72 foot clearspan to my own design, 72x240 inside horse riding arena, all fabricated and welded on site by me, 28 years ago, still in use today with no problems,so this shouldn't be a problem)...several different alternative materials, from strawbale, to cob, to adobe, rammed earth, and bottle walls..No tires though...LOL
The idea is to have it look like the natural top of the hill it is going on, except for the front facade that will be visible. Lot of glass and large overhang as we will be facing near due south to take advantage of the whole town view below...and wooded hills and valleys also visible from this vantage point.
Last edited:
Oh yeah...It will have a few unique features related to the dryness problem some have...a waterwall just inside the front door and a glass floor to thru the roof atrium open to sky to serve as a solar chimney centrally located in the house...air inlets near the front door will let air pass over the waterwall to capture moisture and disperse it through the house before the air is finally expelled up the solar chimney and out, this chimney will also bring coolth in from the tempered air space by opening rear windows...and all with no fans or blowers or a/c needed...A Southwest style circulating fireplace will warm it in winter..thermal mass provided by built in concrete 'sitting areas on each side...
Anyway...I love building stuff...built several houses years ago with a system I was going to patent...but had no way to really protect the patent, so didn't...but they worked as expected and the owners love them and the low bills they pay for an all electric home..less than $50 a month to heat or cool, cook, hot water, and all the other electric we normally use...1450 sq ft patio style homes that look just like every other one in the neighborhood but work in a different way..
Anyway...I love building stuff...built several houses years ago with a system I was going to patent...but had no way to really protect the patent, so didn't...but they worked as expected and the owners love them and the low bills they pay for an all electric home..less than $50 a month to heat or cool, cook, hot water, and all the other electric we normally use...1450 sq ft patio style homes that look just like every other one in the neighborhood but work in a different way..
1420.01 ADOPTION; APPLICATION.
The State Construction Code, consisting of the State Construction Code Act of 1972, as
amended, and all applicable administrative regulations adopted thereunder, is hereby
acknowledged as the applicable construction code in the City.
(Ord. 122. Passed 5-18-81.)
City Ordinances | City of Traverse City
This says the city adopted all state building codes in 1981.
I admit 201 square feet is very small for a building to be enforced under full code.And some city's or boro's will adopt their own codes for smaller buildings.But they will be listed as square footage and usually around 600 square feet.That will be about the size of a 2 car garage.
What I posted earlier is Michigan state code ......not one certain area of the state.Without an exemption from the locality this is the code.
If there is an exemption to this code by the city and this is possible link to it and I will certainly read it and stand corrected but I can't find it anywhere.
Something is off here and it still is.I find it very hard to believe that someone with much construction background could believe those pictures from NS could be the foundation for much more then a shack.You could gather all those rocks up and haul them away with a wheelbarrow in a days time.
I have seen what frost can do to a foundation.Even ones that should have been deep enough.
Last edited:
Charlie P. (NY)
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2006
- 13,017
- 17,166
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab Musketeer Advantage Pro w/8" & 10" DD coils/Fisher F75se(Upgraded to LTD2) w/11" DD, 6.5" concentric & 9.5" NEL Sharpshooter DD coils/Sunray FX-1 Probe & F-Point/Black Widows/Rattler headphone
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
Them Masons, pirates, Templars or Lemurians were certainly cautious and civil minded folk to obey 1981 ordinances back when they supposedly placed the foundations.
What has this got to do with ANYTHING?
What has this got to do with ANYTHING?
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Because once you bring the freemasons into any discussion, then the discussion becomes beyond doubt. It makes a treasure "most certainly there". Because we all know the freemason secrecy, and how they control the world, and are up to no good. Thus it lends credibility to ANY treasure story.
Dave Rishar
Silver Member
Anyone here familiar with Godwin's Law? For those of you that weren't around at the time, this dates back to the archaic, benighted early days of the internet, when users didn't have avatars or post counts and discussions such as this were conducted on usenet, in plain text and without images, just basic white letters on a black background as God intended, all hurtled at you at a blistering 2400 baud, or slower if someone was trying to make a phone call to you.
Godwin's Law states that as an internet discussion goes on, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1 - basically, if an argument goes on for long enough, someone will be compared to Hitler. A corollary to that is that once this comparison is made, the side making that comparison has lost the debate by default, having at that point figuratively (and perhaps literally) overturned the table, thrown their drink on the ground, and called everyone in attendance unflattering names. It is the last act of the desperate person that has run out of valid points and has painted themself into an untenable corner, an announcement to the world that they're done reasoning.
I propose an extension of this that I would like to call Tom in CA's Law, or TIC's Law for short. This law runs like this: "The longer that a treasure legend is discussed, the closer the probability for an attribution to the Freemasons comes to 1." What this means in plain speak is that if we discuss a legend for long enough, someone will eventually blame the Freemasons for it. The first corollary to this law is that once the Freemasons have been blamed, the side doing the blaming has conceded and any further useful discussion in the thread is impossible. (This is of course assuming that we're not blaming the Freemasons for running a fundraiser at the county fair or hosting dance lessons or marriage ceremonies, which is the sort of thing that they normally do around here when they're not hiding treasures and scheming to conquer the world.)
All in favor?
Robot
Bronze Member
- Mar 10, 2014
- 2,039
- 1,740
- Primary Interest:
- Other
Where There Is Smoke...There Probably Is...Fire!
lokiblossom
Bronze Member
Do you think I am lying about being a licensed builder in this area (5 county)? I have built 185 homes here and somehow got away with it. Just because these countys have adapted the national code does not mean they don't have exceptions. The exception to national code for this area, is for the houses (R403.1.4) for garages (R403.1.4.1). These exceptions are now universally accepted in most of the countys of our area.
If you are going to quote the building code you should learn how to use it lol.
We have been pouring garage footings here 12" below grade for a long time and I have not seen the damage you speak of. The limit on this is 600 sq. ft. btw.
You don't see how anybody with a construction background could believe those pictures could be a foundation for much more than a shack. Well, you were wrong on one thing and you are also wrong on this. In the early western United States (this includes the Northwest Territory, ie, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin ect. there are many examples of homes with less footing than those pictures indicate. As a matter of fact some with only a log foundation and some of these are still standing and would be usable today if they had been kept up. Those stones that Joan photographed would have been covered with and set in dirt with the top leveled with smaller stones and a leveled beam on top of that. The building (shack, fortress), would have been built on top of that.
Cheers, Loki
Last edited:
Raparee
Hero Member
... unless the smoke is actually fog. Then you're running around looking for a 'fire' that's not there.
Charlie P. (NY)
Gold Member
- Feb 3, 2006
- 13,017
- 17,166
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab Musketeer Advantage Pro w/8" & 10" DD coils/Fisher F75se(Upgraded to LTD2) w/11" DD, 6.5" concentric & 9.5" NEL Sharpshooter DD coils/Sunray FX-1 Probe & F-Point/Black Widows/Rattler headphone
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
Yeah. Some things smell that aren't smoke at all.
I acknowledge that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But if we just examined the evidence with no pre-conceptions or assumptions of what is on hand at Oak island in looks like 12 at bats have failed to come up with a hit - let alone a home run.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There are tons of speculation but ounces of evidence. Some gutters, scattered rocks (mostly anecdotal and now missing), bits found which do not indicate a treasure presence - and we saw how the "Roman Sword" turned out to be an outright lie (it was purchased off ebaY Italy not too long before it "appeared").
People have been there, people leave artifacts and structures. Happens all the time. So far all we have is people have been busy on the island for some time. There are a couple dozen islands in Mahone Bay - some bigger & some smaller. People been on them, too.
I acknowledge that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But if we just examined the evidence with no pre-conceptions or assumptions of what is on hand at Oak island in looks like 12 at bats have failed to come up with a hit - let alone a home run.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There are tons of speculation but ounces of evidence. Some gutters, scattered rocks (mostly anecdotal and now missing), bits found which do not indicate a treasure presence - and we saw how the "Roman Sword" turned out to be an outright lie (it was purchased off ebaY Italy not too long before it "appeared").
People have been there, people leave artifacts and structures. Happens all the time. So far all we have is people have been busy on the island for some time. There are a couple dozen islands in Mahone Bay - some bigger & some smaller. People been on them, too.
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Good post Charlie.
The mere presence of much "smoke" in this story : "Smoke" being the tons of treasure seeker attention it's gotten over ~150 yrs. Ie.: fun treasure lore that anyone TH'r minded person loves to read, dream, and conjecture about. Someone could now muse that : Afterall, if nothing were there (past or present tense), the logically, all that effort and attention wouldn't have been expended, right ?
But I disagree. I have seen first-hand how a treasure that never existed, can indeed generate lots of very sincere belief . Hence showing examples of how "smoke", like found here, doesn't mean : Ergo a treasure.
That would make this not a stone castle.
I said earlier I will not argue a smaller building such as a small house or black smith shop. Especially since a blacksmith owned this property back in the early 1800's.
What evidence has been produced from this site supports that it was a small fortress.
But I finally got you to state that the building that required only a 12" footer that you described as "large" was 600 square feet or less.With that being said since 600 sqft is large to you a "small" fortress of less then this square footage could be possible and will garner no further argument from me.
lokiblossom
Bronze Member
Wow, first, do you admit I was correct about the depth of footings in my area of Northern Michigan? Because you made a point of how stupid I was and I would like you to clear that up.
And I did say 12" for 600 sq. ft. or less, so you didn't get me to admit to anything!
What I did NOT write was that the fortress at New Ross would only have been 600 sq. ft. and where do you get the idea that 600 sq. ft. is large to me?
Also, I have constantly premised it would not have been a stone castle or any other type of stone building, even when first discussing this with you I wrote that it would be wooden construction.
You do realize there were no building codes in New Ross in 1308? They could have built it as large as they wanted without any footings and it probably could have lasted a long time.
As for blacksmith shop, have you looked at the layout in photos and sketches of the stones that Joan dug up? Blacksmith shop was the premise of a junior archaeologist writing what was probably her first thesis.
I have always premised a small fortress, but I have no idea how small.
Cheers, Loki
Dave Rishar
Silver Member
Correct, but the people that built fortifications for a living had learned how to do so under someone else that did it for a living, and that guy had learned the same way. There were no codes, but there were established methods of doing things, because those were the methods that worked consistantly. Which brings us to...
Ouch. A cheap shot, but I've done worse here so I'll give you a pass. But this isn't what I was referring to above. Which brings us to...
How was a small fortress typically constructed during that era? Define "small" basically however you want, just as long as there's a central keep of some sort and a wall involved. (Otherwise, it wouldn't be a fortress, would it?) Once you've established your upper and lower limits, find me a European match for what we're looking at here. I admittedly haven't run this one down as thoroughly as I normally do and I wouldn't be surprised if I've missed something, so if I have, I want to know about it. I would like to see a 12ish century fortification that was built like this, though.
lokiblossom
Bronze Member
Dave, I do not have any idea of how a small fortress would have been constructed in 1308, but I do know that shelter would have been an early concern. I could speculate and draw something but again all it would be is speculation and maybe it wasn't even a fortress in the European concept. My only point is that they built something at New Ross before dismantling it a little later and moving everything to Annapolis Basin, and they didn't need anybodys permit to do so.
Louis and Clark built a small fortress near the Pacific Ocean late in 1805 for the same purpose except they left the next spring, basically the same concept though.
Cheers, Loki
- Status
Top Member Reactions
-
2679 -
2000 -
1648 -
1597 -
1188 -
984 -
943 -
915 -
860 -
784 -
770 -
495 -
428 -
401 -
400 -
381 -
E
354
-
353 -
348 -
335
