|
Home > Archive > Architecture > October 2006 > garage
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| I just posted this question to home repairs, but I thought I would post
it here, too, just because it's been kind of slow lately
-------------
I am watching my neighbor have some work done to here garage. It is a
small, 1-car garage that was probably built in the 40s' Hinged doors,
not "garage door".
The roof sags quite a bit, maybe 6 to 8 inches in the middle. They
just put up a new facia/soffic/eaves "thing" which is basically two
pressure treated (yes pressure treated) 2x8s toenailed together to form
a V. The long side on on the roof, the short side hangs down. Then
they took 2 more pressure treated 2X8s and formed another V and put
that in as a new ridgeline. (and you can see a gap under it where the
roof sags down). All of this right over the existing roof.
I don't know the next step, but I would guess another 2x8 on its edge
halfway up (shimmed to be level) or 2x8s on edge tieing the ridge to
the edge, followed by decking and roofing.
The old roof has a least two roofs on it already.
It is just me, or does this sound like a whole lot of weight on an old
structure? I've never seen anything quite like this before. I don't
care what they do because it's their garage and their car, but I'm just
curious about it. She's in her 80s, so if it lasts another 20 years
she'll be happy. And if the neighbor is happy, I'm happy.
I know they're not doing any jacking because there's a car in the
garage <gulp>
BTW, the new garage doors look nice and appear to be well made. Also
pressure treated.
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
>I just posted this question to home repairs, but I thought I would post
> it here, too, just because it's been kind of slow lately
>
> -------------
>
> I am watching my neighbor have some work done to here garage. It is a
> small, 1-car garage that was probably built in the 40s' Hinged doors,
> not "garage door".
>
> The roof sags quite a bit, maybe 6 to 8 inches in the middle. They
> just put up a new facia/soffic/eaves "thing" which is basically two
> pressure treated (yes pressure treated) 2x8s toenailed together to form
> a V. The long side on on the roof, the short side hangs down. Then
> they took 2 more pressure treated 2X8s and formed another V and put
> that in as a new ridgeline. (and you can see a gap under it where the
> roof sags down). All of this right over the existing roof.
>
> I don't know the next step, but I would guess another 2x8 on its edge
> halfway up (shimmed to be level) or 2x8s on edge tieing the ridge to
> the edge, followed by decking and roofing.
>
> The old roof has a least two roofs on it already.
>
> It is just me, or does this sound like a whole lot of weight on an old
> structure? I've never seen anything quite like this before. I don't
> care what they do because it's their garage and their car, but I'm just
> curious about it. She's in her 80s, so if it lasts another 20 years
> she'll be happy. And if the neighbor is happy, I'm happy.
>
> I know they're not doing any jacking because there's a car in the
> garage <gulp>
>
> BTW, the new garage doors look nice and appear to be well made. Also
> pressure treated.
I bet there's no permit on this job.
An old building like that is prolly to the point of not being fixable even
from a new construction perspective.
If you tear the old roof off in order to build a new one, you'll find that
the walls are not adequate, and when you try to fix the walls you'll find
the footings are deteriorated.
The neighborhood covenants won't allow another garage of that type to be
built, so the owner is left hiring those fix-it doodz in the paper to come
over and do whatever they can, for as little as possible, and hope no one
gets caught, or hurt, in the process.
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-16, 1:25 pm |
|
"Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
news:eh0fh1029ok@news1.newsguy.com...
> "Pat"> wrote
>
> I bet there's no permit on this job.
> An old building like that is prolly to the point of not being fixable even
> from a new construction perspective.
> If you tear the old roof off in order to build a new one, you'll find that
> the walls are not adequate, and when you try to fix the walls you'll find
> the footings are deteriorated.
>
> The neighborhood covenants won't allow another garage of that type to be
> built, so the owner is left hiring those fix-it doodz in the paper to come
> over and do whatever they can, for as little as possible, and hope no one
> gets caught, or hurt, in the process.
Bang! I heard that hammer hit the nail all the way over here.
| |
|
|
Don wrote:
> "Pat"> wrote
>
> I bet there's no permit on this job.
Permit???
> An old building like that is prolly to the point of not being fixable even
> from a new construction perspective.
About 2 weeks ago she nixed her idea of a new garage. I would have
been nice and none of the neighbors complained that it would encroach
the zoning setback, but she ended up selling her Corvette and decided
not to build a new garage for it.
> If you tear the old roof off in order to build a new one, you'll find that
> the walls are not adequate, and when you try to fix the walls you'll find
> the footings are deteriorated.
Footers??? Coffee cans filled with concrete -- if you're lucky.
>
> The neighborhood covenants won't allow another garage of that type to be
> built,
Neighborhood Covenants??? But we do have zoning. And sometimes it's
even enforced. But in general it is not and we like it that way.
so the owner is left hiring those fix-it doodz in the paper
People who advertize???
to come
> over and do whatever they can, for as little as possible, and hope no one
> gets caught, or hurt, in the process.
Hahaha.
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> Don wrote:
>
> Permit???
>
>
> About 2 weeks ago she nixed her idea of a new garage. I would have
> been nice and none of the neighbors complained that it would encroach
> the zoning setback, but she ended up selling her Corvette and decided
> not to build a new garage for it.
>
>
> Footers??? Coffee cans filled with concrete -- if you're lucky.
>
>
> Neighborhood Covenants??? But we do have zoning. And sometimes it's
> even enforced. But in general it is not and we like it that way.
>
> so the owner is left hiring those fix-it doodz in the paper
>
> People who advertize???
>
> to come
>
> Hahaha.
Sounds like you and me live in similar neighborhoods.
Several times now during the construction of my garage I've mentioned stuff
about *codes* (can't help it man, its an old habit) and I'm immediately met
with cold stares. LOL
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-16, 8:25 pm |
| On Oct 16, 12:57 pm, "Pat" <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
> I just posted this question to home repairs, but I thought I would post
> it here, too, just because it's been kind of slow lately
>
> -------------
>
> I am watching my neighbor have some work done to here garage. It is a
> small, 1-car garage that was probably built in the 40s' Hinged doors,
> not "garage door".
>
> The roof sags quite a bit, maybe 6 to 8 inches in the middle. They
> just put up a new facia/soffic/eaves "thing" which is basically two
> pressure treated (yes pressure treated) 2x8s toenailed together to form
> a V. The long side on on the roof, the short side hangs down. Then
> they took 2 more pressure treated 2X8s and formed another V and put
> that in as a new ridgeline. (and you can see a gap under it where the
> roof sags down). All of this right over the existing roof.
>
> I don't know the next step, but I would guess another 2x8 on its edge
> halfway up (shimmed to be level) or 2x8s on edge tieing the ridge to
> the edge, followed by decking and roofing.
The odds are that the contractor doesn't know the next step either.
> The old roof has a least two roofs on it already.
The contractor is an idjit. A ripoff is required by code. If he
studies and really applies himself, in only a few years of effort, he
might move up to moron.
> It is just me, or does this sound like a whole lot of weight on an old
> structure? I've never seen anything quite like this before. I don't
> care what they do because it's their garage and their car, but I'm just
> curious about it. She's in her 80s, so if it lasts another 20 years
> she'll be happy. And if the neighbor is happy, I'm happy.
You're watching an idjit take advantage of an old lady and you're okay
with that? At the very least I'd go over and shake his tree.
> I know they're not doing any jacking because there's a car in the
> garage <gulp>
>
> BTW, the new garage doors look nice and appear to be well made. Also
> pressure treated.
I'd have a tough time living next to what's going on by you. I have
this thing about people that take advantage of kids and old people. It
pisses me off and I have major problems with such schmucks. I make
this clear to them. They see crazy in my eyes, and they're right.
Obviously the situation you're witnessing isn't heinous activity, but
there's no way there's a permit, from the sound of it the contractor is
probably unlicensed, maybe uninsured, definitely clueless, and to top
it off it's an old lady. I don't know if she's still sharp, starting
to lose it or what, but I'd go over, be neighborly and see what's going
on. I do realize that could be opening a can of worms, but the
potential consequences could be far more serious than her losing just
some money.
R
| |
|
|
RicodJour wrote:
> On Oct 16, 12:57 pm, "Pat" <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
>
> The odds are that the contractor doesn't know the next step either.
>
>
> The contractor is an idjit. A ripoff is required by code. If he
> studies and really applies himself, in only a few years of effort, he
> might move up to moron.
>
>
> You're watching an idjit take advantage of an old lady and you're okay
> with that? At the very least I'd go over and shake his tree.
I learned years ago to keep out of her business. Her husband had some
mobility issues. She got a contractor and spoke wonderful of him, how
good he was, etc. etc. He took part of the dining room and put in a
downstairs bathroom for them. All was wonderful.
The toilet was bizarre. It was built against the wall and then they
went out of their way to construct a partition on the other side of it.
It was at the back of a -- I don't know what you call it, maybe
"dead-end" -- that was about 3' wide and 4' deep with the walkway right
in front of it. The wasn't even a place to put the t.p., so they
installed the holder on the other wide of the walkway, maybe 6 or 7'
from the toilet. They also put in a flimsy metal free-standing shower,
maybe 3' square.
I went over when they were framing it and said, gee maybe it's a bit
small, the toilet isn't right, and if you'd like I could go find you
some sized for handicapped accessibility. You wouldn't have to hit the
sizes, but see if you can get close. I was told no, this was perfect,
the contractor was great, etc. etc. About 2 years later she changed
caregivers, the person hated the bathroom, etc. and suddenly the
contractor is horrible, he didn't know what he was doing, etc. So she
had another contractor come in -- this one was reputable -- and did it
right (or at least reasonably close). She had the whole thing torn
out, including bad plumbing in the basement.
Then she had a small porch and ramp built. The porch was only about 4'
wide, so if they sat the husband there (which was the purpose of it),
no one could get past him and no one could help his up/down. Then the
ramp was like 5/12. I mean steep!. And no stairs. When they were
talking about it, I suggested a "handicapped ramp". See, the stairway
is about 3' up. That 36' of ramp, 4' of top, and 3, 4' landings.
That's 52' of ramp, minimum. Oh, no the did it is like 12 feet. But
what do I know. Then someone else came and said the ramp was too
steep. Suddenly it was the city's fault for approving the plan. These
guys ripped that out and put in stairs.
The wonderful blacktop company came and it was wonderful for about a
week until someone commented on it. Then she bitched and they came and
put down a couple more inches.
The wonderful painter came. Her husband had painted the house,
touching up, every year (maybe twice a year) and couldn't keep the
paint on. The painter did the whole thing head to toe. 3 or 4 places
started peeling. She threatened to sue him.
So no, I don't think she is getting hosed. She gets what she pays for
and she likes it until someone tells her it's bad. I just keep my
mouth shut because she doesn't listen to me, anyway, so there's no
reason to antagonize her. It I see her out and she asks me what I
think, I'll just say its "interesting and I've never seen it done like
that before" so something like that.
I am, the smiling neighbor....
>
>
> I'd have a tough time living next to what's going on by you. I have
> this thing about people that take advantage of kids and old people. It
> pisses me off and I have major problems with such schmucks. I make
> this clear to them. They see crazy in my eyes, and they're right.
>
> Obviously the situation you're witnessing isn't heinous activity, but
> there's no way there's a permit, from the sound of it the contractor is
> probably unlicensed, maybe uninsured, definitely clueless, and to top
> it off it's an old lady. I don't know if she's still sharp, starting
> to lose it or what, but I'd go over, be neighborly and see what's going
> on. I do realize that could be opening a can of worms, but the
> potential consequences could be far more serious than her losing just
> some money.
>
> R
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-17, 3:26 am |
|
Pat wrote:
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> I learned years ago to keep out of her business. Her husband had some
> mobility issues. She got a contractor and spoke wonderful of him, how
> good he was, etc. etc. He took part of the dining room and put in a
> downstairs bathroom for them. All was wonderful.
>
> The toilet was bizarre. It was built against the wall and then they
> went out of their way to construct a partition on the other side of it.
> It was at the back of a -- I don't know what you call it, maybe
> "dead-end" -- that was about 3' wide and 4' deep with the walkway right
> in front of it. The wasn't even a place to put the t.p., so they
> installed the holder on the other wide of the walkway, maybe 6 or 7'
> from the toilet. They also put in a flimsy metal free-standing shower,
> maybe 3' square.
>
> I went over when they were framing it and said, gee maybe it's a bit
> small, the toilet isn't right, and if you'd like I could go find you
> some sized for handicapped accessibility. You wouldn't have to hit the
> sizes, but see if you can get close. I was told no, this was perfect,
> the contractor was great, etc. etc. About 2 years later she changed
> caregivers, the person hated the bathroom, etc. and suddenly the
> contractor is horrible, he didn't know what he was doing, etc. So she
> had another contractor come in -- this one was reputable -- and did it
> right (or at least reasonably close). She had the whole thing torn
> out, including bad plumbing in the basement.
>
> Then she had a small porch and ramp built. The porch was only about 4'
> wide, so if they sat the husband there (which was the purpose of it),
> no one could get past him and no one could help his up/down. Then the
> ramp was like 5/12. I mean steep!. And no stairs. When they were
> talking about it, I suggested a "handicapped ramp". See, the stairway
> is about 3' up. That 36' of ramp, 4' of top, and 3, 4' landings.
> That's 52' of ramp, minimum. Oh, no the did it is like 12 feet. But
> what do I know. Then someone else came and said the ramp was too
> steep. Suddenly it was the city's fault for approving the plan. These
> guys ripped that out and put in stairs.
>
> The wonderful blacktop company came and it was wonderful for about a
> week until someone commented on it. Then she bitched and they came and
> put down a couple more inches.
>
> The wonderful painter came. Her husband had painted the house,
> touching up, every year (maybe twice a year) and couldn't keep the
> paint on. The painter did the whole thing head to toe. 3 or 4 places
> started peeling. She threatened to sue him.
>
> So no, I don't think she is getting hosed. She gets what she pays for
> and she likes it until someone tells her it's bad. I just keep my
> mouth shut because she doesn't listen to me, anyway, so there's no
> reason to antagonize her. It I see her out and she asks me what I
> think, I'll just say its "interesting and I've never seen it done like
> that before" so something like that.
>
> I am, the smiling neighbor....
That's a sad story, Pat. My sister is the manager of a geriatric care
firm. The stories she tells me alternate between hilarious and
heartrending. Yours is somewhere in between.
Keep me posted on how they make the transition from the new straight
ridge to the swaybacked roof.
R
| |
|
|
RicodJour wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> That's a sad story, Pat. My sister is the manager of a geriatric care
> firm. The stories she tells me alternate between hilarious and
> heartrending. Yours is somewhere in between.
>
> Keep me posted on how they make the transition from the new straight
> ridge to the swaybacked roof.
>
> R
Just notices something when I took the dog for a walk this morning.
The roof has slope, but isn't actually as much as a house, which is say
5/12 or about 40%. Say it is about 30% (4/12?). Therefore the peak is
about a 120% angle (I hope my math isn't pissing off the gods of
Architecture). The ridge is 2 boards toe-nailed togethe, at a 90%
angle.
Setting aside the issue of it not sitting on the right correctly, the
angle of the flat edges isn't the same as the angle of the existing
roof. So how are the going to tie into it and make the roof flat?
Rico, is your email right as listed? I'll send you a picture.
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-17, 1:25 pm |
|
Pat wrote:
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> Just notices something when I took the dog for a walk this morning.
>
> The roof has slope, but isn't actually as much as a house, which is say
> 5/12 or about 40%. Say it is about 30% (4/12?). Therefore the peak is
> about a 120% angle (I hope my math isn't pissing off the gods of
> Architecture). The ridge is 2 boards toe-nailed togethe, at a 90%
> angle.
>
> Setting aside the issue of it not sitting on the right correctly, the
> angle of the flat edges isn't the same as the angle of the existing
> roof. So how are the going to tie into it and make the roof flat?
>
> Rico, is your email right as listed? I'll send you a picture.
Can you post the pic?
Old sway back garages are the charm of the
snow belt, perhaps owner built in the summer
without due regard to snowload, especially in
Pat's area.
A neighbour had that problem, IIRC he used
thread rods across the top of the walls to pull
the walls together, then left them for a storage
device. Of course there are details solved by
common sense like putting a 2x4 along the
top of the walls on the exterior and using
large washers etc.
Ken
| |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> Can you post the pic?
>
> Old sway back garages are the charm of the
> snow belt, perhaps owner built in the summer
> without due regard to snowload, especially in
> Pat's area.
> A neighbour had that problem, IIRC he used
> thread rods across the top of the walls to pull
> the walls together, then left them for a storage
> device. Of course there are details solved by
> common sense like putting a 2x4 along the
> top of the walls on the exterior and using
> large washers etc.
> Ken
Yeah, but I just realized my camera isn't here. I'll post tomorrow.
Rain should be gone by then so they should be back to work.
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> Just notices something when I took the dog for a walk this morning.
>
> The roof has slope, but isn't actually as much as a house, which is say
> 5/12 or about 40%. Say it is about 30% (4/12?). Therefore the peak is
> about a 120% angle (I hope my math isn't pissing off the gods of
> Architecture). The ridge is 2 boards toe-nailed togethe, at a 90%
> angle.
>
> Setting aside the issue of it not sitting on the right correctly, the
> angle of the flat edges isn't the same as the angle of the existing
> roof. So how are the going to tie into it and make the roof flat?
Maybe they're building a whole nuther roof up above the existing roof?
| |
|
|
"Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
news:eh363o01k53@news1.newsguy.com...
> "Pat"> wrote
>
> Maybe they're building a whole nuther roof up above the existing roof?
Sounds like one big CF. They could have done it right by now and probably
cheaper.
| |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> Can you post the pic?
>
> Old sway back garages are the charm of the
> snow belt, perhaps owner built in the summer
> without due regard to snowload, especially in
> Pat's area.
> A neighbour had that problem, IIRC he used
> thread rods across the top of the walls to pull
> the walls together, then left them for a storage
> device. Of course there are details solved by
> common sense like putting a 2x4 along the
> top of the walls on the exterior and using
> large washers etc.
> Ken
Just click the file name to get the pic.
1st is ridge line. Notice angle of roof and angle of new roof don't
match. What is the weight distribution? How will they make transition
from old roof angl to new ridge line? These are, of course,
hypothetical questions. We'll see.
2nd pic shows difference between old and new ridge lines (showing
amount a sag).
| |
|
|
Pat wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> Just click the file name to get the pic.
>
> 1st is ridge line. Notice angle of roof and angle of new roof don't
> match. What is the weight distribution? How will they make transition
> from old roof angl to new ridge line? These are, of course,
> hypothetical questions. We'll see.
>
> 2nd pic shows difference between old and new ridge lines (showing
> amount a sag).
http://www.artisticphotography.us/garage/
Duh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
| |
|
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161117519.741851.65020@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> http://www.artisticphotography.us/garage/
This actually may not be a bad solution if they carry it through.
I'm guessing that they will be installing sleepers at each joist/truss and
sheath over the whole thing -- there will be no transistion. The sag can be
taken up by jacking into place, installing collar ties, then
nailing/screwing down through the sleepers.
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-17, 5:25 pm |
| Pat wrote:
>
> http://www.artisticphotography.us/garage/
>
> Duh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I believe, thanks to the Simpson paternal, that that exclamation has
been standardized as, "Doh!"
You are a lucky man, Pat. You get to sit there, drink a cup of coffee,
and watch the truly clueless at work right outside your window without
getting involved or injured (hopefully). When you mentioned that the
ridge boards had been toenailed (that's not toenailing by the way), I
assumed that they had smacked together the boards uncut making a right
angle. Nope. They mitered the frackers and still got the angle wrong.
It will only go, ahem, downhill from here.
It looks to me like they're thinking of bridging between the new ridge
and the eave. The roof is smaller than I thought, and they're stupider
than I imagined. They're making that anemic ridge into an ersatz
structural ridge. I hope that the weather you get in your area is
perpetually sunny and bright. If they shim under the ridge and the
bridging(?) above the rafters, the existing inadequate roof will have
to support far more weight than it currently can't handle. If they're
not going to shim, that fucked-up-tural ridge will be sitting on the
existing ridge in short order ending up in the same predicament as the
first scenario.
Are the people doing the construction contractors, or are they possibly
college kids who were "asked" to sit out a term? Either way they are
indeed making this up as they go along, wasting their time and money,
the owner's time and money and giving you free entertainment. Damn,
does that coffee taste good!
R
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-18, 3:26 am |
|
JD wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1161117519.741851.65020@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> This actually may not be a bad solution if they carry it through.
>
> I'm guessing that they will be installing sleepers at each joist/truss and
> sheath over the whole thing -- there will be no transistion. The sag can be
> taken up by jacking into place, installing collar ties, then
> nailing/screwing down through the sleepers.
Why would they build a new roof (adding ~6 PSF to the dead load) on top
of a failing old one? If the sag can be corrected from inside why are
they building on the outside?
R
| |
|
|
RicodJour wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> I believe, thanks to the Simpson paternal, that that exclamation has
> been standardized as, "Doh!"
>
> You are a lucky man, Pat. You get to sit there, drink a cup of coffee,
> and watch the truly clueless at work right outside your window without
> getting involved or injured (hopefully). When you mentioned that the
> ridge boards had been toenailed (that's not toenailing by the way), I
> assumed that they had smacked together the boards uncut making a right
> angle. Nope. They mitered the frackers and still got the angle wrong.
> It will only go, ahem, downhill from here.
>
> It looks to me like they're thinking of bridging between the new ridge
> and the eave. The roof is smaller than I thought, and they're stupider
> than I imagined. They're making that anemic ridge into an ersatz
> structural ridge. I hope that the weather you get in your area is
> perpetually sunny and bright. If they shim under the ridge and the
> bridging(?) above the rafters, the existing inadequate roof will have
> to support far more weight than it currently can't handle. If they're
> not going to shim, that fucked-up-tural ridge will be sitting on the
> existing ridge in short order ending up in the same predicament as the
> first scenario.
>
> Are the people doing the construction contractors, or are they possibly
> college kids who were "asked" to sit out a term? Either way they are
> indeed making this up as they go along, wasting their time and money,
> the owner's time and money and giving you free entertainment. Damn,
> does that coffee taste good!
>
> R
Doh, I screwed up the Duh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As I said, if they ask me anything I'll just respond with "I've never
seen anything like it before".
When I had said toenailed, I had assumed it was. Couldn't imagine
they mitered a 90 degree angle. All that did was make is weaker,
didn't it. FWIW, I do believe they used screws because I hear the
shreak of screws into pressure treated wood.
I don't know nuthin about architecture, but I know you don't put in a
ridge joist that isn't straight up and down. I can't imagine the
physics of this contraption.
The people aren't kids. My guess would be that they are in their late
50s.
I am still trying to figure out how they make the transition to the new
ridge. Hopefully I'll find out soon.
As for the weather, yes it's always sunny here, except when it isn't.
Not much snow, only about 120" to 150" per year. Pretty tame -- for
the snow belt. But at least we're not Buffalo.
The coffee is great. The old coffee pot died (seems like a coffee pot
should last more than 15 years) and I had to buy a new one. Kept the
thermal carafe approach. Only good water and fresh-ground beans.
| |
|
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
news:1161142635.657963.170090@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> JD wrote:
>
> Why would they build a new roof (adding ~6 PSF to the dead load) on top
> of a failing old one? If the sag can be corrected from inside why are
> they building on the outside?
Maybe it'll be supported by a short kneewall directly over the existing wall
below, thus taking the load off the old roof?
I don't think we have enough *evidence* yet to figure out what they're doing
here.
Come on Pat, we need some more pics! heh
| |
|
|
Don wrote:
> "RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> news:1161142635.657963.170090@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Maybe it'll be supported by a short kneewall directly over the existing wall
> below, thus taking the load off the old roof?
> I don't think we have enough *evidence* yet to figure out what they're doing
> here.
> Come on Pat, we need some more pics! heh
I'm not sure THEY have enough evidence to figure out what's going on.
When the come back, I'll post more pics. Don't want to do to many.
Don't want the neighbor wondering why I'm taking pictures of the great
construction project.
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-18, 9:25 am |
| at" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161174231.192407.221410@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Don wrote:
>
> I'm not sure THEY have enough evidence to figure out what's going on.
>
> When the come back, I'll post more pics. Don't want to do to many.
> Don't want the neighbor wondering why I'm taking pictures of the great
> construction project.
>
This is mostly just a decorative exercise in making the garage look visually
stable from the exterior. Would it be better to remove the roof structure,
stabilize the walls and build a new structure? Yes. Would that be much
more cost prohivitive than what they are doing? Yes.
For a cheap project what they are doing is an acceptable risk compared to
the alternative.
The new ridge essentailly acts a beam spanning the entire structure. The
two 2X8 (10?) 's appear to be nailed together with an angle cut thus making
it a Jerry/Jury rigged ridge beam that is relatively redundent and
structurally sound providing it is nailed from both faces into the opposing
edges. Aside from spanning from front to back, the ridge essentially only
acts as a way to provide a level surface. The eaves are at the same level.
I suspect that a lightweight frame will next be installed on top of the
ridge and eaves by spanning notched 2X4's downwards to the eaves and by
covering the entire thing with 3/8" plywood creating an air space (or
squirrel collector) in between. Providing that the end walls are
structurally sound and stable the extra load shouldn't be much of an issue.
With the new level surface the roof can be shingled and facias can be nailed
to the front and back faces making the new roof look level. Hopefully care
will be taken to ventilate the new air space or the whole thing could rot
from the inside out.
The real test will be the first major snowstorm. If 24" of heavy wet snow
comes down it "could" pop the nails and render the ridge beam useless. On
the other hand, cheap Jerry/Jury rigged solutions like this sometimes work
out wonderfully.
Keep us posted.
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> When the come back, I'll post more pics. Don't want to do to many.
> Don't want the neighbor wondering why I'm taking pictures of the great
> construction project.
Yeah, the ol' lady may suspect you of being a sleeper cell or
sumfink........
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
>
> This is mostly just a decorative exercise in making the garage look visually
> stable from the exterior. Would it be better to remove the roof structure,
> stabilize the walls and build a new structure? Yes. Would that be much
> more cost prohivitive than what they are doing? Yes.
>
> For a cheap project what they are doing is an acceptable risk compared to
> the alternative.
>
> The new ridge essentailly acts a beam spanning the entire structure. The
> two 2X8 (10?) 's appear to be nailed together with an angle cut thus making
> it a Jerry/Jury rigged ridge beam that is relatively redundent and
> structurally sound providing it is nailed from both faces into the opposing
> edges. Aside from spanning from front to back, the ridge essentially only
> acts as a way to provide a level surface. The eaves are at the same level.
> I suspect that a lightweight frame will next be installed on top of the
> ridge and eaves by spanning notched 2X4's downwards to the eaves and by
> covering the entire thing with 3/8" plywood creating an air space (or
> squirrel collector) in between. Providing that the end walls are
> structurally sound and stable the extra load shouldn't be much of an issue.
> With the new level surface the roof can be shingled and facias can be nailed
> to the front and back faces making the new roof look level. Hopefully care
> will be taken to ventilate the new air space or the whole thing could rot
> from the inside out.
>
> The real test will be the first major snowstorm. If 24" of heavy wet snow
> comes down it "could" pop the nails and render the ridge beam useless. On
> the other hand, cheap Jerry/Jury rigged solutions like this sometimes work
> out wonderfully.
Assume that they are able to frame this abortion so that the
supra-rafters aren't touching the existing roof (yeah, right), and
there are no shims/blocking between the new ridge "beam" and the old.
The mitered 2x8's are at an angle, say half strong axis, half weak
axis. The only thing that is keeping the two pieces from laying down
with the load are the screws Pat heard being installed. The ridge is,
what?, 20' long, and it's unclear whether it's a one or two car garage.
How much load do you figure those screws on X" O.C. can take? They're
attaching through a mitered corner so there's not as much meat, and I'm
sure they didn't put the screws 6" O.C. There's no way that ridge
won't sag in snow country. It's just a question of how long it will
take to lay down.
R
| |
|
|
RicodJour wrote:
> Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
>
> Assume that they are able to frame this abortion so that the
> supra-rafters aren't touching the existing roof (yeah, right), and
> there are no shims/blocking between the new ridge "beam" and the old.
> The mitered 2x8's are at an angle, say half strong axis, half weak
> axis. The only thing that is keeping the two pieces from laying down
> with the load are the screws Pat heard being installed. The ridge is,
> what?, 20' long, and it's unclear whether it's a one or two car garage.
> How much load do you figure those screws on X" O.C. can take? They're
> attaching through a mitered corner so there's not as much meat, and I'm
> sure they didn't put the screws 6" O.C. There's no way that ridge
> won't sag in snow country. It's just a question of how long it will
> take to lay down.
>
> R
Ohh, you're all wrong. You guys could cobble together a project like
this if your drafting boards depended on it. They guys are here and
some progress is being made.
Please don't look at the pic if you are standing up, have heart
problems, or suseptible to the giggles. I had to shoot the pic through
the back door window & screen.
http://www.artisticphotography.us/garage/IMG_1612.JPG
BTW, its a small 1-car garage.
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
RicodJour wrote:
> Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
>
> Assume that they are able to frame this abortion so that the
> supra-rafters aren't touching the existing roof (yeah, right), and
> there are no shims/blocking between the new ridge "beam" and the old.
> The mitered 2x8's are at an angle, say half strong axis, half weak
> axis. The only thing that is keeping the two pieces from laying down
> with the load are the screws Pat heard being installed. The ridge is,
> what?, 20' long, and it's unclear whether it's a one or two car garage.
> How much load do you figure those screws on X" O.C. can take? They're
> attaching through a mitered corner so there's not as much meat, and I'm
> sure they didn't put the screws 6" O.C. There's no way that ridge
> won't sag in snow country. It's just a question of how long it will
> take to lay down.
> R
I feel like an armchair quarterback watching
a game on a fuzzy channel, but I think it'll
work.
My guess is 7/16" OSB supported by 2x4's
bridged from the depicted ridge to eave.
The OSB becomes a strong structrual
element when attached to the 2x4's,
provided the eave beams are secured to
make sure they are relatively stationary,
then one has a big triangular prism roof.
Ok I'm an optimist, I'll presume the box
that the prism sits on will be sufficient.
It's still the 1st quarter.
BTW it's not "if" you get 24" of heavy snow,
it's when. Incidentally Pat may correct me,
what is the snow load spec for your area?
Ours is only 30#'s per square foot, I'd
guess your's is 50-60, in that area I use 60.
That's equal to about 8' of fresh snow, that
remains and compacts over the season,
using 10" fresh snow = 1" of water.
Ken
| |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> I feel like an armchair quarterback watching
> a game on a fuzzy channel, but I think it'll
> work.
> My guess is 7/16" OSB supported by 2x4's
> bridged from the depicted ridge to eave.
> The OSB becomes a strong structrual
> element when attached to the 2x4's,
> provided the eave beams are secured to
> make sure they are relatively stationary,
> then one has a big triangular prism roof.
> Ok I'm an optimist, I'll presume the box
> that the prism sits on will be sufficient.
> It's still the 1st quarter.
>
> BTW it's not "if" you get 24" of heavy snow,
> it's when. Incidentally Pat may correct me,
> what is the snow load spec for your area?
> Ours is only 30#'s per square foot, I'd
> guess your's is 50-60, in that area I use 60.
> That's equal to about 8' of fresh snow, that
> remains and compacts over the season,
> using 10" fresh snow = 1" of water.
> Ken
I don't know the spec, but we average about 85-90" a year. I just
check (for another reason). Lake effect is usually pretty light-weight
snow. OTOH, Buffalo is only about 50 miles north. So sometimes sh*t
happens.
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161188051.516927.184050@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> Ohh, you're all wrong. You guys could cobble together a project like
> this if your drafting boards depended on it. They guys are here and
> some progress is being made.
>
> Please don't look at the pic if you are standing up, have heart
> problems, or suseptible to the giggles. I had to shoot the pic through
> the back door window & screen.
>
> http://www.artisticphotography.us/garage/IMG_1612.JPG
>
> BTW, its a small 1-car garage.
>
Yup, they're doing what I thought they were doing. It'll work for a while
and maybe even for a long while. Until it the screws pop out that is... I
almost can't wait for the first big snowstorm now...
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
Pat wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> I don't know the spec, but we average about 85-90" a year. I just
> check (for another reason). Lake effect is usually pretty light-weight
> snow. OTOH, Buffalo is only about 50 miles north. So sometimes sh*t
> happens.
Yeah I just rechecked the code here. The snow load
spec is based on a 30 year worst case scenario.
Ken
| |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> Yeah I just rechecked the code here. The snow load
> spec is based on a 30 year worst case scenario.
> Ken
Don't know historically, but we got 107" in 02-03 and 30" on the ground
is "normal", but not unheard of either.
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161188770.579696.244640@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> I don't know the spec, but we average about 85-90" a year. I just
> check (for another reason). Lake effect is usually pretty light-weight
> snow. OTOH, Buffalo is only about 50 miles north. So sometimes sh*t
> happens.
>
Up in the Catskills the snowload is basically the same as what you just
described except that the wind load is also very high. So in the 10 years
of having my wayyyyyyy underdesigned leanto (2X4's @ 27" OC spanning 16 feet
and a roof at 1:5) I expected that it would be gone by now. But funny
things happen with heavy wind and lots of nails. I built it without power
and with a chainsaw/hammer/nails and broke every concievable design rule...
I expected it to last a year or two yet here we are 10 years later and the
thing is getting stronger by the day as the materials harden and seal
themselves together with what I've alwats called "magic glue". It's an
amazing phenomena... ever try to do demo in an old victorian home? Lot's of
"magic glue"
http://tinyurl.com/yzacwn
http://tinyurl.com/q9x8v
http://tinyurl.com/yfh9tp
http://tinyurl.com/y9vzpc
Because of the wind, the roof has never had more than 12-18 inches on it as
it just blows off during the big storms and we've had some doozies in the
past 10 years. One was a 42" storm in March 1996 but there was about 18
inches on the roof.
So
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
Pat wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> Don't know historically, but we got 107" in 02-03 and 30" on the ground
> is "normal", but not unheard of either.
Well 100" of snow => 10"of water, and water
is about 66# /cubic foot, so 10" is near 60#,
psf. Snow often melts but clings to the roof,*
by just compacting, and then a drizzle adds
more weight by just soaking snow and then
freezing unless you luck out and get an out-
right few days of sunny thaw, but that might
happen only in the spring.
*Friends of ours used steel roofing and claim
the snow will slide off them with a moderate
slope "5/12", "3/5", likely true if the attic has
some heat.
Ken
| |
|
|
Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1161188770.579696.244640@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Up in the Catskills the snowload is basically the same as what you just
> described except that the wind load is also very high. So in the 10 years
> of having my wayyyyyyy underdesigned leanto (2X4's @ 27" OC spanning 16 feet
> and a roof at 1:5) I expected that it would be gone by now. But funny
> things happen with heavy wind and lots of nails. I built it without power
> and with a chainsaw/hammer/nails and broke every concievable design rule...
> I expected it to last a year or two yet here we are 10 years later and the
> thing is getting stronger by the day as the materials harden and seal
> themselves together with what I've alwats called "magic glue". It's an
> amazing phenomena... ever try to do demo in an old victorian home? Lot's of
> "magic glue"
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yzacwn
> http://tinyurl.com/q9x8v
> http://tinyurl.com/yfh9tp
> http://tinyurl.com/y9vzpc
>
> Because of the wind, the roof has never had more than 12-18 inches on it as
> it just blows off during the big storms and we've had some doozies in the
> past 10 years. One was a 42" storm in March 1996 but there was about 18
> inches on the roof.
>
> So
We always say that they are "held together by habit"
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> OTOH, Buffalo is only about 50 miles north.
Anywhere near Palmyra, or is that in the other direction?
Palmyra, I spent a week there one night.....
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-18, 1:25 pm |
|
Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1161188770.579696.244640@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Up in the Catskills the snowload is basically the same as what you just
> described except that the wind load is also very high. So in the 10 years
> of having my wayyyyyyy underdesigned leanto (2X4's @ 27" OC spanning 16 feet
> and a roof at 1:5) I expected that it would be gone by now. But funny
> things happen with heavy wind and lots of nails. I built it without power
> and with a chainsaw/hammer/nails and broke every concievable design rule...
> I expected it to last a year or two yet here we are 10 years later and the
> thing is getting stronger by the day as the materials harden and seal
> themselves together with what I've alwats called "magic glue". It's an
> amazing phenomena... ever try to do demo in an old victorian home? Lot's of
> "magic glue"
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yzacwn
> http://tinyurl.com/q9x8v
> http://tinyurl.com/yfh9tp
> http://tinyurl.com/y9vzpc
>
> Because of the wind, the roof has never had more than 12-18 inches on it as
> it just blows off during the big storms and we've had some doozies in the
> past 10 years. One was a 42" storm in March 1996 but there was about 18
> inches on the roof.
>
> So
So, wind is unpredictable at creating snow
drifts, by scheme or luck your roof avoided
that and benefited from wind. It's common
to have 10'-12' drifts but not usually on roofs,
but that happens, a few plaza's have collapsed
due to uneven loading. You just had to throw in
a zinger...and "magic glue" too.
Ken
| |
|
|
Don wrote:
> "Pat"> wrote
>
> Anywhere near Palmyra, or is that in the other direction?
> Palmyra, I spent a week there one night.....
No, south and more depressing. But about the same amount of bad
weather.
Palmyra is about 20 or 30 miles east of Rochester. Rochester is about
50 miles east of Bflo. I am about 50 miles south of Bflo.
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-18, 5:25 pm |
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161196930.943214.77600@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Don wrote:
>
> No, south and more depressing. But about the same amount of bad
> weather.
>
> Palmyra is about 20 or 30 miles east of Rochester. Rochester is about
> 50 miles east of Bflo. I am about 50 miles south of Bflo.
>
Doesn't that put you right dab smack in the middle of Ralph "Bucky" Phillips
country? That musta been fun...
| |
|
|
Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1161196930.943214.77600@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Doesn't that put you right dab smack in the middle of Ralph "Bucky" Phillips
> country? That musta been fun...
Oh yeah, that was all around here. Buck jokes. Bucks songs. Bucky
shirts. Bucky sightings.
Typical Bucky joke: Want to hear a Bucky joke.
"Yeah"
"New York State Police, what a joke".
Or "How many Troopers does it take to catch Bucky".
"Only 1 if it's a PA trooper" or earlier it was "I don't know, but
it's more than they have".
The Trooper Superintendent looked incredibly like Jackie Gleason in
Smokey and the Bandit
http://www.troopers.state.ny.us/Introduction/ And this is a GOOD
picture of him.
My son's after-school program had a lock-down when he was seen nearby.
No one was scared of him. I think that if you didn't threaten him, he
would be perfectly fine to you. It is reputed than when he broke into
places, he always paid for what he took, which was cool.
They caught him about 30 miles away. It was all over the news for the
longest time.
It broke up the monotony.
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-18, 9:25 pm |
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161221408.094485.279360@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
>
> Oh yeah, that was all around here. Buck jokes. Bucks songs. Bucky
> shirts. Bucky sightings.
>
> Typical Bucky joke: Want to hear a Bucky joke.
> "Yeah"
> "New York State Police, what a joke".
>
> Or "How many Troopers does it take to catch Bucky".
> "Only 1 if it's a PA trooper" or earlier it was "I don't know, but
> it's more than they have".
>
> The Trooper Superintendent looked incredibly like Jackie Gleason in
> Smokey and the Bandit
> http://www.troopers.state.ny.us/Introduction/ And this is a GOOD
> picture of him.
>
> My son's after-school program had a lock-down when he was seen nearby.
>
>
> No one was scared of him. I think that if you didn't threaten him, he
> would be perfectly fine to you. It is reputed than when he broke into
> places, he always paid for what he took, which was cool.
>
> They caught him about 30 miles away. It was all over the news for the
> longest time.
>
> It broke up the monotony.
>
When does the movie come out and who'll play him?
| |
|
|
Pierre Levesque, AIA wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1161221408.094485.279360@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> When does the movie come out and who'll play him?
I told a friend of mine -- who is working on the great American novel
and who daughter sighted him -- to start the book so it would be
published 30 days after his capture. But she didn't. Too bad.
I bet they use Mel Gibson and adapt it as Die Hard 7 or Steven Segal as
Hard to Kill 23
It would sort of be Last of the Mohicans meets The Green Mile.
Too bad Jackie Gleason can't play the Trooper-boss. Maybe Carrol
O'Connor
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> The Trooper Superintendent looked incredibly like Jackie Gleason in
> Smokey and the Bandit
> http://www.troopers.state.ny.us/Introduction/ And this is a GOOD
> picture of him.
Looks more like Archie Bunker, meathead!
| |
|
| "Pat"> wrote
> Maybe Carrol O'Connor
Bucky didn't happen to do crack did he? <wink>
| |
| RebarGuy 2006-10-19, 1:25 pm |
| >
> Too bad Jackie Gleason can't play the Trooper-boss. Maybe Carrol
> O'Connor
Unless he can do it from beyond the grave, Carroll O'Conner won't be
available.
:-)
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-10-19, 1:25 pm |
|
"RebarGuy" <rebarhas@ridges.net> wrote in message
news:iiMZg.32955$vi3.6225@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
> Unless he can do it from beyond the grave, Carroll O'Conner won't be
> available.
>
> :-)
Carroll O'Gleason?
| |
|
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1161226953.303022.239380@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> O'Connor
uh, I'm afraid he can't either.
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-20, 1:25 pm |
| C'mon, Pat! Help me out man, I'm jonesing. Where's my daily foto fix?
R
| |
|
| "RicodJour"> wrote
> C'mon, Pat! Help me out man, I'm jonesing. Where's my daily foto fix?
Rico sed jonesin' heh
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-20, 1:25 pm |
|
RicodJour wrote:
> C'mon, Pat! Help me out man, I'm jonesing. Where's my daily foto fix?
> R
Yeah, it's like missing an episode of "Laurel and
Hardy meet the Garage", say, do you suppose the
fella's doing this work follow alt.arch, and are
waiting for suggestions?
Ken
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-20, 5:25 pm |
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> RicodJour wrote:
>
> Yeah, it's like missing an episode of "Laurel and
> Hardy meet the Garage", say, do you suppose the
> fella's doing this work follow alt.arch, and are
> waiting for suggestions?
Have you ever seen The Sitterdowners (The Sitter Downers?) - it's a
Three Stooges short about building a kit home. If you haven't seen it,
make the effort. Talk about deconstructivist!
R
| |
|
| "RicodJour"> wrote
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> Have you ever seen The Sitterdowners (The Sitter Downers?) - it's a
> Three Stooges short about building a kit home. If you haven't seen it,
> make the effort. Talk about deconstructivist!
Gimme a link man, send me to that bit torrent, hell, I'll even do mIRC.
I likes me sum ol' b/w stuff, specially popeye..........
| |
|
|
Don wrote:
> "RicodJour"> wrote
>
> Gimme a link man, send me to that bit torrent, hell, I'll even do mIRC.
>
> I likes me sum ol' b/w stuff, specially popeye..........
My 14 year old (at the time, not a proud 15) said something to me and I
said "No, Who's on first". He didn't understand it. But he's a BIG
baseball fan, so I found the routine on YouTube. He thought it was
hysterical. He couldn't believe something could be that funny but so
staged, clean, old, etc. etc. Last week, I was flipping channels and
found "A Day at the Races". He actually watched it for about half an
hour before he wanted to get back to a baseball game. There's hope for
him.
| |
|
|
RicodJour wrote:
> C'mon, Pat! Help me out man, I'm jonesing. Where's my daily foto fix?
>
> R
Sorry, I was traveling. Damn that work stuff. Had a meeting/site
visit/monsoon on the other end of the state. Left at 6:15 AM. Got
home at 11:45 PM.
I post another one as soon as I can. Meanwhile, breathe deeply.
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-21, 1:25 pm |
|
Pat wrote:
> Don wrote:
[color=darkred]
We liked Money Pit and Mr. Blanding...some neat
stuff on America's Funniest Video when the guy's
put up a wall and it keeps going and crunches his car.
We're enjoying following the saga of Indiana Don,
Sasquatch (Green Acres) and Buffalo Pat's garage,
Texas Kris's pool, Washington Bob's bridge, and
meanwhile perhaps another episode from the Tucker
ranch maybe in the works.
[color=darkred]
> My 14 year old (at the time, not a proud 15) said something to me and I
> said "No, Who's on first". He didn't understand it. But he's a BIG
> baseball fan, so I found the routine on YouTube. He thought it was
> hysterical. He couldn't believe something could be that funny but so
> staged, clean, old, etc. etc. Last week, I was flipping channels and
> found "A Day at the Races". He actually watched it for about half an
> hour before he wanted to get back to a baseball game. There's hope for
> him.
Beats Shakespeare, a Literature Classic!
Ken
| |
|
| > 14 y/o
Aside from the baseball affliction, sounds like maybe you have a keeper.
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-23, 1:25 pm |
|
gruhn wrote:
>
> Aside from the baseball affliction, sounds like maybe you have a keeper.
No such thing as a keeper, if your lucky!
3 years to Marilyn Manson concert money
and the keys to the car.
Ken
| |
|
| "Ken S. Tucker"> wrote
> gruhn wrote:
>
> No such thing as a keeper, if your lucky!
> 3 years to Marilyn Manson concert money
> and the keys to the car.
MM is so 90's.
Anyway, 3 years will fly by.
My son wasn't allowed to go to an MM concert til he was 16 and I went with
him.
I ended up enduring 2 more of those ghastly things.
The last one I spent out in the parking lot cause I just couldn't stand it.
Don't know whats with most concerts anymore, they are way too loud to even
be heard.
I like extremely loud toonz but at some point its not fun anymore.
Prolly the best concert I saw in the last 20 years was Collective Soul in a
formal set-down concert hall normally reserved for the likes of Streisand
type concerts.
Big, plush chairs, everybody (well, almost everybody) acted like human
beings.
| |
| Ken S. Tucker 2006-10-24, 9:25 am |
|
Don wrote:
> "Ken S. Tucker"> wrote
>
> MM is so 90's.
> Anyway, 3 years will fly by.
> My son wasn't allowed to go to an MM concert til he was 16 and I went with
> him.
> I ended up enduring 2 more of those ghastly things.
> The last one I spent out in the parking lot cause I just couldn't stand it.
> Don't know whats with most concerts anymore, they are way too loud to even
> be heard.
Hear ya maybe, what did you say? Speak up!
It's the damn ringing in the ears, it's a bad
hang-over, last one I had lasted 2 days, F that.
> I like extremely loud toonz but at some point its not fun anymore.
> Prolly the best concert I saw in the last 20 years was Collective Soul in a
> formal set-down concert hall normally reserved for the likes of Streisand
> type concerts.
> Big, plush chairs, everybody (well, almost everybody)
"acted like human beings."
Don I think that was a recital :-).
Ken
| |
|
|
"Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
news:ehjkol01g2n@news4.newsguy.com...
> "Ken S. Tucker"> wrote
>
> MM is so 90's.
> Anyway, 3 years will fly by.
> My son wasn't allowed to go to an MM concert til he was 16 and I went with
> him.
> I ended up enduring 2 more of those ghastly things.
> The last one I spent out in the parking lot cause I just couldn't stand
> it.
> Don't know whats with most concerts anymore, they are way too loud to even
> be heard.
> I like extremely loud toonz but at some point its not fun anymore.
> Prolly the best concert I saw in the last 20 years was Collective Soul in
> a formal set-down concert hall normally reserved for the likes of
> Streisand type concerts.
> Big, plush chairs, everybody (well, almost everybody) acted like human
> beings.
I'm taking my 15yo son and two of his buddies to a ska show in a couple of
weeks. I'm looking forward to taking him to his first show that doesn't
feature garage bands. Any ska fans out there?
Actually, it's his 2nd show but he was a bit younger when we saw the Tubes
by accident at a fair because it was a free show. Tubes? Free? I'm there!
| |
|
|
"JD" <laughingarchitectNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Nbs%g.17221$vJ2.1243@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
> news:ehjkol01g2n@news4.newsguy.com...
>
> I'm taking my 15yo son and two of his buddies to a ska show in a couple of
> weeks. I'm looking forward to taking him to his first show that doesn't
> feature garage bands. Any ska fans out there?
>
> Actually, it's his 2nd show but he was a bit younger when we saw the Tubes
> by accident at a fair because it was a free show. Tubes? Free? I'm there!
.....one in a million gurlz.......she's a beauty.........
>
>
|
|
|
|
|