3 ms·

Doesn't buildings in America have underground bases to ensure their stability? Because that's the case in my country even though seismic activity is very rare.

Doesn't buildings in America have underground bases to ensure their stability? Because that's the case in my country even though seismic activity is very rare. (We're talking about renforced concrete bases around 2 meters deep for a single story home. Obviously, the higher the building, the deeper the base.) If so, how was this building moved? If not, how did it manage to stay up?

throwawayboise 5y ago
They excavated under the base, and jacked up the building.
frosted-flakes 5y ago
Of course building have foundations. I imagine they built a new foundation at the new location, then lifted the building off the old foundation and slowly moved it to the new one. This is actually a fairly common thing to happen to houses; less so for large buildings, but certainly not rare. I know several people who had their old houses moved onto a new foundation with a basement within the last 15 years. Also, in the 1960s, my grandparents moved an entire garage several miles onto their farm property. In 2018, the historic Kodak Building 9 in Toronto was moved 200 feet out of the way so a subway station could be built beneath it, then moved back into place on a new foundation above the station. See here for details of how it was done and a timelapse video: http://www.thecrosstown.ca/node/2018 http://www.thecrosstown.ca/node/2018
willcipriano 5y ago
In the west a few decades prior, buildings would be constructed on gravel, field/paving stones or even the bare ground that would last a couple of decades due to the low moisture, but I don't think they would've done that there or that late.
martyvis 5y ago
This building would have been brick or stone. Hence the lower bricks would be cemented at best to the foundation. The floor structure, timber or steel could be jacked up, as would any walls to move it.

3 ms·

Doesn't buildings in America have underground bases to ensure their stability? Because that's the case in my country even though seismic activity is very rare.

by ahmedfromtunis 5y ago

throwawayboise 5y ago
They excavated under the base, and jacked up the building.
frosted-flakes 5y ago
Of course building have foundations. I imagine they built a new foundation at the new location, then lifted the building off the old foundation and slowly moved it to the new one. This is actually a fairly common thing to happen to houses; less so for large buildings, but certainly not rare. I know several people who had their old houses moved onto a new foundation with a basement within the last 15 years. Also, in the 1960s, my grandparents moved an entire garage several miles onto their farm property. In 2018, the historic Kodak Building 9 in Toronto was moved 200 feet out of the way so a subway station could be built beneath it, then moved back into place on a new foundation above the station. See here for details of how it was done and a timelapse video: http://www.thecrosstown.ca/node/2018 http://www.thecrosstown.ca/node/2018
willcipriano 5y ago
In the west a few decades prior, buildings would be constructed on gravel, field/paving stones or even the bare ground that would last a couple of decades due to the low moisture, but I don't think they would've done that there or that late.
martyvis 5y ago
This building would have been brick or stone. Hence the lower bricks would be cemented at best to the foundation. The floor structure, timber or steel could be jacked up, as would any walls to move it.