• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

concrete driveways and arrogance

C

codeworks

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
579
Location
South Texas
we have alot of concrete driveways here. was on an inspection this morning where the reinforcing steel was tied continoulsy throught the "expansion joints". nice pressure treated wood with holes drilled every 12 inches for the passage of #4 deformed bars. so , i see no breaks in the steel at expansion joints, no smooth dowels and of course, no slip caps on the missing smooth dowels. i asked the builder if these were expansion joints, he stated "yes", i informed him they wouldn't function properly unless the srteel was cut so as not to be continous throught the joint, and he

needed to provide smooth dowels with slip caps, in orderr for the expansion joint to function properly. "well, we don't NEED expansion joints" was his response.

meaning, i don't want to do what you just informed me to do mr. inspector. must be nice to be so f%%%^ng smart you don't see that water will get in between the pt wood and the concrete, cause the deformed bar to rust and expand, then blow the concrete apart at the "alleged expansion joint". what a rookie. i educated him, wrote him up and left. 100 bucks says he places concrete before he calls for a reinspect, too common
 
Are you sure it's purpose was expansion and not controlling cracks? A concrete driveway has to be pretty long before it actually requires expansion joints. And the continuous dowels at a control joint would tend to limit differential settlement - besides, rebar exposed to the weather will not really last that long anyway.
 
every 40 to 60 feet it generally good practice. i asked the builder if they were expansion joints, he said "yes",. i work from there.........
 
Thank goodness we don't inspect driveways and sidewalks on private property. City right-of-way yes!
 
codeworks said:
every 40 to 60 feet it generally good practice. i asked the builder if they were expansion joints, he said "yes",. i work from there.........
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should work from the sealed plans or the code book in lieu of access to such.
 
Greetings,

We don't inspect drives here either. What's funny is the number of complaints I've heard from homeowners about funky, cracking driveways. Imagine that.

BS
 
We don't need no stink'n driveway inspections!

Wood not good as an expansion, shrinks, swells, move upward, splinters off, maybe control joint is what is needed. Expansion would be againest house and drive, get it from the concrete plant, tar based product i think?.

Expansion at driveway end where touchy city approch, yes, yes!

little bird, speak in ear! tell me things i want to here!
 
oh yeah, asphalt impregnated sheathing, works great, been there, i know it works, used to install it. as far as plans on a job site, wouldn't that be nice ( believe me it'd make my job so much easier, the first question i asked when i started here was " why don't contractors keep plans on the job for us" " we're not that far along" or something too that nature was the response) , so i work with the code book, thank you very much, and with what i'm instructed to work with. i'm a peon, not policy maker, but i do know how it can run, just ain't so here....yet
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No "post on site" plans, no inspection...I'm not going to inspect something if I don't know that it's what was even approved.
 
Slabs on grade are not covered by ACI 318 thus there is no technical basis for determining what is acceptable by the code. In the absence of such criteria the building official has nothing to say. Refer to Section 105.2 of the IBC where it exempts driveways from the need for a permit. I would expect the IRC would get you to the same result.

Crack control is a bigger issue than expansion. As noted it would have to be a very long driveway before expansion could be a problem.

When the reinforcing is continious it prevents the joint from acting as either an expansion or contraction joint.

Typically the reinforcing installed is not enough to make much difference. My preference is to put 0.5% reinforcing in each direction and not worry about joints in the concrete slab. There will be some cracks but they will be small and evenly spaced and the resulting cracks will not normally be objectionable.
 
No "post on site" plans, no inspection...I'm not going to inspect something if I don't know that it's what was even approved. (same as bgingras)

We also do not inspect driveways
 
From the engineering perspective a driveway is obviously a very low risk item, at least in regards to the safety of live, although done badly it can have repercussions in the area of aesthetics and money, and it is generally on the lower end of the monitary scale in a residential and commerdial project so as long as it won't crumble in the first few years nobody, owner included, wishes to invest the time or money into dirves. That being said, personally I think that the very small cost, in both time and money, it takes to create a long lasting, smooth drive is well worth it.
 
codeworks said:
we have alot of concrete driveways here. was on an inspection this morning where the reinforcing steel was tied continoulsy throught the "expansion joints". nice pressure treated wood with holes drilled every 12 inches for the passage of #4 deformed bars. so , i see no breaks in the steel at expansion joints, no smooth dowels and of course, no slip caps on the missing smooth dowels. i asked the builder if these were expansion joints, he stated "yes", i informed him they wouldn't function properly unless the srteel was cut so as not to be continous throught the joint, and heneeded to provide smooth dowels with slip caps, in orderr for the expansion joint to function properly. "well, we don't NEED expansion joints" was his response.

meaning, i don't want to do what you just informed me to do mr. inspector. must be nice to be so f%%%^ng smart you don't see that water will get in between the pt wood and the concrete, cause the deformed bar to rust and expand, then blow the concrete apart at the "alleged expansion joint". what a rookie. i educated him, wrote him up and left. 100 bucks says he places concrete before he calls for a reinspect, too common
Click to expand...
2009 IRC

R105.2 Work exempt from permit.

5. Sidewalks and driveways.

2009 IBC

105.2 Work exempt from permit.

6. Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches (762 mm) above adjacent grade, and not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route.

Apparently your jurisdiction has a local amendment that requires review, permit, inspection and approval. I assume you're jurisdiction has adopted and is enforcing the ICC model codes.

I'm curious as to what code violation you referred to when you wrote this up?
 
Public Works requires driveway permits when they are off a county road, however the entrance is their only concern. They have requirements for width, site distance, and thickness.
 
Drive "ways" and sidewalks on private property are exempt........the IRC relates to private property. Drive "approaches" in ROW and sidewalks in ROW require permits in our AHJ.
 
Driveways were exempt from permits until we amended the codes to require permits (an administrative decision to verify zoning compliance) and in limited cases, inspections. IRC codes do not apply. City Ordinances, Development Agreements and Zoning Regulations are applicable to driveways and sidewalks, and the Building Department Inspectors have been delegated the honor of inspecting these when required (standard zoned sites are exempt from inspection but still need to comply). Site plans are required prior to issuance of a permit. When an inspector is required to perform an inspection, compliance with on site-plans is required. If an amendment is requested, the inspection is to be rescheduled until after the amendment has passed plan review and been reissued (no additional fees). Non-compliance requires removal and replacement. Failure to bring into compliance will result in a long drawn out process that results in City Workers (or contracted workers) performing the work and billing the property owner. Failure to pay invoice for work performed results in a lien filed on the property.
 
The only time our department has any involvement is when I have to worry about low water crossings or in the flood plain.
 
Bridges Have expansion joint - driveways do not- Why? because concrete never gets any larger than they day it is poured from that point onward it shrinks - therefor driveways require control joints to control where it gracks as it shrinks. Most often you want to guess where the crak will occur and place the control joint 2 or 3 inches left or right of where the crack will occur. mot of the slab placement guys seem to get that spot on!
 
Architect1281 said:
Bridges Have expansion joint - driveways do not- Why? because concrete never gets any larger than they day it is poured from that point onward it shrinks - therefor driveways require control joints to control where it gracks as it shrinks. Most often you want to guess where the crak will occur and place the control joint 2 or 3 inches left or right of where the crack will occur. mot of the slab placement guys seem to get that spot on!
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Concrete has a thermal coefficient of expansion roughly the same as steel. That's why reinforced concrete doesn't blow itself apart when the temperature changes.

In addition, concrete will expand in response to moisture.

That's why movement joints in bridges allow for expansion and contraction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top