• 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

Top of slab to grade

R

Rio

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
224
We have a slab on grade addition that is not complying with the current code regarding wood framing members being a min. of 8" to the grade (CBC2304.11.2.2, similar to IBC but California has to feel special I guess). There is an existing sloping slab that was cut to accommodate the monolithic slab/footing and the distance is about 4-5". The addition is getting a stucco finish and the bottom of the weep screed will be about 2" off of the flatwork, which slopes away from the addition with no ponding issues.

Is there a provision in the code that will allow for small deviations from the code when the intent of the code is being complied with and to comply with the code will impose a financial hardship on the parties involved? Any suggestions on how to deal with this situation are appreciated.

Rio

P.S. I noticed the exception with allowing the bottom of the sill to be 6" from the top of asphalt or concrete draining away from the building but we are coming in at 4-5" regarding that situation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is 8" from grade for unprotected wood. Use protected wood and you'll be ok for decay, but I don't know the provisions for termites (assuming you have them, I don't).
 
Thanks Yankee. One of the options we're thinking of doing if we aren't allowed to proceed is to use a 3" PTDF plate as then we could hold the struct. I ply above the 8". If it gets tight we plan on blocking between the stud bays to be able to have sufficient edge distance for the nails to the ply and sill plate.
 
You are welcome and if it were my jurisdiction there would not be any provision for leeway
 
No offense but I'm glad I'm not in your jurisdiction, LOL. We've had similar situations arise before and the field inspectors have always been cooperative with us.
 
Yankee said:
That is 8" from grade for unprotected wood. Use protected wood and you'll be ok for decay, but I don't know the provisions for termites (assuming you have them, I don't).
Click to expand...
Rio -

I agree with Yankee, pressure treated or wood naturally resistant to decay. Sometimes it is the only answer.

And yes, I would accept it due to the fact that we are talking about an addition to an existing structure.

Sue, in rainy NorCal
 
Thanks for all of the input. We are meeting with the inspector shortly and are going to point out to them that if this project had been done last year in California it would have complied, as the required distance then was 6". We'll also bring up the other points I mentioned in the first post and see what happens. We do have the treated wood option as a backup.
 
Rio said:
Thanks for all of the input. We are meeting with the inspector shortly and are going to point out to them that if this project had been done last year in California it would have complied, as the required distance then was 6". We'll also bring up the other points I mentioned in the first post and see what happens. We do have the treated wood option as a backup.
Click to expand...
Rio -

I'm confused. CA hasn't changed it's codes yet, that will be in January 2011.

Sue in CA
 
MH is right, we're under the 2007 CBC and apparently we're going to go to the IRC come January. The 6" was under the 1997 UBC which I'm missing more and more. As to the problem, the field inspector asked us to provide an 8" piece of galv. sheet metal against the wood and extending down the face of the slab on grade footing to just above the flatwork. As we held back the shear ply this was easy to do and that satisfied the inspector and saved us having to put in a stemwall of some sort.
 
Rio said:
... the field inspector asked us to provide an 8" piece of galv. sheet metal against the wood and extending down the face of the slab on grade footing to just above the flatwork.....
Click to expand...
Very common.
 
mark handler said:
Sue the 8" is in the current CBC 2007.
Click to expand...
Mark -

Missed that one somehow. Of course, when everything is built with a cawlspace, guess that it is easy to miss.

Sue, in freezing CA
 
At least they are using a weep screed... I still get a lot of cross-eyed looks when I say they are required...
 
JayHawkInspector said:
So where does this wood post/column fall within this discussion? It does have a post base under all that sand.
Click to expand...
if it is not pressure treated, i would say "start shoveling!":mrgreen:
 
Now you think you have problems, look at the attached photograph........:-(I guess out here in Kansas they don't think this type of clearance is very important.

View attachment 225

View attachment 225

/monthly_2010_10/572953b9bed70_2702ShamusSt2.jpg.a33fce4e8607109b2ee783b999d615df.jpg
 
Looks like the post is cedar....so it wouldn't have to be pressure treated ....would it?
 
Jayhawk,

We have some of that problem here. Our problem is the general gets done, does a final grade, sows some grass or lays some sod, the property owner moves in and the owner then has a full blown landscaper come in who reshapes the yard and moves dirt up higher on the side of the house, takes out the drainage swales and all kinds of fun stuff.

I kind of shot myself in the foot on this one. We require the lot to be graded and stabilized (vegetation) before C of O, but the council won't give us the ordinance to require a permit for regrading and relandscaping after the C of O. They don't understand why that is important. And it will be ten years or so before the first walls start rotting out for this reason. Oh well, it was right the last time my department was there, and we document that on each new house so we can deflect blame in the future. Still don't like being in the position of stuff happening and only being able to say "I told you so" further down the line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mule said:
Looks like the post is cedar....so it wouldn't have to be pressure treated ....would it?
Click to expand...
western red cedar heartwood is o.k and good eye mule! is that heartwood or do i see some wide grained jacket wood there? what structural value does cedar have and are you o.k. with that too? it could be black locust or redwood even but i can't see it from here. mule? :mrgreen:
 
The post is douglas fir rough sawn. They just should of put a sign on it for the termites saying "Free Lunch"............:)

And what would a 6 X 6 cedar post cost now days?????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top