Ryan Stouffer
09-17-2009, 07:44 AM
Gents, I did an inspection last week and the home had a small attached deck and the columns of the deck were just landscape stones. So I mentioned in the report that this may not be a strong enough support system. The realtor trying to sell the home called the city building inspector and this is what he wrote. What are your thoughts?
Per your request I visited the house at Heber City.
The deck in question to my knowledge was not built at the time the house was constructed. No separate building permit was issued for the deck. In reviewing the construction of the deck I found the platform to be soundly built using correct materials and fasteners, however, the supports to grade appear to be only to a shallow paver rather than a footing. At the time the house was built the governing building code was the 2003 International Residential Code (IRC). This code exempts from permits detached accessory structures under 200 sqft. While this deck is not detached from the house it is built less than 30” above grade and has less than 4 risers on the steps to grade. Considering the square footage being under 200 sqft, the use proper materials, the exemption from needing a handrail or a guard it is my opinion that no building permit would have been required.[/font]
Currently the 2006 IRC has exemption from permits on structures less than 120 sqft. This deck is also smaller than this limit. Both the 2003 and 2006 IRC have exemptions for free standing decks under 400 sqft from being supported by footings extending below local frost depths. While it is true that the deck is attached to the house it could easily meet the code by being un-attached even though it is below the square footage requiring a permit. It is my opinion that the size, height, and attachment of the deck adequately meets the intent of the code of the time for life, health, and safety.Best Regards
Per your request I visited the house at Heber City.
The deck in question to my knowledge was not built at the time the house was constructed. No separate building permit was issued for the deck. In reviewing the construction of the deck I found the platform to be soundly built using correct materials and fasteners, however, the supports to grade appear to be only to a shallow paver rather than a footing. At the time the house was built the governing building code was the 2003 International Residential Code (IRC). This code exempts from permits detached accessory structures under 200 sqft. While this deck is not detached from the house it is built less than 30” above grade and has less than 4 risers on the steps to grade. Considering the square footage being under 200 sqft, the use proper materials, the exemption from needing a handrail or a guard it is my opinion that no building permit would have been required.[/font]
Currently the 2006 IRC has exemption from permits on structures less than 120 sqft. This deck is also smaller than this limit. Both the 2003 and 2006 IRC have exemptions for free standing decks under 400 sqft from being supported by footings extending below local frost depths. While it is true that the deck is attached to the house it could easily meet the code by being un-attached even though it is below the square footage requiring a permit. It is my opinion that the size, height, and attachment of the deck adequately meets the intent of the code of the time for life, health, and safety.Best Regards