Bump
This may help you here;
If the bay window area is greater than 6’ you would use double joist beams.
Great! Thanks again Randy. That’s what I’ve seen on newer construction.
To clarify my last posts, depending on the span lengths the beams my be composed of 2 to 4 joists. In this case it may be more economical to add additional support columns, see diagram.
What’s your opinion of the span length limit with using what you designed at a cantilevered (bump-out), 10’, 12’, or is there one?
I see ledgers attached to kitchen/dining room floor overhangs (bump-out) often, 12’ to 16’.
I must be naive but aren’t wooden decks required to be permitted and approved by the local jurisdiction?
With that said about the only time I see a wooden deck is on summer vacation in the mountains
Isn’t this chart for when beams are supported by post?
Would the span differ when one end of beam(s) is supported by a steel hanger; also at how the ledger board hanger was fastened to was attached to building?
Chris,
I roughed out the calculations for the worse case where the deck projects 16’ from the house and clear spans a 16’ wide bay window (bumped out 2’). I did not take the time to draw in all the extra joists, but you can see the header beam next to the bump out requires (5) 2x12x16’, and (3) 2x12x16 on each side. The biggest problem I see in this design is the load transferred to the ledger beam. In this case we are looking at a 3000 lbs concentrated load at the end of the beam. The connection requirements would be expensive. The best solution is to add extra support posts next to the house. This is all designed using 40 lb/sf live load and 10 lb/sf dead load with a L/240 total deflection and #2 southern pine lumber. As a side note, with the size of the loads involved, if there is a stud wall below the ledger board it too may need strengthened.
Randy,:)I see 3 addittional post to frame with 2"x10" joist and double joist around the cantilever.
Marcel,
Three additional posts is a cheap solution to this problem. The difficult part is you have a homeowner saying that deck has been that way for 10 years and no problems. Both agents have this blank look on their faces saying no one has ever reported this issue before. All three of then are looking at the buyer as if he has to decide who to believe. More then half the time the buyer will give in to the pressure. But I have done my job and reported the issue and have no problem sleeping at night.
All we can do Randy is call it out. And I know it will never be corrected. :)
The one I posted might actually get corrected.
My client called me the next day to talk him through the issue as he was concerned the deck could collapse. I wish more paid attention.
Wrong is wrong.
We get to report what we see and as Randy said, sleep at night.
That is good if they do, but judging what I see in the picture, the chances of colapse is slim. unless the anchorage to the rim joist of the cantilever is not up to par.
Amazing that years ago before the new codes, it sufficed and now they need to be brought up to todays’ codes.
I guess the call for saftey is now based on CYA and not have to worry about it.
Amazing. 
Oh well, 3 commercial inspections I have made in the past couple of years have not sold yet and still vacant, so I might be guilty of CYA also.
Well how would you feel if they put a hot tub up there?
Differently, but when they used to frame them like that, there were no not tubs. :mrgreen:
Maybe you should put that in your report too, No Hot Tubs Allowed on Deck. Failure could be eminent. ;)
Me thinks Marcel used to build decks that way.:roll:
No, but seen more than some here.
Don’t mention hot tubs or that one guy will come back and start trying to sell his bolt spacing software. 
Thanks for that link Marcel. That had all information I needed.