Please see PDF for Inspectors.
Thanks.
Pretty hefty PDF for your first post RN. Please fill out your profile so we know where you are located.
The new 2009 codes do not allow any attachment to a cantilever. This is why I recommend changing to free standing when seeing this kind of arrangement.
Can you provide me with that specific clause.
Thanks
The connection has to be engineered specifically for the connection.
Sorry the PDF will not fit on the allowed storage.
You may be able to get it from someone with the 2009 Deck Guidelines.
It has a picture that says no attachment allowed.
Thanks Larry I did not even check to see it was on the world wide web. LOL
Page 12 has the illustration.
The PDF looked like an ad when I opened it for report software endorsed by Nick plus was a little confusing.
R502.2.2 Decks. Where supported by attachment to an exterior
wall, decks shall be positively anchored to the primary structure and
designed for both vertical and lateral loads as applicable. Such
attachment shall not be accomplished by the use of toenails or nails
subject to withdrawal. Where positive connection to the primary
building structure cannot be verified during inspection, decks shall
be self- supporting. For decks with cantilevered framing members,
connections to exterior walls or other framing members, shall be
designed and constructed to resist uplift resulting from the full live
load specified inTableR301.5 acting on the cantilevered portion of
the deck.
I think this is what you are looking for.
Troy that is the reason I do not like code. This is the wrong application. Take a look at pg 12 of the PDF just given.
I know, I saw that. There is a prescibed method in another PDF I found when I was looking this up awhile back. Ill find it and post it later
Yes, I wanted to know what specific clause you refer to.
http://buildingcodes.jocogov.org/documents/Deck%20Brochure%202009.pdf
Page 10 is what I was referencing
What would you say the proper application is? Can you please specify. Thanks.
Does this look OK to you, or not? How did they determine the # of bolts?
Troy was talking about a cantilevered deck and I was talking about a cantilevered entrance or overhang out to a deck and the fact that now no attachment is allowed according to the guides.
Does the info Troy put on look right the answer is NO!
So if the cantilever was specifically engineered for the connection to the deck you are going to say it’s wrong?
I think we are going in circles with this one Troy. Again I referring to the bolt pattern on your Deck info in your area to the bolt pattern and specs for Deck building 2009 our area.
I am not sure what he is thinking and need more clarification to the question posed.
Some have read the PDF. I would be very greatful for comments and concerns to be opened up in this forum. Its important to understand and dialog about the contents of the PDF.
What was your impression of the article?