Home Remodel: Do, Don'ts, Advice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Huskier

This is less of a home improvement and more of an outdoor improvement question: I just got done building a paver patio that's partially dug into a hillside. The downhill side is 35 inches above grade, no railing required per code but definitely not safe for wandering small humans. The wall is 30 ft long. Debating what to put up/what will hold considering that the downhill wall is free-standing. If I sink anchor bolts into the capstone for fence post brackets, will the brackets hold or will they just lift the capstone and adhered wall bricks? The alternative is boring down into wall bricks/in-fill and placing steel pipe that I would then have to build posts around.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

---

I dont deal with single family residential, but 30" drop requires fall protection for anything i deal with (multifamily, commercial, retail, townhomes, etc). You might want to doublecheck that code you're referencing.


Nothing will be very robust without some kind of foundation (not just bolting to capstone)... not that you necessarily need it robust. If you can afford to "lose" a little bit of the useable squarefootage, i would just line that drop off area with a long bench, or a mix of benches/seating and skinny 18-24" tall planters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by californiagrown

I dont deal with single family residential, but 30" drop requires fall protection for anything i deal with (multifamily, commercial, retail, townhomes, etc). You might want to doublecheck that code you're referencing.


Nothing will be very robust without some kind of foundation (not just bolting to capstone)... not that you necessarily need it robust. If you can afford to "lose" a little bit of the useable squarefootage, i would just line that drop off area with a long bench, or a mix of benches/seating and skinny 18-24" tall planters.

---

Maybe I'm thinking of the minimum for required engineering...

Anywho, yeah planters would be a good alternative. You mean paver benches?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Huskier

Maybe I'm thinking of the minimum for required engineering...

Anywho, yeah planters would be a good alternative. You mean paver benches?

---

Sub 4' wall usually doesnt require engineering or a permit... unless there is surcharge from something important (like a house or other permitted structure).


You can do paver benches, or wood ones, or metal ones, or fiberglass, or concrete. Tons of different products and designs depending on your budget and aesthetic. If wood would work well, maybe something like this:

https://www.foreverredwood.com/bench...ers-combo.html

Something like this gives a rough idea of what you would be trying to accomplish.
Attachment 506525

We used a mix of black square planters for a privacy screen on our patio. Something like these are pretty economical:

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Veradek-...-2PK/316385610

Bushes. Or benches. Or if you want a rail dig out in in front of the wall. If you have wind loads drilling into the capstone isn’t good. Unless you are thinking of an open railing. That could work.

And yes. For residential. Outdoor drops and fall zones aren’t in the code.
Yet. Give them time.
But there’s also common sense. And sometimes insurance renewal inspections demand such things

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by californiagrown

...
Attachment 506525

---

Just my two cents, but if the goal is to protect small humans from themselves, I'd want backs on the benches so that they don't just become a jumping platform adding height to the 36" drop.

YMMV, of course, depending on where the small humans in question land on acrobatic ability, size, and instinct for self preservation--I'd be far more concerned about my son than my daughter on the setup pictured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum

Just my two cents, but if the goal is to protect small humans from themselves, I'd want backs on the benches so that they don't just become a jumping platform adding height to the 36" drop.

YMMV, of course, depending on where the small humans in question land on acrobatic ability, size, and instinct for self preservation--I'd be far more concerned about my son than my daughter on the setup pictured.

---

You want it easy to jump off, but hard to fall off. IMO for my 3 yr old lol.

Backs would be much safer for sure

I lived with this deck for 20 years and never lost a rug rat or anyone else over the side. It did make an excellent start platform for the 2 curve luge track in the winter.

Attachment 506540
Attachment 506541

^^ yup that's pretty much what I'm rockin' but just a foot taller. The bushes are actually a nice sort of barrier too I hadn't thought of that

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Ouch

https://www.oregonlive.com/clackamas...0-c3d9ab45aab5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

Ouch

https://www.oregonlive.com/clackamas...0-c3d9ab45aab5

---

Interesting. Pretty surprised that the City made them change it knowing that they would take the $160k financial hit... and its a small enough discrepancy that exactly no-one would have called them on it. IMO, City should have done 1 of 2 things: Either ignore the issue, and not put the problem into writing... or, issue a variance to allow the higher roof (this would be the official CYA route, though this could have involved HEX and public comment).

pretty hamfisted of the city
i do also wonder if the owner also blundered & pissed someone off enough to provoke this public airing of grievances
#ownyerfail

[i do find it hard to believe the arch didn't already know this dimensional discrepancy & since he doesn't seem to be sued yet, i'm guessing the design/owner side knew up front]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

[i do find it hard to believe the arch didn't already know this dimensional discrepancy & since he doesn't seem to be sued yet, i'm guessing the design/owner side knew up front]

---

Eh, exact requirements can sometimes be up to interpretation (how to measure average existing and final grade can be fudged in different ways, and also calculated differently in various jurisdictions, building height can be measured to different parts of the roof in different jurisdictions and even interpreted differently from reviewer to reviewer int eh same city) and they might have gotten away with this exact calculation on previous jobs, but new personnel had a different interpretation?


IME, when an approved design is found to not be in compliance after it has been constructed, it is allowed to remain as long as it meets the spirit of the code and/or does not cause any detrimental impacts to the public. $160k is a big chunk of change to just voluntarily shell out to fix a minor building code issue on a single home. I bet the City manager is PISSED!

Eh...the are suing. They haven't gotten the money. Frequently the municipalities are held harmless.

We build to max height all the time. It is express to final grade. So the dirt work gets manipulated to make it happen.

You kinda need to know the particulars of the error to know who to point the finger at. Unfortunately, the property owner is ultimately responsible for building to code and the municipality interprets the code.

Sent from a 6 m/s face melting thermal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

Ouch

https://www.oregonlive.com/clackamas...0-c3d9ab45aab5

---

Moving from Portland to Lake O? Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. See you this summer as we SUP Lake Oswego

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Huskier

The downhill side is 35 inches above grade, no railing required per code

---

You still in Washington? Code is over 30 inches.

[edit: never mind. I see CG already said that]

Throw down 5" of soft mulch and call it good?

That Oregon roof story reads like a rich couple who have tons of coin and made the changes quick and spitefully with the plan of suing and getting media attention.
Who the fuck doesn’t ask for a variance before all that?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jm2e

That Oregon roof story reads like a rich couple who have tons of coin and made the changes quick and spitefully with the plan of suing and getting media attention.
Who the fuck doesn’t ask for a variance before all that?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Most variances require HEX approval and public comment. Meaning a few months at least, likely delaying the whole project months. This would have been a variance, not a deviation (instant approval from AHJ).

Could they have fixed this by temporarily adding a foot of mulch around the house? Where's the roof height measured from?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by californiagrown;[emoji[emoji6[emoji640

[emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]]]]Most variances require HEX approval

---

What’s “HEX”?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dan_pdx;[emoji[emoji6[emoji640

[emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]Could they have fixed this by temporarily adding a foot of mulch around the house? Where's the roof height measured from?

---

That’s the kind of thinking that will get you paid!

[regrading might actually work for them]

My 1930 house has about a 1/2 gap between the brick hearth and the narrow, thin strip oak flooring. Suggestions for what to fill the gap with. Mortar? Tile grout? Something else. My wife wants to use brown tinted silicone caulk. Bad idea I think, at least for looks. There is a little cold air coming up through the gap from the crawl space.

3/4" quarter round trim?

If it's really 1/2 inch, maybe you could trim down some flooring to fit. I would go with a contrasting color like walnut. You might also be able to get some pencil tile in there like this: https://www.wayfair.com/home-improve...-mxem1151.html