# Patio Cover and footings



## tbz (Aug 7, 2014)

Good afternoon all....

We are installing a new patio cover to replace one that came down during the snow this past winter.

The existing aluminum cover was installed on top of this raised cement patio.

Now the current slab is poured over a second slab over stone.

We are looking to just cut out the 2 corners and one center point to dig and set (3) footings for (3) 3" columns that will hold up a aluminum I-beam.

Once we install the beam and columns we are going to install the screening between the columns and the house.

Here are my questions and see photo's below.

1.) With the slab over slab, over stone do you see the footings required?

2.) Do you see any issues with just the (3) columns being installed with the screening between.

3.) I an looking for a picture of a finished room and will post that pic when I find it.

But the questions is, for a patio cover do you feel we need to dig footings here?


----------



## mjesse (Aug 7, 2014)

Ick.

Footings required to frost depth for anything attached to the house here.

If not, cover will move seasonally causing problems with the connection at the house.

Will your footing and hold-downs take wind uplift into account?


----------



## mark handler (Aug 7, 2014)

Replace with what? metal? Wood?

Spans between columns?


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 7, 2014)

IRC appendix H


----------



## mark handler (Aug 7, 2014)

Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> IRC appendix H


If adopted


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 7, 2014)

Build it free standing and use IBC 1809 or submit under alternate materials and methods and reference appendix H and/or IBC 1809.5

The plain concrete will easily support the aluminum patio, wind up lift would be the main concern if the new footings are not large/heavy enough to resist the up lift.

The slab appears to have been there for quite some time and if there is no history of it heaving or moving then I would not be concerned about the cover being attached to the structure.


----------



## fatboy (Aug 7, 2014)

I'm with mjesse.......


----------



## tbz (Aug 8, 2014)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Replace with what? metal? Wood?Spans between columns?


I should know better for got in a rush.

Aluminum EPS foam core like this






The only difference we would be enclosing the area with a screen room.


----------



## tbz (Aug 8, 2014)

We are looking at (3) columns along the front with a single I-beam

We are looking at 96inch projection

20ft width on the raised slab

Building it free standing is not an option we have to tie it to the house.


----------



## JCraver (Aug 8, 2014)

fatboy said:
			
		

> I'm with mjesse.......


Me too.  I would require footings here.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 8, 2014)

Are you using a "C" channel attached to the fascia? If so design the channel so the fastener holes are slotted on the top of the channel and will allow the panel to move if frost heave is a concern. Similar to slotted track for stud walls in a building that allows for the roof deflection in snow areas. Flash the top for weather resistance There are plenty of flexible materials on the market you can use

If the slab heaves 6 inches on your 96 inch span  that is about a 3/4 inch movement you would need to account for. Unless you have some clay issues I seriously doubt that in your climate you would have much movement due to frost if your soils are well drain-able and the water runoff from your patio roof drains away from the slab


----------



## tbz (Aug 8, 2014)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Are you using a "C" channel attached to the fascia? If so design the channel so the fastener holes are slotted on the top of the channel and will allow the panel to move if frost heave is a concern. Similar to slotted track for stud walls in a building that allows for the roof deflection in snow areas. Flash the top for weather resistance There are plenty of flexible materials on the market you can useIf the slab heaves 6 inches on your 96 inch span  that is about a 3/4 inch movement you would need to account for. Unless you have some clay issues I seriously doubt that in your climate you would have much movement due to frost if your soils are well drain-able and the water runoff from your patio roof drains away from the slab


MT,

The wall mounting unit is a pivot mounting C unit.

The mount to the wall allows for about 7deg rotation we mount them in the center so we have 3deg +/- rotation.

So frost is not a problem we have ever had.

The patio structure is almost 50 years old.  My father built the first aluminum awning cover with screen room for this client in the mid 60's, the roof and screen room were just lag down to the slab.

No movement in 50 years seems to be a pretty good indication of stability to me.

This past winter the main roof of the house built up snow pretty high and when it started to melt about 2/3 of the roof slid on to the awning, you can imagine the result of a structure with 0.030 aluminum sheets with 1.125 x 3.5 x 0.035 rafters 16" on center held up on that.

It folded in the center and dropped about 3ft in the middle.

When we cut through the slabs we are going to hit bedrock, which the slabs are poured over.  Seems like a lot of work for nothing when we have drilled 1/2" holes down 20" to confirm rock under double slab.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 8, 2014)

> When we cut through the slabs we are going to hit bedrock, which the slabs are poured over


It is a lot of work and totally unnecessary for this project.

R403.1.4.1 Frost protection.

Except where otherwise protected from frost, foundation walls, piers and other permanent supports of buildings and structures shall be protected from frost by one or more of the following methods:

1.	Extended below the frost line specified in Table R301.2.(1);

2.	Constructing in accordance with Section R403.3;

3.	Constructing in accordance with ASCE 32; or

4.	Erected on solid rock.

I suggest you install snow brakes on the roof to reduce the snow slide and eliminate a re-peat failure in the future.

http://snowbrakes.com/


----------



## mjesse (Aug 8, 2014)

tbz said:
			
		

> When we cut through the slabs we are going to hit bedrock, which the slabs are poured over.


Important point not clearly described in OP

"slab over stone" to me, means a stone/gravel sub-base. Solid rock is is a different story as MT points out.

Still need to consider wind uplift.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 8, 2014)

We do a lot of concrete labs or 6 inches of washed 3/4 gravel and have no problems with frost heave

I believe the uplift loads are easily addressed by the connect to the original slab


----------



## mjesse (Aug 8, 2014)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> We do a lot of concrete labs or 6 inches of washed 3/4 gravel and have no problems with frost heaveI believe the uplift loads are easily addressed by the connect to the original slab


Not being argumentative, just clarifying my thoughts...

1- Slabs here are similarly constructed. The slab itself may have no "problems" per se due to frost heave, but they *do *move based on soil conditions.

The problem begins when the patio cover attached to the slab hinges against the house due to movement. Haven't seen the pivoting mount mentioned above, then we don't have many of the types of units pictured in my municipality.

2- Uplift MAY be addressed by the weight of the slab, but it may take more than a 1-1/2" tapcon at each column to make it work.

The only thing worse than a jacked patio cover against your house, is a jacked patio cover blown into your neighbors family room window.

Appendix H is a good place to start for guidance. It may not be enforceable if not adopted, but it can certainly be cited as reference.


----------



## ICE (Aug 8, 2014)

These patio covers come with factory engineering....lots of engineering....so much engineering that it is difficult to know what is required unless your particular detail drawings are highlighted. Years ago, a 4" slab was all that was needed.

I recently posted pictures of a massive footing for one of these. Had the builder read the footnote, he would have seen that the detail was for the planet Saturn.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 8, 2014)

> Appendix H is a good place to start for guidance. It may not be enforceable if not adopted, but it can certainly be cited as reference.


Agree



> but it may take more than a 1-1/2" tapcon at each column to make it work.


Agree again, That is why I stated connected to the original slab, I was thinking more along the lines of a 3/8" Titen anchor

http://www.strongtie.com/products/anchorsystems/mechanical/titen-hd/


----------



## tbz (Aug 12, 2014)

Thank you for all the information, I am having a hard time wrapping my head around all the added re-work to replace what was originally there for over 40years without an issue.

We even did a removal permit for take down and now another permit for the replacement unit.

If there was going to be an issue you would have thought it would have showed up in the last 40 plus years.  The slab and the unit never moved evident by the paint at the seams never splitting.

But thank you for all the input.

Tom


----------



## mjesse (Aug 12, 2014)

tbz said:
			
		

> If there was going to be an issue you would have thought it would have showed up in the last 40 plus years.


A sentiment I summed up in my first comment as "ick"

These are the types of things I struggle with as a Code Official, after working for, and as, a contractor for 25 years.

I know what the Code says, and what is required to comply. But occasionally there are things like patio covers that have worked just fine for generations without the requirements prescribed by Code.

It's a personal struggle to tell someone things have to be done a certain way because the Code "says so" despite having been real life tested since our grandfathers first installed them.

I think this is the reason I, and possibly others here, refuse to take the hard edged "No Mercy" code enforcement path. I try to look at things holistically, and apply the Code with some compassion and an understanding of what is really important. Fortunately, as the sole Code Official/building inspector for a small home-rule community, I have the ability to follow this path.

Good luck with your project, keep us posted.

mj


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 13, 2014)

R104.11 Gives you the authority to "approve" alternate methods. Some fear this responsibility for a number of reasons, I for do not. The IRC is prescriptive and allows you to use other codes if what is being constructed is not covered prescriptively.

Hard edged "No Mercy" code enforcement is counter productive for a jurisdiction. We have to remember we work for the public and service should be a priority and if it means sitting down and coming up with alternative solutions in lieu of "Go get engineering" then that is what we should be doing. It is not hard it just takes effort on our part.

This patio is a perfect example of "finding a solution that works". I may have to get off my :butt and go out in the field to see what is there and listen to the proposed solution and make a rational decision based on the facts of what is existing and the proposed method of construction being proposed.  

Been there 40 years with an existing awning, corners of the concrete are not cracked, no evidence of setteling or frost heave, proposed Titen will extend through the top slab to the original slab, that is sufficient to resist the uplift loads, approve as proposed


----------



## fatboy (Aug 13, 2014)

In light of the additional info, I wouldn't have an issue with footings, but would like to see info on the anchorage.


----------



## righter101 (Aug 14, 2014)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> R104.11 Gives you the authority to "approve" alternate methods. Some fear this responsibility for a number of reasons, I for do not. The IRC is prescriptive and allows you to use other codes if what is being constructed is not covered prescriptively.  Hard edged "No Mercy" code enforcement is counter productive for a jurisdiction. We have to remember we work for the public and service should be a priority and if it means sitting down and coming up with alternative solutions in lieu of "Go get engineering" then that is what we should be doing. It is not hard it just takes effort on our part.
> 
> This patio is a perfect example of "finding a solution that works". I may have to get off my :butt and go out in the field to see what is there and listen to the proposed solution and make a rational decision based on the facts of what is existing and the proposed method of construction being proposed.
> 
> Been there 40 years with an existing awning, corners of the concrete are not cracked, no evidence of setteling or frost heave, proposed Titen will extend through the top slab to the original slab, that is sufficient to resist the uplift loads, approve as proposed


BRAVO!!!!

I have been trying to make this point to inspection and plan check staff but it gets met with resistance.

I have a fundamental problem with requiring engineering when the cost of the engineering either A) Doubles the cost of the project, or B) Exceeds the entire project cost.

Fences are another great example.

Thanks for the comments.


----------



## Coder (Aug 16, 2014)

Is "common sense" allowed as a code enforcement official? I hope so.


----------



## steveray (Aug 16, 2014)

Coder said:
			
		

> Is "common sense" allowed as a code enforcement official? I hope so.


Only until you end up in court...


----------



## mark handler (Aug 16, 2014)

Coder said:
			
		

> Is "common sense" allowed as a code enforcement official? I hope so.


"Common sense" does not exist


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 16, 2014)

"Common Sense, or the pragmatic point of view of the common people as it was known in Medieval times, does in fact exist. It is the most practical and pragmatic way of looking at a problem/solution without it becoming complex. In other words, the simpler solution which makes sense and works over the complex solution which often fails. When people say that a person doesn't have common sense, they are really saying that person is thinking too hard or making something more difficult than it should be".

And

Common sense is one of those attributes that separate us from other animals. It’s a gift to us, as man, that allows us to “feel” the difference between what really makes sense from what we may deem to be intellectually sound.

In other words, I find common sense to be a higher form of instinct. All animals have instinct that allows them to, among other things, sense danger. Animals cannot “talk themselves” out of responding with instinct. They can be distracted and may miss the signs. That’s why some get eaten and some do not. But instinct is their gift in order to survive.

Common sense is our gift and we seldom use it correctly. That’s the problem when you are also blessed with intellect. Intellect can be a valuable tool for man, but it can also be a distraction that interferes with our instincts.

Man, if they allow themselves to be open to it, can “feel” when things make sense or when they don’t. We need to allow our instincts to kick in from time to time before we lose that attribute for good by over intellectualizing everything.

I’m afraid that many of our political leaders are in danger of doing just that.

They have become so entrenched with their personal or political agendas and are too comfortable with rhetoric in lieu of meaningful dialogue that they are losing the ability to “feel” the difference.

My family deserves the credit for instilling in me the need to really understand the value of common sense. They made sure that I used it whenever I had an important decision to make.

It not only taught me how to rationalize my life and the things around me, but taught me to trust my gut when events around me were sending mixed signals. You would be amazed how powerful your gut can actually be. When you have to fight with yourself to do otherwise, you may be over thinking the situation.

As I pointed out, I believe we all have that ability. It’s part of our nature. If we are honest with ourselves, we are well aware of this gift and can apply it to just about everything we do in life that has a right and wrong option.

Everything you experience in life becomes part of a cumulative experience that makes you the person you are. Sometimes, we try to intellectually counter those feelings and experiences in order to accomplish something that we want to do, even though we know it differs from our subjective feelings, our gut.

Going back to our childhood, we had such a limited core of experiences that we could easily misjudge things and make wrong decisions because of it. That’s why we had parents and guardians. We were way too dangerous to manage ourselves.

As competent adults (and I use that term loosely), we need to fine tune that inner pool of knowledge and understanding known as “common sense”, apply it to our current concerns and see where it takes us.

Believe it or not, those in charge of the big stuff may not really know more than you. Sure, they should have more information at their fingertips to assist them, but using that information correctly is another matter. When you hear people in power over-intellectualizing the issues, they may be simply trying to justify their intentions and convince you that their words are more powerful than your gut.

Throughout this book you will find in larger and bolder print a series of CS moments intended to get you to think about what you really feel. They are simple phrases that just make a point.

So come along with me on this journey. You may learn a lot about how our country should be run and a lot more about yourself as well.

http://www.commonsenseinamerica.net/excerpt.php


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 16, 2014)

Can you rely on the common sense of the future building inspection staff years from now when a different home owner has the patio enclosed with wood frame then in the future with another change of owner or staff adds a second story thinking there's a footer? It almost happened several times in my short career.

An 80 yr. old house has a sagging floor with no settlement evident and was having an addition; contractor discovers the existing footing consist of 4 courses of bricks; our frost depth is 18"

How would you know if the footing is not there when it should be?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 16, 2014)

> How would you know if the footing is not there when it should be?


How does anyone know what is the supporting foundation is in an 80 year old structure?

Unless some one has personal knowledge similar to what TBZ had in his OP you don't.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 16, 2014)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> How does anyone know what is the supporting foundation is in an 80 year old structure?Unless some one has personal knowledge similar to what TBZ had in his OP you don't.


True but the next person may not be of TBZ caliber or have the building staff with your diligence.

miss my point that unless it can be documented for limited use on the co for example; it may be considered constructed in compliance to the current code.

The example with picture sets the stage of why new construction or reconstruction should have the footing instead of justifying how the existing building works without one; it could be 18 years old; it doesn't matter.

The next owner should not bear the cost unless it is disclosed.


----------



## tmurray (Aug 19, 2014)

Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> Can you rely on the common sense of the future building inspection staff years from now when a different home owner has the patio enclosed with wood frame then in the future with another change of owner or staff adds a second story thinking there's a footer? It almost happened several times in my short career.An 80 yr. old house has a sagging floor with no settlement evident and was having an addition; contractor discovers the existing footing consist of 4 courses of bricks; our frost depth is 18"
> 
> How would you know if the footing is not there when it should be?


This is why we keep records. Permit application comes in to close it in, just have a look at the records and deny it.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 19, 2014)

tmurray said:
			
		

> This is why we keep records. Permit application comes in to close it in, just have a look at the records and deny it.


Thanks for that reminder, but not all localities are required to which is why I suggested a permanent record such as the co.


----------



## Tonia Bond (Aug 22, 2016)

great tips


----------

