Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Accessory structures and frost footings

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
That's what I'm getting at.  You could conclude that
by not being specifically excluded, they (small
unattached structures) are therefore included.  But is
that the intent of the code?

What's next - frost footings under concrete sidewalks?

Jim Wilson

--- Jake Watson <jwatson(--nospam--at)utahisp.com> wrote:
> Read that entire section carefully.  I believe there
> is language which
> states that a permit may not be required, but you
> must still comply with the
> provisions of the code.
> 
> Jake Watson, P.E.
> Salt Lake City, UT
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Wilson [mailto:wilsonengineers(--nospam--at)yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 6:48 AM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Accessory structures and frost footings
> 
> Is there an item in the IRC that excludes certain
> residential accessory structures from requiring
> frost
> footings?  i.e. sheds, playhouses, unattached small
> decks, etc.
> 
> R105.2 excludes small structures from requiring
> permits, but not necessarily from requiring
> footings.
> 
> Jim Wilson, PE
> Stroudsburg, PA


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********