Conventional Construction options

[fwillison]

I'm about to start my 45x65x12 shop. Unfortunately it will be built on a residential zoned lot, and they wont give me a permit for a post frame construction style. The residential building code (IRC 2009) requires a "full perimeter footing". In my area the requirement is 18 x 18 in.

So my options for framing are to bracket (or toe nail) the 6x6 posts to the semi-monolithic slab (or sill plate), and construct with posts, girts and purlins. Alternatively I could just go ahead and use conventional framing (2x6x12s 16 in on center).

Either way I want to maintain a "clear span" building so I can configure the interior however I want.

Another issue: if I go with conventional framing, should I stick with metal siding and roofing?

Opinions?

Thanks
Fred
Tulsa

 

[Diesel Dan]

If they are going to make you go with a perimeter footing then I'd just go stick built. For me it's yes on the metal siding and roofing. Metal roofing is much more durable than asphalt shingles.

 

[Average_Joe]

You should be able to do a "pole barn" style building as long as you have engineered (PE stamped) plans.



From IRC 2009

"SECTION R403
FOOTINGS
R403.1 General. All exterior walls shall be supported on continuous
solid or fully grouted masonry or concrete footings,
crushed stone footings, wood foundations, or other approved
structural systems which shall be of sufficient design to accommodate
all loads according to Section R301 and to transmit the
resulting loads to the soil within the limitations as determined
from the character of the soil."



Unless your local municipality has a restriction on pole buildings, the code does not prohibit it. Hope this helps

 

[NUTTSGT]

If you have to have a footer, I'd lay out a couple of courses of block (or a concrete stem) and stick build on top of that.

As far as the metal siding/roofing goes, I would want something would match the house. Possibly use two different colors for the siding, a light upper color and a darker color for wainscoting at the bottom usually looks nice.

Something else to consider is using a multiple of 2' or 4' when stick building. (48x64 vs 45x65)

Welcome to GJ Fred, try spending a few days (yes days) searching through the gallery section. It'll give you plenty of ideas to complete your new bldg.

 

[bczygan]

Welcome to GJ!
You say they won't approve a "Post frame construction style". That means more than just footings. Sounds like they want conventional framing. You need to determine this with them before going any further.
The sheer size of the planned building forces me to ask if you have done the planning to see that it meets all the zoning requirements for size, height, lot coverage, setbacks etc.
Building codes don't usually tell you what type of building you can build. Usually that is in zoning. Is it specifically addressed in the zoning requirements for your zoning? They may be trying to avoid the large metal building look of a pole barn in a residential area. Read the zoning rules carefully BEFORE you talk to the jurisdiction. Never ask a question without knowing the answer first.
Next, if your only reason for pole barn type framing is to get the clear span, that can be done with conventional framing. And conventional framing will give you the spacing needed to support a ceiling.
45' is a long span for wood trusses. Have you priced steel framing?

 

[rancherbill]

The residential building code (IRC 2009) requires a "full perimeter footing". In my area the requirement is 18 x 18 in.

You are from Tulsa, my guess is that it is for wind load. Some of the pole barns I see on GJ would be destroyed with the winds and tornados you would expect in Tulsa.

I would talk to someone that is local to find out the best way to construct your building. A 12' high wall is going to have a lot of stress on it in the wind, and you don't want it separating from the footer.

 

[fwillison]

Thanks for the replies.
The building permit office said I had two options, either go with a footing and they'd give me a permit, or get an engineer to stamp plans. I asked two local structural engineers. Both gave negative opinions on post frame construction, and neither would agree to approve the plans. Very frustrating, not to mention expensive, to deal with the bureaucracy.
The dimensional sizing will probably not make much difference going from 45x65 vs say 48 x 64 according to the builder. The main issue will be whether or not an extra truss is needed. Anyway, the size was the result of starting with 40 x 60 and laying out the space and deciding "a little more would be nice". I then staked it off on my lot with regard to setbacks, privacy, keeping space open for other uses. After going back and forth many times I ended up with 45 x 65 as optimal. I'm loathe to change it again!

Here's a question: 14 ft walls with mezzanine storage vs. 12 foot walls with attic trusses/attic storage?

 

[bczygan]

Thanks for the replies.
The building permit office said I had two options, either go with a footing and they'd give me a permit, or get an engineer to stamp plans. I asked two local structural engineers. Both gave negative opinions on post frame construction, and neither would agree to approve the plans. Very frustrating, not to mention expensive, to deal with the bureaucracy.
The dimensional sizing will probably not make much difference going from 45x65 vs say 48 x 64 according to the builder. The main issue will be whether or not an extra truss is needed. Anyway, the size was the result of starting with 40 x 60 and laying out the space and deciding "a little more would be nice". I then staked it off on my lot with regard to setbacks, privacy, keeping space open for other uses. After going back and forth many times I ended up with 45 x 65 as optimal. I'm loathe to change it again!

Here's a question: 14 ft walls with mezzanine storage vs. 12 foot walls with attic trusses/attic storage?

What was their reasoning?

Did they decline to seal YOUR plans, or even plans THEY would draw up and design?

You must understand that you are enclosing a very large space and will need it to be carefully engineered to meet code requirements.

You don't detail the rules that the building department is using to base their requirements on.

What is your preference...attic storage or mezzanine? Either can be done. But you are already spanning a great distance and attic storage will require substantial trusses. And also note that for attic trusses, you are NOT talking about pole barn construction here, but rather, standard construction with trusses spaced 2'o.c.

You need to sit down with providers of the different types of construction and have them put numbers on their methods for your size building. You will then see the most efficient (Least expensive) method. Make sure they each will meet all codes for required loads.

 

[Diesel Dan]

Here's a question: 14 ft walls with mezzanine storage vs. 12 foot walls with attic trusses/attic storage?

14' with at least one 12-13' door for taller future projects(RVs).

 

[fwillison]

This is the process I've been going through. Talking mostly to National Barn Company. As far as reasoning, the engineers were a little vague. I contacted them and stated I wanted to build a post frame shop, but it needed to qualify as a residence based on zoning. The permit office gave me the options of footing vs. engineer approval, no other issues. The first engineer just said he wouldn't be willing to do it. The second said he would and then changed his mind. Here is an excerpt from his email:
"This constitutes habitable space and thus it is considered category II occupancy which has more stringent requirements than structures deemed low risk to human life. This structure will also require a full perimeter footing and a slab elevation 6" minimum above adjacent exterior grade."
and...
"Sorry, but I can't help you. You've been sold a bill of goods by the promo man from the NFBA and as an Engineer with 25 years experience, I know for a fact what he is promoting is not legal in any jurisdiction in the country that uses a legitimate building code."

He seemed knowledgeable so I decided to just go with footings, but it is much more expensive, and I really just want a shop building.

 

[bczygan]

Lets go back to the beginning.
Is there a residence on this lot?
If so, this is an accessory building.
If not, then are you trying to build a shop and make it satisfy residential zoning requirements?
Who is the governing authority? City of Tulsa?
What is your zoning?

 

[bczygan]

One more thing to consider.
Regardless of what a building department official tells you, you must meet all code requirements, whether they mention them to you or not. So it benefits you to become very knowledgeable about them.

 

[WNYflyer]

International Residential Code 2009:

R301.1.2 Construction systems. The requirements of this code are based on platform and balloon-frame construction for light-frame buildings. The requirements for concrete and masonry buildings are based on a balloon framing system. Other framing systems must have equivalent detailing to ensure force transfer, continuity and compatible deformations.

This basically says to me that a majority of the required construction details indicated in the IRC 2009 are based upon the assumption that the structure is "stick built". In other words Platform/balloon framing. "Other Framing Systems" such as a post frame structure must be engineered and detailed and stamped by a PE because they are not covered by the "prescriptive" requirements indicated in the IRC 2009. Well that is my opinion for what is worth as a engineer for 29 years.

I believe what the building official is saying is the following:

- If you want to do a post frame building we will not allow you to utilize a superstructure and foundation system whose strength and stability is obtained from the posts being embeded in the ground.

-You can still do a post framed building but you must get an engineered superstructure ( by building Mfg.) and also have an engineered foundation system (PE stamped).

-If you went with "stick built" then you would need a continous perimeter footing since this is a "bearing wall" system rather than a post and beam system (i.e. post-frame). If "stick built" the "prescriptive" construction details and requirements within the IRC 2009 would now apply.

Also a full perimeter footing/foundation maybe be required for reasons other than structural loading. Thus a post-frame structure may be required to have a continous perimeter footing for water/weather concerns, insulation, critters,etc.

I am pretty sure within reason a post-frame building manufacturer can design structurally a building to whatever building "category" they need to. And the third party engineer can design the foundation if they really want to. I would point out to make sure your local building official is in agreement with the structural design criteria the the building manufacturer would utilize for any qoute you get. Sometime local conditions can over-ride those stated in the building code. This will help insure a good quote and no surprise up charges for possibly more stringent local structural requirements.

Good luck and don't be in too much of a hurry. You want to get it done right with the least amount of stress

 

[rancherbill]

This is not difficult.

1) It is in an area zoned residential - Residential codes apply.

2) Secondly, The structure he is building is a shop not a barn. The requirements for a shop are much higher than a barn. A shop is rated for humans to be actively using it. I have seen examples of people going for business licences, getting the licence, and then finding out that their 'shop' is really a 'barn' and are prevented from using the barn for their business.

Today, there is not a lot of differences between a barn and shop using engineered trusses, but as always the devil is in the details.

 

[fwillison]

Excellent and intelligent comments, Thanks!
The simple issue is that I have a vacant lot and I want to build a metal building on it to house my car restoration hobby. It is in an area where what I plan to build will markedly improve the value of adjacent lots, many of which have ancient falling down pole barns.
The lot is zoned residential, however, which means that any building I construct on it must qualify as a residence (full bath, kitchen, sleeping space). My "man cave" will have all of this and therefore will qualify, however, it must meet IRC 2009.
Personally, I think the government over-regulates these things, like most else in our modern lives. As a physician, you would not believe the quagmire that is foisted upon your healthcare in the name of "protecting you". But I digress.

In the end, the permanence of a full foundation is appealing if not cost effective for my purpose, so I can live with it.

Since I'll be doing stick built framing, I've been considering fiber cement siding (eg. Hardiplank) because I like it. Maybe be overkill for a shop though, and not sure how the cost stacks up against metal.

 

[Falcon67]

Excellent and intelligent comments, Thanks!
The simple issue is that I have a vacant lot and I want to build a metal building on it to house my car restoration hobby. It is in an area where what I plan to build will markedly improve the value of adjacent lots, many of which have ancient falling down pole barns.
The lot is zoned residential, however, which means that any building I construct on it must qualify as a residence (full bath, kitchen, sleeping space). My "man cave" will have all of this and therefore will qualify, however, it must meet IRC 2009.
Personally, I think the government

Ah ha. "The lot is zoned residential, " Meaning there is no primary structure. And - just like here and 99% of cities I've lived in - you can't have an accessory building on a lot with out a primary.

Have you though about - reviewing the immediate area and the tax authority maps to see if there are other accessory buildings on lots that are taxed separately. If you can find a few accessory buildings already on lots then you can apply for a variance. I did a review and found that many houses in the neighborhood had additional lots under the owner's name with accessory buildings. Some were lumped together when the hosue was built, some were just "those people bought two lots". They "looked" like one unit to the eye but on the tax rolls the legal descriptions indicated differently. I applied for a variance based on the fact that my neighbors enjoyed the priviledge and I should be able to enjoy the same priviledge. My shop sits on it's own lot. The lot and building are paid for too. The shop, house and our other adjacent lot are taxed as a unit but they carry three separate legal descriptions and individual deeds.

There is even a house around the corner that stradles two lots. One lot is taxed at the full house value, the other one has the garage, driveway and back bedroom on it but is taxed as an empty lot.

As for the foundation - if we used the big city next door 2009 UBC ammended building codes, then my shop would also have had a 18x18 footer. However, I pointed out to the inspector that we had adopted the 2009 UBC without ammendments, so 12x12 was good for this purpose. I'd bet Abilene's modified foundation requirements are almost a mirror of Tulsa.

 

[bczygan]

Fred,
There are a thousand decisions in the design of a structure for any purpose.
And many of the decisions are a BALANCE between one choice or another. Some are a choice BETWEEN one thing and another. Some are a choice to do something and some are to NOT do something.
You may choose to overbuild your neighborhood with no thought of future resale because you want to do what you want to do.
You may choose to limit your project in one way or another because the money cost is just not worth it.
You may choose to design it so resale is maximized.
Within the constraints of what the governing jurisdiction will allow you to do, and what it requires you to do, and what you are able and willing to do, is your answer.
Planning is just the process of carefully examining and weighing all these options and choosing the ones you need and want, balancing some, and discarding the others.

Will you actually live here?
Will a family inhabit it?
Is resale a concern?
Is the neighborhood deteriorating or improving?
Will your project overbuild the neighborhood?
Will your design be easily resell-able?
Do you intend to keep it for a long time?
Is it for hobby work or a business?
Is the scope of the project at the edge of your financial ability? Or is there some leeway for unexpected surprises?
Lots of questions for you to ask yourself.

 

[bczygan]

Falcon67,
Good points about primary and accessory buildings. I think the OP is trying to build one structure that has living space that qualifies it as a residence, as well as massive shop space for his workspace. No accessory building involved.
My stepson has a house with attached garage that is a16' tall by about 30x30 structure. This would be a similar situation. The question is how do you design it? He seems to be leaning toward a large space with some partitioned off area for the living spaces, rather than a house with large workspace attached. He could also actually build a small house and then an accessory building for a shop.
Depending on the limits for size, building it all in one structure may allow him the largest cubic space for the lot and zoning.
I would be interested in knowing the lot size, zoning and zoning regs. to see if the proposed structure meets the requirements.

And when building one large structure and partitioning off the living areas, it is important to think about resale and also to separate the living and work spaces with fire walls and labeling the work area (No matter how big) as a "garage space" to avoid it being labeled a commercial space. I would go so far as to lay out parking spaces in it for that purpose (And I have done so on some design projects). Also you can use up some space by laying out proposed "Future" additional bedrooms, or great rooms or bonus rooms or recreation areas or even designate it as a basketball court or future indoor above ground pool room. Or just label some of it as storage. To justify an extra large garage I would also draw in spaces for lawn equipment such as garden tractors (Or even regular tractors) and mowers and such. They MAY require that the minimum house square footage for the zoning be partitioned off within the building for living spaces. And required minimum living space sizes and egress requirements be met.

 

[Average_Joe]

I was going to say you should ask the pole building contractor if they know an engineer that will do it. But... then I read that this will be the primary building on your lot, not an accessory. So that may not even work.

 

[Moose97]

Keep in mind that the codes are a minimum standard. If you meet the "code" requirement, you've made a "D". The 2009 I-codes have gotten really stringent in regards to wind bracing requirements. The city is looking at this as a home. Not a shop or a barn. I would at least look into a metal building on slab and then do the exterior in something else (hardi-board).

 

[fwillison]

bczygan is right, this is exactly the design issues I've thought through. If I built a small house with an accessory building I could not build a large shop. The zoning allows an accessory building of 750 sq ft, or 40 percent of the square footage of the primary building , whichever is larger. To build my 45x65 shop (2925 sq ft) I would have to build a 7312 sq ft house! A 750 sq ft shop is much to small.
The solution is that the house is the shop and vice versa.
The lot is 1.3 acres, and if you looked at it you would imagine it was agricultural zoning given the surrounding properties.

 

[Diesel Dan]

We have always lived in the country and would never consider a 1.3A lot agricultural.

 

[Falcon67]

No, but it's a damn big city lot. That's kinda my point - if the neighbors have big barns/buildings then OP can try to claim hardship because he should be allowed to have the same privilege as the neighbors. It's the "let one carport in the neighborhood and everyone gets a carport" deal. I've been to plenty of council and zoning meetings - zoning says "no", doesn't meet the new master plan in a series of master plans that constantly change. Applicant goes to council and says "Bob has one, so does Fred, Mable on the corner and there are three in the next two blocks. What the hell, I pay my taxes, why can't I have at least what the neighbor's have been allowed?" Zoning overruled.

 

[DekeT]

No, but it's a damn big city lot. That's kinda my point - if the neighbors have big barns/buildings then OP can try to claim hardship because he should be allowed to have the same privilege as the neighbors. It's the "let one carport in the neighborhood and everyone gets a carport" deal. I've been to plenty of council and zoning meetings - zoning says "no", doesn't meet the new master plan in a series of master plans that constantly change. Applicant goes to council and says "Bob has one, so does Fred, Mable on the corner and there are three in the next two blocks. What the hell, I pay my taxes, why can't I have at least what the neighbor's have been allowed?" Zoning overruled.

Not that simple. The existing structures on the neighbors lots may be non- conforming to the present zoning. Lots of examples of buildings constructed prior to current zoning. That means they can stay for awhile but cannot be expanded. And new construction MUST conform to current standards.

It is clear the OP wants to dance around the intent of the land use zone. OP should just build his stuff where it is more appropriate and forget all the headaches. No way is he going to get variances either. I may be in the minority here but I simply do not empathize with his plight at all.

 

[fwillison]

Not that simple. The existing structures on the neighbors lots may be non- conforming to the present zoning. Lots of examples of buildings constructed prior to current zoning. That means they can stay for awhile but cannot be expanded. And new construction MUST conform to current standards.

It is clear the OP wants to dance around the intent of the land use zone. OP should just build his stuff where it is more appropriate and forget all the headaches. No way is he going to get variances either. I may be in the minority here but I simply do not empathize with his plight at all.

Well then you must like big brother telling you what you can do and can't do, no matter how stupid the rules are. I'm telling you the area has run down agricultural buildings and shops and old junk cars and livestock. Building a high quality aesthetically appealing building would be a nice upgrade to the area.

Yet the bureaucrats get to tell me if I can build, what I can build, what size it can be, where on my lot I can build it, what type of construction I must use, etc. etc. etc.

That's fine if you think it's appropriate. Personally I think it's way overboard and over-regulated like everything else in modern life. Sometimes I think I am an anachronism. I should have lived a hundred years ago. In the days of "Little House on the Prairie" they just built the barn, they didn't have to ask permission and pay taxes on the building, the cars, the gas, the roads, etc. etc. etc.