FHB Logo Facebook LinkedIn Email Pinterest Twitter X Instagram Tiktok YouTube Plus Icon Close Icon Navigation Search Icon Navigation Search Icon Arrow Down Icon Video Guide Icon Article Guide Icon Modal Close Icon Guide Search Icon Skip to content
Subscribe
Log In
  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Restoration
  • Videos
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House
  • Podcast
Log In

Discussion Forum

Discussion Forum

Crazy Kitchen Bump-Out Idea

madmadscientist | Posted in General Discussion on November 12, 2007 05:33am

Hello All,

  Just had a wild hair today and thought I would run this idea by y’all and get a feeling for how good/bad crazy/stupid this idea is.

Here’s a pic of our first idea on how to redo our kitchen.

View Image

Its pretty darn cramped in there and I would really like to have more space.  Here’s what I’ve come up with.

View Image

If I do a 4′ by 9′ cantilevered bump-out I don’t lose any wall cabinet space gain two windows and more light and the table is the heck out of the way.  Here’s why I think it possible.  The floor joists run in the right direction. I can sister on new floor joists for the bumpout.  If I make the ceiling height in the bump out say 8′ instead of ten I don’t think that I’ll have to mess with the roof as I can put on a low slope roof just over the bump-out.  Don’t know what they are called one of those cool-curved copper roofs?

Here’s what the outside of the house looks like there.  There is already a bump-out on that side of the house and this rectangular bump-out would be mostly hidden by the existing.  The two existing windows would be pushed out 4′ and brought slightly closer toghether.

View Image

So that’s my wild hair idea for the day fire away guys.

sorry forgot to add that the existing joists are 20′ 2by 10’s that bear fully on the top plates of the outside walls and on a center loadbearing wall.  So that’s a ~10′ span

thanks,

Daniel Neumansky

Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

Oakland CA 

Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer


Edited 11/11/2007 9:33 pm by madmadscientist


Edited 11/11/2007 9:34 pm by madmadscientist


Edited 11/11/2007 9:34 pm by madmadscientist


Edited 11/12/2007 1:21 am by madmadscientist

Reply
  • X
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • pinterest
  • email
  • add to favorites Log in or Sign up to save your favorite articles

Replies

  1. alwaysoverbudget | Nov 12, 2007 06:00am | #1

    just remember the historical commitee! after all the fun with permits i'd think you'd be done changing orig plans.

    but all that said i like the idea and if it were me would toy with slanting the walls like the one up front. it would give a little more room plus pick up the orig design,but thats me.

    time to start appling for permits so you can do this in july..... larry

    if a man speaks in the forest,and there's not a woman to hear him,is he still wrong?

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 06:47am | #5

      time to start appling for permits so you can do this in july..... larry

      Yea exactly its mostly a wild hair idea now but it might be fun to run it by the zoning board just to see the look on their eyes!  Since I do my own drafting it will only cost me the time...and it should be amusing for y'all too...

       

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  2. USAnigel | Nov 12, 2007 06:17am | #2

    Go for it! only thing is to place the chairs 2&2 to give room to get around the table. Or make the bump match the other and use an elliptical table.

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 06:45am | #4

      I went with the rectangular bumpout because that gave us the max amount of space in the bumpout with out losing any wall space for the cabinets.

      If I made the bump out angles match then I would have less space in the bump out and I havent decided if that would be worth it or not.

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. alwaysoverbudget | Nov 12, 2007 07:00am | #7

        what about if you bump it with the angled walls to match the outside,and i'm not sure i can explain what i'm thinking ,but then on the angles a angled type floor csbinet to square the space back up inside to give you a little more cabinet and some countertop space. when your sitting in the nnok you would be looking over these to give you a little larger feel. does any that make sense?larryif a man speaks in the forest,and there's not a woman to hear him,is he still wrong?

        1. User avater
          madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 09:13am | #13

          Yea that makes sense build the nook bigger and then do custom cabinets to fill the space and the resulting rectangular space would be the same.

          Daniel Neumansky

          Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

          Oakland CA 

          Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  3. wrudiger | Nov 12, 2007 06:24am | #3

    I had the same initial thoughts as Larry

    1) Are you out of your frigg'n mind?  I wouldn't want to go anywhere near that building dept again after what you've already gone through.  But hey, keeps things entertaining here on BT watching the carnage from afar ;-)

    2) From the perspective of dealing with the cramped space makes sense.  Those chopped-up Vic's with all the too-small rooms are tough to make work with today's lifestyles.  What's driving you to put such a big table in the kitchen to start with? Nook for 2 I'd understand, but that looks like quite a bit bigger table.

    3) Definately follow the design of the front bay for a more harmonious look (and possible smoother sailing through Alameda politics & bureaucracy.

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 06:52am | #6

      1) Yep I am out of my friggen mind didn't Bill Mooney convince everyone of that a while ago??

      2) That table isn't all that big.  That's our exact kitchen table where 6 adults can eat and not be too crowded.  We don't have anywhere else in the house to eat (no dining room) so everyone has to fit in the kitchen.  No kids yet but at least one in the future and inlaws who love to visit and friends who love me to cook for them.

      3) You see if I do that I will take a ton of wall space and have less space for cabinets which the kitchen needs badly...

      So anyone have any comments on the actual build-ibility of the thing?  I figure I will need to do a beam and post to carry the load in the original wall. 

      Any comments on the cantilevered idea?

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. User avater
        mmoogie | Nov 12, 2007 07:04am | #8

        Four feet is a pretty good-sized cantilever. What is the depth and unsupported length of the joists in the kitchen? I believe there is a maximum ratio that you can cantilever out, but I don't know what it is. Any engineers out there?I too think a square bumpout would look a little off there, but I can see why you want to do it. How much does that existing bay project? What about taking it further and extending the bumpout into the existing one, and matching the roofline and angles?Steve

      2. wrudiger | Nov 12, 2007 08:09am | #11

        Yep, cantilever is definately do-able and a very resonable approach. Buildable? Absolutely, but only your engineer will know just how (& how much!).

        It's been a loooong time, but IIRC at the time it was 1/3rd of joist (e.g. 4' on  12'er). 

        Depended on the wood - we were using Sel Str DF - and how the other end was anchored (e.g. is the other end part of a load-bearing wall or...).

         

        1. User avater
          madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 09:19am | #15

          The existing joists are 2by 10's and they are about 20' long!! (hurray for old growth lumber!!).  They bear on the outside top plates and the center load bearing wall.  Seems like I could get 16' struc select 2by10's and bolt them to the existing joists and cantilever out the 4'.  Not married to the 4' number but would like it.  The existing bump out is ~3' so might have to do that anyways...

          Daniel Neumansky

          Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

          Oakland CA 

          Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  4. ruffmike | Nov 12, 2007 07:15am | #9

    I like it. There are a lot of cantilevered bays around Alameda. I'm sure they'll run it right through downtown. <G>

                                Mike

        Trust in God, but row away from the rocks.

    1. User avater
      mmoogie | Nov 12, 2007 07:19am | #10

      here's a two-second sketch of my thought...

      View Image

      Steve

      Edited 11/11/2007 11:23 pm by mmoogie

      1. User avater
        madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 09:11am | #12

        I understand what your saying and that would be a good way to increas the size of the kitchen while keeping the look the same.

        Problem is, the roof over the exisiting bump out is very complicated.  Its hard to tell from the picture but that A peaked roofline intersects the bump out and I don't know if I want to fiddle with it.  One of the pluses in my mind is that I don't think that I will have to mess with the roof at all.

        Daniel Neumansky

        Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

        Oakland CA 

        Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

        1. User avater
          mmoogie | Nov 12, 2007 03:40pm | #16

          Not knowing what your skil level is, I don't know how tough that roof would be for you, but from what I can see it looks like everything you would be adding to the bumpout roof would be behind where the gable peak is, so it would just be a matter of extending the bumpout roof towards the back, and not really involving the gable intersection. It would involve some extra trim work to tie into the frieze. To me it would seem worth the effort for the better look on the outside and a less cramped seating area on the inside.But then again, I'm 2000 miles from there. It'll be easy for me ;-)Steve

    2. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 12, 2007 09:14am | #14

      Yea wish I could have a hidden camera there to catch the zoning-planning guys reaction!

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. ruffmike | Nov 12, 2007 04:40pm | #17

        You definately don't want to go out any further than the existing bay, any closer to the property line and they'll nix it.                            Mike

            Trust in God, but row away from the rocks.

  5. User avater
    CapnMac | Nov 12, 2007 05:56pm | #18

    That bump-out is pretty logical, really.

    Which means P&D is near-certain to shoot it down (ugh, I'm having a pessimistic Monday).

    If you get a "yes, but only if you angle the walls to match the existing; that will work--just turn your table 90º.  Sure, it will be about as much "in the way" as it is now, but really, only when being fully used.

    Now, if we could just get the fridge either over to the left, or over to the right . . .

    Or, really radical--range to fridge wall, fridge to right wall, leave sink where it is.  That would create three "preperation areas" which might better distribute kitchen visitors (if making for some to-ing & fro-ing for a single chef).

    Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 03:35am | #19

      Why move the fridge to the left or right?  I admit I am no certified kitchen designer so I'm open to ideas.

      So you suggest moving the stove to where the fridge is and then moving the fridge to the right hand wall with the L shaped run of cabinets?

      One reason that the stove is on the outside wall is that venting it to the outside will be much simpler.

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. User avater
        CapnMac | Nov 15, 2007 04:02am | #20

        Why move the fridge to the left or right

        Well, if you only "get" a 3' bump, then moving the fridge over a tad keeps it off the end of the table, if it gets turned 90º into the space.

        Yeah, and outside wall makes some sense for the range, just don't let a few feet (no matter how big a pain in the yang those feet can be) of duct from letting you be flexible in designing your kitchen.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)

      2. redeyedfly | Nov 15, 2007 04:39am | #21

        Several problems.-There's no way you can cantilever 4' with 2x10's SS Doug Fir or not. Why not just bump out with a foundation? Anything else will require steel or a flitch('s) or a tremendous stack of LVLs- 4' looks like it will put you right on the property line. I don't know the Oakland code, but I've never seen one that allows any windows or openings of any kind in a wall within 3' of a property line. -That table is too big for the room. Go shopping and find a smaller one.

        1. User avater
          madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 04:59am | #22

          The property line on that side is 9' away from the house so with a 4' bumpout I would be right on the allowed setback of 5'. 

          4' feet seems unreasonable what about 3'?  Doing the foundation to match would push this project into another category of expense that I am not sure I want to venture into.

          The table really isn't big its only 5' by 3' and its basically the smallest family dinner table that would work.  We want the table in the kitchen because the house really doesn't have room for a 'dinning room' that and we really don't believe in wasting the space like that. 

          Daniel Neumansky

          Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

          Oakland CA 

          Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      3. barrmo4321 | Nov 15, 2007 05:45am | #23

        On the roof: you could drop the ceiling height lower in the addition(you dont need so much where youre sitting) so maybe the roof could flow over with some actual slope. FHB just did a photo spread on dining bumpouts and half of them had lowered ceilings. good luck Barmo

        1. User avater
          madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 10:08am | #24

          Yea definatley going to lower the ceiling in the bump-out so I can do a seperate roof under the existing roof line.  Who needs a ten foot ceiling in a dining area anyways right?

          Daniel Neumansky

          Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

          Oakland CA 

          Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          1. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 10:11am | #25

            Just read in a book that the general rule of thumb is that a joist can cantelever 40% of the length between supports but not more than 4x its depth so with my 2by10's I can get uh, 38" out of it.  So maybe a 3' bump out is reasonable?

            Its only 9' wide so even if I had to use LVL's or PSL's or what not I would only need ~7 of them.

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          2. redeyedfly | Nov 15, 2007 10:26am | #26

            Why would a foundation add so much to the expense? You're in CA. No need to excavate for frost footings. You just need a little concrete for the footers and a few block. Sounds pretty cheap to me. Probably cheaper than hiring an engineer to calc your large cantilever and paying for the req'd framing.

          3. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 11:09pm | #34

            I'll have to work out the different options myself-but if I use the same engineer that I used for the foundation work it should'nt be all that much money to pay him to do the calc.  My thinking was, if my ####-sumptions were right (bolt new joists to old for the cantelever, framing the three walls and mini-roof and of of course the finish work) then the wife and are capable of doing the work ourselves.  If we are going to start the bumpout from the bottom floor then thats a new foundation, another set of wall framing, more expense and more time-plus with two bulged discs I don't do a lot of digging anymore. That and I've been planning this project for a later date after I have the brick foundation replaced-to do the two level bumpout I would have to get it approved now to include that foundation into the current plan-scope of work...not eager to do that...

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          4. mike_maines | Nov 16, 2007 04:13am | #37

            Runnerguy said what I was thinking.  Your floor plan looks good, but it would be nearly impossible for the outside to look right.  I know it's not an important facade but still, no need to muck it up. 

            Move the bumpout to the back wall--extend the main roofline down, reorient the working part of the kitchen to where you have the table now (including stove on the outside wall).

            Oh, and 4' is a lot for a cantilever, but why not just drop sonotubesat the outside corners and go as far as you can?

          5. mike_maines | Nov 16, 2007 04:47am | #38

            Nevermind, kitchen doesn't fit where the table is.  This is a good workable layout though:View Image

          6. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 16, 2007 05:12am | #39

            Wow Mike thanks for thinking enough about this idea to take the time to do a sketch.

            That layout has a significantly bigger 'bump-out' right?  You are also taking away the cabinets along the wall where the fridge was and the far corner.  I'm not against it I'll have to play with it in the design program and see.

            Thanks,

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          7. mike_maines | Nov 16, 2007 06:03am | #41

            My bump-out is 25 or 30% bigger.  Wouldn't affect the cost much, small area, basically same amount of labor.

            Including the island, you lose a foot or two of total cabinet run.  Add in the piece of furniture against the wall and you're close to even.  Add to that a much better work triangle, ability to mingle with guests/family while they stay out of your way, and overall more expansive feeling to the space, and I think you're way ahead.  What you have now has charm.  My design works.  Maybe somewhere in between is a compromise.

            BTW, the design is worth exactly what you paid. 

          8. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 16, 2007 05:15am | #40

            Runnerguy said what I was thinking.  Your floor plan looks good, but it would be nearly impossible for the outside to look right.  I know it's not an important facade but still, no need to muck it up. 

            I could just be optimistic but I think it can be made to look darn original.  I've seen several houses in the area that have similar original bump-outs that are similar to what I am proposing.  That would help get it past planning.... I think really its the windows that could make or break it.  If I go with vynil with the wrong porportions that would mess up the look.  I can match the wood siding and exterior trim details, the little mini roof over it might be tough though....

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          9. mike_maines | Nov 16, 2007 06:05am | #42

            Oh, I know the bump-out itself would look great.  I'm just concerned about it being so close to the other one, and of a different style.  Even if it was an angled bay, one of them is going to look like an afterthought.  Maybe it's not a big deal.  Hard to tell from here.

          10. User avater
            mmoogie | Nov 16, 2007 06:19am | #43

            In isolation your bumpout proposal is not too bad with the style of the house. What makes it feel off is its relationship to the other bay right next to it. Keeping it to the 3-foot projection of the other one would help, but I think the two different shapes would clash so close to each other, though I certainly would try a 3D rendering of in a CAD program to see. Even if you don't join the two, making two seperate bumpouts of identical size and shape with either a shared roof or two identical roofs would seem more in tune to the building as a whole I think.Steve

          11. User avater
            CapnMac | Nov 15, 2007 11:15pm | #35

            in CA. No need to excavate for frost footings

            That's just it, it's CA, he's not allowed to place a foundation that does not have a certified-for-seismic-PE's stamp on it.  Then, there's getting the bar into the foundation, and tying it to the existing, all with inspections.  Can be a tone of work for one tremmie of concrete.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)

          12. redeyedfly | Nov 16, 2007 02:54am | #36

            Good point. I have zero experience with seismic codes.

          13. User avater
            CapnMac | Nov 16, 2007 07:24am | #44

             I have zero experience with seismic codes

            Amd most of mine is second-hand from my cousin who practices in Oregeon.

            He'll send me details every so often.  Nifty things kije garage door sills that only need to be 12" x 12" thickened edges--but wind up 24 x 18" to accommodate various kinds of steel, driveway dowels and the like.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)

          14. JHOLE | Nov 15, 2007 03:11pm | #27

            Those "rules of thumb" have been proven wrong more times than they have been proven correct.

            Even here on this forum.

            Piffin was right, the only safe assumtion is that it will support a lenghth equal to it's width.

            After that you have to do the actual calculations.Remodeling Contractor just on the other side of the Glass City

          15. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 10:47pm | #31

            I didn't see a response from Piffen did I miss it?

            I will get the engineer to do the actual calc but I like to have a pretty good idea if its even reasonably possible to do it before I pay an engineer to tell me no way.

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  6. User avater
    McDesign | Nov 15, 2007 04:16pm | #28

    I think it looks good - I'd say go for it.

    But -

    Think there's an error in your "after" calculations.  You've got 229.9842 square feet, and the actual is more like 229.9849 square feet.

    Building department's gonna' catch you tryin' to slickee in extra floor space - that's a taxable bit almost 3/8 of an inch square.

    Forrest - trying to help

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 10:48pm | #32

      yea that home design program makes em laugh at the building dept when I show them the sketches made with it and I forget to hide the square foot numbers.

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  7. runnerguy | Nov 15, 2007 08:22pm | #29

    Good comments all above.

    Coupla thoughts: From looking at the outside photo, don't forget about building setbacks. If that's the property line where that fence/eave/structure thingy is, you're going to be close to the property line.

    I agree with the others in that you need to be sure there is adequate space behind the chairs. As it stands now the guy seated up against the window will be there for the duration of the meal.

    Any way to move the whole shabang (sorry for the technical term here) to the right and have the right side of your cantilever be at the same point as the right wall? The cabinets over there could then move to the left to be more part of the kitchen proper and a great place to put the sink looking out a window.

    And speaking of the sink, what exactly are you thinking??

    Runnerguy

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 15, 2007 10:58pm | #33

      Coupla thoughts: From looking at the outside photo, don't forget about building setbacks. If that's the property line where that fence/eave/structure thingy is, you're going to be close to the property line.

      Yea it doesn't look like it but the house is 9' from the property line and we have a 5' setback rule here.  So I should be able to go out 4' with the bump-out but who knows, RUFFMIKE has a point that the exisiting bump-out is 3' and I may be stuck with that.

      Any way to move the whole shabang (sorry for the technical term here) to the right and have the right side of your cantilever be at the same point as the right wall? The cabinets over there could then move to the left to be more part of the kitchen proper and a great place to put the sink looking out a window.

      Move the bumpout to the back corner of the house?  Have'nt thought of that I'll have to noodle it around for a bit.

      And speaking of the sink, what exactly are you thinking??

      Ha yea, that's my cheap-o designer program attempt at showing how a actual corner sink would fit in the area.  For some reason I like the corner sinks and think they are useful in smallish kitchens.

       

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. runnerguy | Nov 16, 2007 01:26pm | #45

        No, I said maybe move the bumpout to the right as I'm looking at your drawing (bumpout on the bottom).

        I modified your drawing with a couple of crude lines but I can't figure out how to upload an image.

        Runnerguy

        Edited 11/17/2007 7:53 am ET by runnerguy

        1. User avater
          madmadscientist | Nov 19, 2007 09:58am | #46

          Okay I spent a little time this weekend playing with the drafting program and here's what the bump-out looks like from the outside...

          View Image

          I couldn't figure out how to get the dang 30 buck program to do a roof over the bump out but picture a low slope roof with a bit of a swoop in it to match the roofs on the dormers.

          View Image

          Yea they might look a little weird next to each other... This has the 4' deep version which I am pretty sure I'll never be allowed to build...though I think I might have a fighting chance with a 3' deep version that depth would match the existing at least.

          View Image

           

          Here's a shot of the framing in the area.  Should I be concerned about the fact that the area that I am planning on doing this is over these windows and door?  The top plate here is two full 2by6's which the joists bear fully on.  The joists also have a span of 10' 

          View Image

          What y'all think?

          Daniel Neumansky

          Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

          Oakland CA 

          Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          Edited 11/19/2007 1:58 am by madmadscientist

          Edited 11/19/2007 1:59 am by madmadscientist

          Edited 11/19/2007 1:59 am by madmadscientist

          Edited 11/19/2007 2:00 am by madmadscientist

          Edited 11/19/2007 2:02 am by madmadscientist

          1. wrudiger | Nov 19, 2007 10:39am | #49

            How attached are you to those windows & the door under the proposed bump-out?  I'm betting lack of sufficient support (header or solid wall) will be the deal-breaker from a code & engineering standpoint.

          2. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 19, 2007 10:04pm | #52

            Yea those studs in the outside walls are on 32" centers so the window's and doors fit between the studs and hey no headers needed...  At lest the top plate acting as a header is basically a full height 4by6.

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          3. MikeHennessy | Nov 19, 2007 03:14pm | #50

            Well, I'm no architect or engineer, but you plan looks dead in the water after seeing those pictures. A cantelever needs a fulcrum, which is typically the wall on which the joists rest. In your case, the kitchen floor  is carried by the rim joist that acts as a header over your windows/door. You'll need to remove the rim joist to cantelever the floor joists out, so there will be no support for the floor joists, or the walls above them, unless you lose the windows/door and build a supporting wall in their place, or at least allow room for a pretty beefy header which may, in turn, make the window/door openings too low to be practical anyway.

            I guess there is another option -- make the two outside joists into cantelevered beams, supported by posts in the wall to the footer, large enough to carry the full load of the floor between them, and everything above. That way, the bump-out floor is not cantelevered, per se, just the two outside beams.

            If you are really serious about doing this, I'd say this one is tricky enough to require a trip the the engineer's office.

            Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA

          4. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 19, 2007 10:09pm | #53

            Well, I'm no architect or engineer, but you plan looks dead in the water after seeing those pictures. A cantelever needs a fulcrum, which is typically the wall on which the joists rest. In your case, the kitchen floor  is carried by the rim joist that acts as a header over your windows/door. You'll need to remove the rim joist to cantelever the floor joists out, so there will be no support for the floor joists, or the walls above them, unless you lose the windows/door and build a supporting wall in their place, or at least allow room for a pretty beefy header which may, in turn, make the window/door openings too low to be practical anyway.

            The rim joist is a doubled full height 2by6.  I don't understand why I need to remove the rim joist in above?  A modern 2by10 is going to be slightly less deep than the existing and the existing are sitting on top off the rim joist.  Could'nt I just remove the siding and slide in the new joists right along side the existing?

            I guess there is another option -- make the two outside joists into cantelevered beams, supported by posts in the wall to the footer, large enough to carry the full load of the floor between them, and everything above. That way, the bump-out floor is not cantelevered, per se, just the two outside beams.

            I think I have the space to do this, this is an interesting option which I will run by the engineer if it gets that far.

            Definately going to have an engineer look at it if it gets that far.  A far harder obstical is going to be the citys zoning-planning board...

             

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          5. MikeHennessy | Nov 19, 2007 10:44pm | #55

            "I don't understand why I need to remove the rim joist in above? "

            Unless I'm missing something (and I may be, since I haven't read all the posts in this thread in detail), you want to sister onto the existing floor joists to cantelever out and form the floor of your bump-out. To do this, you need to remove the rim joist (currently a single or perhaps a double 2X10), so the new sistered joists can extend past the plane of where the rim joist used to be. The existing floor joists are not sitting on top of the rim joist -- they are sitting on the sill plate (which I think is what you are calling the rim joist) and the ends of the floor joists are nailed into the rim. The sill plate, even if it is a double 2X6, will NOT support the floor joists since it's oriented with the wide side in the horizontal plane.

            The thing that gives your existing wall enough strength is that the rim joist is sitting on the sill plate that is supported below by studs between the windows/door. Your existing openings have no headers except for the rim. You can't mess with that rim unless you pick up the loads somewhere else.

            Either that, or I am totally missing your point, and the above is nonsense. ;-)

            Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA

          6. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 21, 2007 04:54am | #57

            Sorry major brain fart on my part.  Eventhough I am just an HO I do know the difference between a rimjoist and a top-plate.

            Here's the thing, no top plates.  There is blocking in everyother joist bay but no rimjoist-hope that doesn't mean that my house is going to fall down.  It's an old house (1897) and I guess they didn't use rim joists back in the day?  You say the rim joist is responsible for a lot of the strength of the wall should I be concerned (I mean seriously this time??)

            Here's a shot of the existing 3' bump-out.

            View Image

            Its right over a window also and the joists just hang out 3' to support it.  The double top plate looks to be doing the job of supporting the load in this case?

            Here's a shot looking down into a joist bay on the bump out. 

            View Image

            Haven't looked in there for a while and discovered a bunch of old rats nest bits that I forgot to clean out...hopefully that part of the house will smell a little better now...

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

            Edited 11/20/2007 8:55 pm by madmadscientist

            Edited 11/20/2007 8:55 pm by madmadscientist

          7. MikeHennessy | Nov 21, 2007 04:29pm | #58

            OK, now I am even more confused. Your pics show that there is indeed a double top plate (what I was calling the sill plate-- I was assuming that the basement exterior walls are masonry, but not a major difference for this issue) on which your joists rest. Your photos also shows what appears to be a rim joist. See attached "Basement.jpg".

            You say it isn't a rim joist but imply it's merely blocking between the joists. I've never seen this done, tho' I have seen blocking behind the rim and between each joist. If the wood is 3" thick between the joists, that's likely what you have -- 1-1/2" blocking and 1-1/2" rim.

            That said, your pic of the existing bump-out shows no header over the openings, and the floor joists resting directly on the plate. (It also shows some serious notching on the bottom of the joists, but I digress.) This is obvously working -- the plate is at least partly acting as a header over the openings. But I'd be surprised if a building inspector would pass that if you did it today unless you had a stamped drawing to prove it would work. Especially if there is no rim joist as you believe.

            So, I'm stickin' to my suggestion to install properly supported and sized cantilevered beams at each side of the new bump-out, and use them to support the floor load of the bump-out. See attached "BumpOut.jpg". This, of course, assumes that the new span does not exceed the span capacity of your existing-sized joists.

            Your photo doesn't show it, but are the joists at either side of the existing bump-out doubled up? If so, they may be functioning exactly this way, and the sill is not supporting the floor -- the rim joist of the bump-out is.

            Sorry if I'm telling you things you already know -- it's hard to guage the knowledge of the poster sometimes.

            Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA

          8. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 22, 2007 02:46am | #59

            Hi Mike,

            Yea the notches on the joists didn't make my engineer super happy either.

            Here's a shot of a joist bay over the doorway in the picture that you copied above.

            View Image

            Here's a shot in the next joist bay over that clearly shows the backside of the exterior siding...ie no rimjoist-just blocking in every other bay.

            View Image

            I'm sure its not how houses are done now a days but back then??? Who knows. 

            Here's a wider shot of the framing in the existing bumpout.

            View Image

            The joists on either side of the window are doubled but the bumpout is actually wider than the window by two joist bays on either side.  So there does not appear to be any beam and post setup on the existing.

            I like the cantelevered beam and post idea to support the bulk of the load of the bumpout.  If I can get a beam that's strong enough in the 10" depth I think that would be ideal.  Probably have to go with an LVL or PSL beam-that'll be something for the engineer to decide on though.

            No your tone is not condescending at all I just earlier had a brainfart switching rimjoist for top plate in my head. 

             

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

            Edited 11/21/2007 6:47 pm by madmadscientist

            Edited 11/21/2007 6:47 pm by madmadscientist

            Edited 11/21/2007 6:49 pm by madmadscientist

          9. MikeHennessy | Nov 22, 2007 09:35pm | #63

            No rim joist -- that's just wierd. All the work I do is on renovations, and I've worked on houses up to 150 yrs old, and never saw that one.

            However, you can't argue with success -- it's still standin'!

            Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA

          10. User avater
            j99t99 | Nov 24, 2007 07:19am | #64

            No Rim joist on my house either.  I believe it's called balloon framing.  I have no blocking in mine either, just the occasional piece of insulation...not really effective.

            1910-1915 new jersey construction for ya...it's still standing too, however no insulation.

            TimTim

          11. User avater
            j99t99 | Nov 22, 2007 03:14am | #60

            Hello all.  Brand new to the board.

            This is a fantastic post.  I am considering the identical remedy to my kitchen as madmanscientist.  Not to distract from your issue, but I thought I'd tag along for the great information, but have a slight variation.  Drawing attached below.

            I am considering a first floor 24 inch cantilever bump out but only have 2x8s existing framing and can span ~9 ft back to reach the center load bearing beam(total joist length 11 foot).  I plan on sistering the joists on the existing 2x8s and was using the (4 x rule) to allow me to span the  24 inches.  The joists will rest on the foundation sill plate.  My house doesn't have a rim joist installed.  Will this solution be feasible?

            Thanks in advance!

            Tim

          12. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 22, 2007 03:33am | #61

            Hi Tim,

            Before anyone else says it you should really fill in your profile.

            Only a licensed engineer can tell you if the cantelever will work. 

            Are you going to have to redo the roof or are you going with a dropped ceiling in the area?

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          13. User avater
            j99t99 | Nov 22, 2007 03:51am | #62

            I updated profile thanks.

            Actually I am going to just add a small roof over top, similar to your original idea.  I have a 2 story colonial and only plan on a single story.

            I agree that licensed engineer is the way to go, just wanted some feedback from experienced folks.

            Thanks for reply.  I will attach some pictures when the sun comes up.

             Tim

          14. reinvent | Nov 19, 2007 06:33pm | #51

            How about nice looking structural brackets on either side of the bump out. Basswood is making some, maybe he could make a couple more. Or something like Mike Smith did (scroll down the thread a little)http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=95928.1

          15. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 19, 2007 10:11pm | #54

            Structural brackets are another idea.  The does not have any ornamentation like it so it might be a hard push thru planning...  But if the brackets are really structural and not just for looks this would give me another option.

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          16. sawduster | Nov 20, 2007 03:53am | #56

            Planning for future possibilities is the right approach, but what's happening with the foundation work? Never mind the flatwork, go for foundation and shear wall. Earthquake country, you know...got brick foundation?... the Hayward Fault waits for no one!

          17. reinvent | Nov 24, 2007 03:15pm | #65

            I just had another idea. What if you were to replace the doubled up sill with a box beam made out of steel. I bet that could handle the load and the steel would'nt be to much money.

          18. redeyedfly | Nov 29, 2007 11:45pm | #69

            That's a good idea.

          19. mike_maines | Nov 28, 2007 07:28pm | #66

            I still think Sonotubes are the easiest way to support this thing--easier than cantilevering, especially with what's going on underneath.  You could actually hold the sonotubes out 3' from the house and go 4' with the bump-out, a mini-cantilever.

             

          20. User avater
            madmadscientist | Nov 29, 2007 11:35pm | #68

            Oh I agree that the sonotubes would be the easiest way to go just not the way I want to go right now.

            Daniel Neumansky

            Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

            Oakland CA 

            Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

          21. mike_maines | Nov 30, 2007 01:33am | #70

            Gotcha

  8. sungod | Nov 15, 2007 09:09pm | #30

    Turn the table 90 degrees and maybe a bay window will do.

  9. newbuilder | Nov 19, 2007 10:08am | #47

    I might lose the table and go for an eating nook.  Solid benches on either side and the 'table surface' turned 90 degrees to what you're showing ... easy slip in and out and ... classy.

    But then .. I LOVE restaurant style eating nooks.  People are drawn to them and they're cozy as hell.

    nb

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 19, 2007 10:33am | #48

      I am also a fan of cozy rest nooks for eating.  Problem is, is that those windows are quite tall and go down to 18" above the floor.  Not getting any benches around those.  If I wanted to use smaller windows set higer in the wall the bench idea would work but I'm pretty sure the city won't let me change the existing windows so dramatically.

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

  10. RSager_em | Nov 28, 2007 10:07pm | #67

    From a design standpoint, has anyone suggested you do built in bench seating around the
    table? Such seating is quite comforable if the backs are angled (Sarah Susanka has some great tips on designing these). And, the benches provide storage space (for example, drawers on the right and left; and at back of table, the bench seat top could hinge up to get to long term storage items).

    Also, I'd suggest a full height pantry/broom closet to the right of the table (as your drawing is oriented.) The table offers lost of good work space so you'll probably benefit more from the full pantry than a couple more feet of counter top. Pantries make kitchens way more functional and organized spaces by providing: place to hang things like aprons and shopping bags, to keep step ladder and extinguisher, to hang dog leashes, store long handled brooms/mops, store recycling. (Think about including an electrical outlet in there for charging cordless hand vacuum.)

    Your bump out might give enough space for a small moveable island, for which you might consider creating a built-in home for when you don't need it. (if you're going custom, think about designing the moveable island as a base cabinet on wheels) If the base cabinet will live under another counter when not in use, then it will have a shorter height, and it is good to have a variety of work surface heights to accommodate different jobs and helpers' needs.

    1. User avater
      madmadscientist | Nov 30, 2007 03:11am | #71

      We love the idea of built in bench seating with storage but the windows are only 16" off the floor not leaving any room for that.

      The pantry idea is also good the tall cabinet next to the fridge is a pantry cabinet.

       

      Daniel Neumansky

      Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

      Oakland CA 

      Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

      1. User avater
        madmadscientist | Nov 30, 2007 03:21am | #72

        Brought down my renderings to the planning and zoning desk today to see if I could make their heads spin round.  They were surprisingly not against the whole idea.  I explained to them that the kitchen is too small and that I would make the bump-out look like it was always there.

        Interestingly enough they didn't like the sonotube & posts idea...said it wasn't historically accurate!!

        They did say that I would have a much easier row to hoe if I made the proposed match the existing....big shock to everyone here I know...They also said they would have to run it by the historical society for their blessing.....man those guys are tough.  I didn't know that the city considers our place super historically significant and they will be looking at any exterior changes with a very fine tooth comb....

        After the foundation and bottom floor is all roughed in I might pursue it more seriously then as part of the kitchen remodel...

        But hey, not instantly shot down though!

        Daniel Neumansky

        Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA.  Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/ 

        Oakland CA 

        Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer

        1. mike_maines | Nov 30, 2007 04:45am | #73

          Not instantly shot down!  Hey, celebrate the little victories!

           

           

           

           

          I still like the sonotubes and posts, I don't care what you say ;-)

        2. sawduster | Nov 30, 2007 08:16am | #74

          I don't remember whether this is facing east, west, or south, but that is a consideration. Since you are doing the foundation, why not make the 'bump out/bay match the other bay, but bring it all the way down to the ground. And in fact extend down the other bay. It will cost less than the cantilevering or sonotube/post headaches. You get extra space and it looks "architecturally consistent". If it is south facing you can have windows and doors for the solar gain. Just some thoughts.

Log in or create an account to post a comment.

Sign up Log in

Become a member and get full access to FineHomebuilding.com

Video Shorts

Categories

  • Business
  • Code Questions
  • Construction Techniques
  • Energy, Heating & Insulation
  • General Discussion
  • Help/Work Wanted
  • Photo Gallery
  • Reader Classified
  • Tools for Home Building

Discussion Forum

Recent Posts and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
View More Create Post

Up Next

Video Shorts

Featured Story

Podcast Episode 694: Bath Fans, Too Many Minisplits, and Second-Story Additions

Listeners write in about fire-rated doors, using seven minisplits for cooling, and how to build a second-story addition.

Featured Video

SawStop's Portable Tablesaw is Bigger and Better Than Before

The 10-in. Jobsite Saw PRO has a wider table, a new dust-control port, and a more versatile fence, along with the same reliable safety mechanism included in all SawStop tablesaws.

Related Stories

  • xoxo test post 3
  • xoxo test post 2
  • xoxo test post 1
  • Midcentury Home for a Modern Family

Highlights

Fine Homebuilding All Access
Fine Homebuilding Podcast
Tool Tech
Plus, get an extra 20% off with code GIFT20

"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Fine Homebuilding Magazine

  • Issue 333 - August/September 2025
    • A Practical Perfect Wall
    • Landscape Lighting Essentials
    • Repairing a Modern Window Sash
  • Issue 332 - July 2025
    • Custom Built-ins With Job-Site Tools
    • Fight House Fires Through Design
    • Making the Move to Multifamily
  • Issue 331 - June 2025
    • A More Resilient Roof
    • Tool Test: You Need a Drywall Sander
    • Ducted vs. Ductless Heat Pumps
  • Issue 330 - April/May 2025
    • Deck Details for Durability
    • FAQs on HPWHs
    • 10 Tips for a Long-Lasting Paint Job
  • Issue 329 - Feb/Mar 2025
    • Smart Foundation for a Small Addition
    • A Kominka Comes West
    • Making Small Kitchens Work

Fine Home Building

Newsletter Sign-up

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox.

  • Green Building Advisor

    Building science and energy efficiency advice, plus special offers, in your inbox.

  • Old House Journal

    Repair, renovation, and restoration tips, plus special offers, in your inbox.

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters

Follow

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X

Membership & Magazine

  • Online Archive
  • Start Free Trial
  • Magazine Subscription
  • Magazine Renewal
  • Gift a Subscription
  • Customer Support
  • Privacy Preferences
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Terms of Use
  • Site Map
  • Do not sell or share my information
  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility
  • California Privacy Rights

© 2025 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.

Fine Homebuilding receives a commission for items purchased through links on this site, including Amazon Associates and other affiliate advertising programs.

  • Home Group
  • Antique Trader
  • Arts & Crafts Homes
  • Bank Note Reporter
  • Cabin Life
  • Cuisine at Home
  • Fine Gardening
  • Fine Woodworking
  • Green Building Advisor
  • Garden Gate
  • Horticulture
  • Keep Craft Alive
  • Log Home Living
  • Military Trader/Vehicles
  • Numismatic News
  • Numismaster
  • Old Cars Weekly
  • Old House Journal
  • Period Homes
  • Popular Woodworking
  • Script
  • ShopNotes
  • Sports Collectors Digest
  • Threads
  • Timber Home Living
  • Traditional Building
  • Woodsmith
  • World Coin News
  • Writer's Digest
Active Interest Media logo
X
X
This is a dialog window which overlays the main content of the page. The modal window is a 'site map' of the most critical areas of the site. Pressing the Escape (ESC) button will close the modal and bring you back to where you were on the page.

Main Menu

  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Video
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Popular Topics

  • Kitchens
  • Business
  • Bedrooms
  • Roofs
  • Architecture and Design
  • Green Building
  • Decks
  • Framing
  • Safety
  • Remodeling
  • Bathrooms
  • Windows
  • Tilework
  • Ceilings
  • HVAC

Magazine

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Magazine Index
  • Subscribe
  • Online Archive
  • Author Guidelines

All Access

  • Member Home
  • Start Free Trial
  • Gift Membership

Online Learning

  • Courses
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Podcast

More

  • FHB Ambassadors
  • FHB House
  • Customer Support

Account

  • Log In
  • Join

Newsletter

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Follow

  • X
  • YouTube
  • instagram
  • facebook
  • pinterest
  • Tiktok

Join All Access

Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.

Start Your Free Trial

Subscribe

FHB Magazine

Start your subscription today and save up to 70%

Subscribe

Enjoy unlimited access to Fine Homebuilding. Join Now

Already a member? Log in

We hope you’ve enjoyed your free articles. To keep reading, become a member today.

Get complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.

Start your FREE trial

Already a member? Log in

Privacy Policy Update

We use cookies, pixels, script and other tracking technologies to analyze and improve our service, to improve and personalize content, and for advertising to you. We also share information about your use of our site with third-party social media, advertising and analytics partners. You can view our Privacy Policy here and our Terms of Use here.

Cookies

Analytics

These cookies help us track site metrics to improve our sites and provide a better user experience.

Advertising/Social Media

These cookies are used to serve advertisements aligned with your interests.

Essential

These cookies are required to provide basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website.

Delete My Data

Delete all cookies and associated data