Replies

1. 
   ProBozo | Jul 04, 2003 03:29pm | #1

   We don't hardly do cedar around here, everything is always PT, but I would certainly have used concrete piers/footings and post anchors for this.  If nothing else, sure makes it easy in twenty years when the post has to be replaced.

   Plus, around here, that wouldn't pass code.  Footings must be engineered/approved.  I don't know a P.E. that would sign off on that installation.

   
   

   ---

   Edited 7/4/2003 8:30:50 AM ET by ProBozo

1. 
   FastEddie1 | Jul 04, 2003 04:12pm | #2

   I agree.  I would have used a pt post on top of the concrete pier, then wrapped it in cedar for "the look".

   Do it right, or do it twice.

2. 
   ProDek | Jul 04, 2003 06:52pm | #3

   Cedar is not structural and should never be used for heavy loads. Incised pressure treated Doug/fir should be used to support a roof. Sono tubes with and Simpson post bases should have been used to keep the lumber off of the ground not in it.

   Incised Pressure treated wood is guaranteed 50 years buried in the dirt but I wouldn't give cedar 5 years around here. I hope he treated it with an underground treatment before he buried it.That will at least give it another 5 years.

   Did you get a permit for this job? 

   "Rather be a hammer than a nail"

   Bob

1. 
   Manchild | Jul 04, 2003 08:53pm | #4

   This is a pretty rural area of Kansas. I don't know if there is a permit. I figure if you want a cheap temporary fix and the price is low, that's your business. But to charge a lot and build cheap is wrong. Earlier in the week the owner and the wife and kids were nice and friendly. Yesterday the wife of the home wouldn't even talk to me. They have a feeling something is wrong but will probably do nothing. The cedar posts were not treated at all and there is very little concrete around the posts where the corners of the posts are. A little bit of swelling and the concrete is just going to pop at all four corners. The posts are on the dirt in the bottom of the holes so there will be nothing to keep the posts from sinking. I've been out of the construction biz for 15 years so I was not sure if things had gotten so cheap that this was considered acceptable. Most of my work was in So. Cal. and I think standards are higher there.

1. 
   FastEddie1 | Jul 04, 2003 09:58pm | #5

   Sounds like standards are higher everywhere else except your little corner of Kansas.  

   Kansas...Kansas...rings a bell...was CAG on the project?Do it right, or do it twice.

1. 
   AaronRosenthal | Jul 05, 2003 05:18am | #6

   LOL! that was NASTY <G>

   I'm glad I got a little chuckle from the post just before I shut down for the Sabbath (Fri. night)Quality repairs for your home.

   Aaron the HandymanVancouver, Canada

3. 
   steve | Jul 05, 2003 03:07pm | #7

   hate to say this, but you're asking for problems later

   at least the footing should be a sonotube with a simpson or whatever fastener for the post

   if nothing else it will make replacing the post easy later

4. 
   NickNukeEm | Jul 05, 2003 04:54pm | #8

   I just finished replacing 6 foundation posts that sat diectly on the concrete piers.  Granted, it was pine, and I don't know how old they were (2 posts were held vertical by the beams they were supposed to be holding up) but the job would have been considerably more comlex had they been buried in soil or concrete.

   BTW, I used 1" galvanized standoffs in the replacement.  Maybe these will last longer.

   I never met a tool I didn't like!
5. 
   Piffin | Jul 06, 2003 06:11am | #9

   I wouldn't even do a fence post that way.

   I have indeed replaced several that had been done like that. What happens is that the crete holds the water against the wood so that it will rot faster than if it is buried in gravel. When water seeps in during winter, it will freeze and expand, cracking the concrete at those thin corners. But when the wood sweels from the same trapped moisture in the summer, the result is bruised wood fibres that can make it fit loose. Again, if it were in gravel, the gravel will self tighten/settle again, but the crete will not.

   There is nothing that will happen to this "foundation" than that it will get worse.

   I predict that in two years, the crete will be broken into two or three pieces each and the fit between wood and crete will be loose. The deck will have settled an inch or so. That might or might not play havoc with roof flashings at the junctions.

   In six years, there will be serious signs of rot about eight inches below the soil surface. The look the lady gives you then will be more serious than how she looks at you now.

   Duck!

   .

   Excellence is its own reward!

1. 
   Manchild | Jul 06, 2003 07:39am | #10

   I'm not the contractor on this job. I'm just a carpenter. My conscience is clear. He'll have to carry it around or his son will who is taking over the company. I'm not sure how long I can work for them.

1. 
   Piffin | Jul 06, 2003 08:13am | #11

   Sorrrry if I sounded like I was putting it on you. Didn't mean to. Just elaborating that it will get woprse before it gets better.

   I know that setting fence posts in the midwest is often done this way. That suggests to me that this guy got his start on the fenceline.

   Excellence is its own reward!

1. 
   Manchild | Jul 06, 2003 03:25pm | #12

   Hey no problem. I didn't take offence.

1. 
   darrel | Jul 06, 2003 03:48pm | #13

   As a homeowner I'd REALLY appreciate and respect (and in some ways, expect) receiving knowlege from someone on the job that clearly knew the contracter was f'ing up my job. Whistle blowers aren't a bad thing. Maybe even just mention to the HO it wouldn't hurt for them to bring out an inspector.

   Just a different POV to consider. ;o)

2. 
   Manchild | Jul 06, 2003 08:39pm | #14

   I can't do that. My job in this company is to do what I'm told. That is what my relationship is to the owner of the construction co.. The owner of the house already knows something is wrong but probably won't do anything. He can call any number of people out to take a look at the job.

3. 
   Piffin | Jul 07, 2003 12:58am | #15

   I agree with you. When you take a job, you work for the company. Nothing to stop you from looking for a better place or trying to convince the owner to do it right, but do it away from the customer.

   But

   If the customer asks you point blank, it would be fair to say that if it were up to you, you probably wouldn't do it that way or ask her to take it up with your employer.

   .

   Excellence is its own reward!

4. 
   Qtrmeg | Jul 08, 2003 05:04am | #16

   What is stopping you from asking the contractor... "What are you thinking, anything?"

5. 
   RalphWicklund | Jul 08, 2003 07:55am | #17

   He's already answered that question. From the boss's point of view it's "either my way or the highway".

6. 
   Qtrmeg | Jul 08, 2003 03:01pm | #18

   I still don't see where he said that, and I still think this is what he should be doing. He will either be recognized for being on the ball, being a pest, or he will get fed up enough with the circus act to find a better position.

   I'm not so hardheaded that I wouldn't listen to questions from the help, but I am hardheaded enough to question practices like this if I were involved in it. I have subbed off of some beauts, and I have often said that exact phrase, or something like "What do you have planned for here, Opie?".

7. 
   RalphWicklund | Jul 10, 2003 07:34am | #19

   Q -

   Post #14 - Darrel510 suggested he put in his opinion to the homeowner, including calling an inspector.

   Post #15 - David wrote, "I can't do that. My job in this company is to do what I'm told.

   See also Post #11

   I read his answer two ways. 1. He is an employee and should not confide in or prompt the homeowner regarding his employers' methods, which is a good thing, because he is only directly responsible to his employer. 2. He is airing his misgivings about potential improper building practices on this forum tacitly admitting he's not communicating with his employer except to blindly follow orders.

   How can he say his conscious is clear if he believes his employers wrong but will only say to us that they will have to live with it, not him.

   It is my interpretation, from his wording, that he has been told, or it has been implied, that he is just a lowly nail banger and if he wants his job to continue he goes along, keeping the status quo. If my opinion is incorrect, then so be it.

   I'd like to hear again from David about any steps taken to alleviate the homeowners concerns and whether or not his employers were proactive and are willing to field constructive questioning from their employee.