Posters with actual experience in the field have chimed in on that. I’m not a construction professional, so offered no opinions, just the observation of what it looked like.
I am a licensed professional Engineer, and I agree with most of what Grateful says (meaning, I’m not disputing anything he says, just that I am limiting my scope to items 1, 2, and 4). I would not approve this construction if I was asked to do so. Unless there is more to be done to the setup I viewed in the photos, and unless there is something I’m not seeing (which is certainly possible), I would not certify that construction to be safe.
This is not professional Engineering advice, I’m not your Engineer, you have not hired me, and no professional relationship exists between us. Plus I’m probably not even licensed in your State.
Having lived in California for 20+ years, and having seen how things look when built to withstand earthquakes, I can offer an armchair carpenter’s analysis:
Oh. Hell. No.
I see no joist hangers. I see no diagonal bracing or bridging between joists. I do see a bunch of split wood. I’d definitely advise being on site the next time the inspector is there and ask “naive homeowner” questions like “There’s a big crack in that board. Is that OK?” and “Every time I see home repair shows on TV, they always seem to make a big deal about bracing for earthquakes. Has that been put in yet? I was just wondering what it looked like.”
Unless the framing guy is a complete bozo, my guess is that he’s just not finished yet.
If the OP can get a hold of the PDFs of the structural drawings and post them online somehow, we could probably help out with seeing if they have been built per the drawings.
Whew! I was beginning to think I was all on my lonesome out here!
First, professional caveats are understood, and I still appreciate the advice.
Next, no they are not finished. This is very much a job in progress, and the photos I posted were done Sat am after they let off Fri afternoon. I know more work is going on before the inspector is even called out to check things out.
Not shown in the photos are the other end of the joists, which I am very confident in. Massive foundation work was done to the entire house, huge caissons were dug (7 in total) into bedrock with huge rebar structures. Several of the inspectors told me the engineer went beyond cautious and basically put enough support in to hold up an 8 story apartment building, much less a 3 story wood house, even on a hillside in earthquake country.
So that’s all good – it’s just the side I took photos of that didn’t look quite as secure. Contractor is coming over first thing tomorrow morning to walk me through what’s been done and what is still left to do. Too early for inspection, but I’ll be here for that as well.
So far, the one comment I’ve seen above that has me the most worried is the rotational torque on the wall studs. Even without that comment, what caught my attention was really large bolts that are almost as wide as the studs they are going into. That surprised me for sure.
I’ll post an update later tomorrow. Meantime, thank you all again!
OK, finally got updated info and photos.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmyak/
Short version - city inspector and engineer approved it (longer story than that, but that’s the short and simple version), but I had issues and discussed with contractor who agreed with me. Engineer updated the plans and brought it to city bldng & safety who agreed it was a big improvement and now the changes are in place.
They added an additional beam under the first beam, to help support the weight. Also metal hangers, and some blocks between the studs to help with the side-to-side support.
A considerable improvement, however: (and remember, I am not providing professional advice; just observing how I would do it if it was my own house…)
- They approved the bolts into the wall studs??? Not only that, they approved yet another beam, attached the same way under the original beam??? So now you have reduced the support capacity of the studs by some 60%, before we even start to talk about the studs splitting???
- I don’t see any blocking between the joists; is that because you didn’t post a picture, or is there not any?
Ugh you are making me nervous. Yeah had our engineer approve it, AND the city engineer approved it. And the city has been incredibly strict this entire process – I won’t even get into the 4.5 months of foundation work we did.
We are going to add plywood above and below the floor (ground to ceiling) which we were told would absolutely help but is not required by the city. We are doing it for extra safety, just have to wait for framing etc to pass inspection before plywood goes in.
I thought there was a shot of the blocking in there… Will have to check from home later (on my phone now).
Now I don’t know whether to feel safe or panic. gulp. Wish I understood the process better but I’m just not an engineer…
Professional carpenter here. I work in MD, and our codes are less strict than CA and I can’t imagine that passing here. The lags holding that beam to the 2x4 wall are a terrible idea. I would have built the wall in 2 levels, with the floor joists sitting on the double top plate of the lower section.
I’m baffled.
Cat, what are lags?
As for the wall, that’s been there 60 years. We are adding a 3rd floor to an existing 2 story house. Foundation massively updated. Floor being added to “crawl space” that is tall enough for 2 floors.
Is the floor-to-wall connection really that bad? How did the city approve it? I’m honestly trying to figure out the best thing to do here. Conflicting info from helpful professionals online versus two engineers and city planner all telling me we are in great shape…?
Lag bolts look like big wood screws (at least 1/4" thick) with hex heads (you tighten them down with a socket).
http://www.mcfeelys.com/product/GSL-08/12quot-Galvanized-Lag-Bolts
Just a question:
When you say “the city engineer approved it”, do you mean:
a. The city engineer approved the design and the construction, and thereby accepted all professional liability for the engineering and the structure
or
b. The city engineer approved the structure by specifying that it conformed to the design submitted by your engineer, and thereby all liability remains with your engineer and builder.
There is a very significant difference between these two alternatives, and neither necessarily relates to the correctness of the engineering.
What the engineers are saying, and I agree with, is that the way those lag bolts are installed, they are severely compromising the 2x4’s they are attached to. Going by the size of the heads, those are 1/2 inch lags, meaning that the diameter of the bolt is a 1/2 inch. So, you’ve bored a hole 1/2 inch in diameter into a stud with a nominal width of 1 1/2 inches, reducing it’s effective width by 1/3. Now do that 4 times to each stud! That’s nuts.
At this point, I would want either a new bearing wall under those beams, or a post under those beams every 10 feet. Whether that’s feasible depends on the foundation. If you have a solid foundation, not just a thin concrete slab to build on, you’re ok. If not, new footers will have to be dug, inspected and poured.
Again, YMMV, I am not an engineer, just a carpenter and not your carpenter.
I think the new design is much, much improved, but may have problems.
One question - is your engineer, and the city engineer, a real engineer (as in, a licensed, Professional Engineer who is registered with your State) or someone who is calling themselves such? Each month it seems my State board takes civil action against a carpenter or vo-tech graduate who advertises themselves as an “engineer.” What is the difference? While the aforementioned may be experts in their field with loads of experience, and great folks, a PE can do the calculations above and beyond just looking things up in code tables. One would also hope that a PE would exact a much higher standard of safety and due diligence, if for no other reason than they would not want to have their license stripped, career ended, and paying civil penalties.
Before your design was updated, your photos showed prima facie an unsafe design. Now…I’m not sure. Part of being a good Engineer is knowing your limitations, and without seeing more or being there in person, at this point I can’t say any more.
Why would you need a structural engineer? I submitted my own drawings for my garage based on the city’s housing codes. I didn’t submit any drawings for the foundation. The inspector just needed to verify it was the proper width/depth and signed off the hole.
OK… sorry for the very long delay, but holiday travel, etc.
Update:
First, yes, he’s a real, licensed engineer. Not only that, but due to the difficulty of this project I know the city has taken a very close look at the plans and has made many modifications to ensure the safety and integrity of the building.
You mention the bearing wall under the beams, and that’s something I can talk about with a fair amount of layperson knowledge. That entire wall is the downhill slope side of the house. We’ve completely redone the foundation around the entire house, and the downhill side got the most modifications done.
Three caissons were dug to 15’ past hard rock (most of them are just over 20’ deep now, and we’re on bedrock… had professional soil report done).
Then huge rebar pipes were dropped down those holes. I have photos of all of this, by the way, if you’re interested.
Those vertical rebar (and cement, or concrete… I can never remember the difference) caissons were then tied to horizontal caissons running the length of the downhill side of the house. So one caisson on the north end, one on the south end, third one in the middle of the north-south running wall. The horizontal rebar was #10… I was told it’s usually used to hold up freeway overpasses, and that our engineer went a bit crazy and designed a foundation to support a 6 story apartment building.
The foundation around the other walls of the house was just as extensively redone – and thank goodness, when we dug up the original foundation were were surprised at how poorly made it was. They used bell shaped supports that apparently are meant for flatlands in Kansas, not hillsides in seismic zones. (Was built in late 50’s.)
I’m expecting a call from the engineer to go over a few points brought up here on the message board, but overall I’m feeling a bit better about this.
Thank you, everyone.
Hey see that? It’s a dead horse. Let’s go beat the shit out of it!!
Anyway FINALLY spoke w engineer today. Lots of phone tag. He agreed with the weakened studs, but said since our house was built a while ago we had the advantage of starting out with 3" studs. That helped right off the bat. And he did run calculations that show it’s safe. City engineers double checked all his work. That we can’t put machine shop with 20 employees and massive sheet metal benders, but a full size pool table plus furniture plus people is all safe.
Thank you everyone for helping me follow up on this!!
I’m glad you got your project worked out. Our project to add another story onto our house went to fucking fucked-up shit this year. 
When you say 3-inch studs, what do you mean?
Sister a 2X6 nice & tight from the bottom plate to the underside of the horizontal beam that the joists are hung from, metal hangers at the top & bottom to help hold everything in place.
You seem to be on a steep hill in California, of course it will come down in a good sized quake or mud slide. Keep lots of insurance paid up. What are you doing for forest fire protection or are you without vegetation? ( Can you say ‘mud slide’? )
If that comes down you got way bigger worries than your house structure.
YMMV