I was under the house this morning, and noticed something odd.
I have a California Bungalow about 24’wide x 55 ft deep front to back, which has a foundation wall running up the middle of it, and also a major wall of the house running up the middle. I always assumed this was a bearing wall, being that there’s a foundation wall under it and that the roof bumps in for the porch at the same point.
However, as I was under the house, I noticed that the central foundation wall is NOT directly under the main interior wall of the house. It’s about a foot to one side. It’s clearly bearing the weight of the floor above, as there are overlapping joists resting on it.
Is this common? Is the wall in the house still a bearing wall for the roof? Is there anything to worry about if roof weight is being borne a foot away from the foundation?
Thanks.
Rebeccah
Note: two sketched attached. I couldn’t figure out how to delete the first one, which omits part of the roof detail.
Replies
Though Im no structural engineer, Id say your fine if within a foot. I would say the load will still be transferred effectively.
Based on the sketch, I'd say one of two things, neither of which would suggest a problem to me:
If the main roof of the house(The one with the ridge running parallel to the front of the house) is framed end to end, (beam carrying the roof in the area of the peak on the front) the only thing bearing on the beam foundation wall is the floor, wall, and ceiling joists, not the roof. If this is the case, the peak on the front would be framed as a "layover" which should be fine.
If the peaked roof on the front is framed all the way in (possible in any case, but improbable unless that area is cathedral ceiling) then that wall (and foundation wall ) IS bearing, but in the application you've shown, It's not uncommon (or against codes I've seen) to offset the bearing wall (18" in some I've seen).
The front wall with the funky dormer roof would be the one carrying the main roof in my guestimation, unless they framed it with an inverted hip @ the peak area to create the valley that's shown, in which case you're still ok.
So......unless you're asking this 'cause something looks like it's sagging........I'd say you're ok.
Bing
--- If the main roof of the house(The one with the ridge running parallel to the front of the house) is framed end to end, (beam carrying the roof in the area of the peak on the front) the only thing bearing on the beam foundation wall is the floor, wall, and ceiling joists, not the roof. If this is the case, the peak on the front would be framed as a "layover" which should be fine. ---I haven't been in the attic yet -- I was up on the roof for the first time this weekend. If it's framed all the way across, then the front and back walls of the house would be the only roof-bearing walls, correct? I know that on the back side of the ridge it's framed at least all the way to the little hip thingy, because the ceiling is exposed tongue and groove, and you can see the rafters. The hipped section back there is kind of weird, because the top of the hip is taller than the surrounding roof planes. I suspect that before the addition was done in the back, it might have been a gable similar to (but smaller than) the one in front.There's a concrete foundation wall around most of the house, except at the front porch -- there's a post under the rim joist there, set on (or in?) a concrete pad. There's also foundation wall under the start of that funny hipped roof section in the back.--- If the peaked roof on the front is framed all the way in (possible in any case, but improbable unless that area is cathedral ceiling) then that wall (and foundation wall ) IS bearing, but in the application you've shown, It's not uncommon (or against codes I've seen) to offset the bearing wall (18" in some I've seen). ---No cathedral ceiling. But there's no wall inside the house that extends from the wall under the "funky dormer roof". Maybe it's "framed all the way in" anyway, or maybe there's a beam above the ceiling that carries that part of the roof and transfers the load to its two ends, so that the center wall as a whole is not bearing, but its front end is (and same for the side wall of the house)?--- unless they framed it with an inverted hip @ the peak area to create the valley that's shown, in which case you're still ok. ---Not sure what an "inverted hip" is, or which peak or valley you're referring to.--- So......unless you're asking this 'cause something looks like it's sagging........I'd say you're ok. ---No, nothing's sagging. But I'm contemplating a variety of renovation projects, including possibly digging out the basement (in which case it's useful to know what that center foundation wall is carrying), or enlarging the kitchen (in which case it matters which walls in the kitchen, if any, are bearing).Thanks for your help. Guess I'll have to take a trip up to the attic at some point. And bring some plywood strips with me.Rebeccah
It's like a diving board. You get on it, no bounce. You take one step, still probably no bounce. The bouncing happens when you get further away from the support.
Engineers like to have a direct line for bearing, but it's simply not possible all the time. As long as you're near the bearing, it's often o.k..