200 square foot footprint... what about cantilevering?

hnash53 · January 08, 2013, 03:38:28 PM

Hi there forum readers... long time since I've been on here.

I have a question about the 200 sq ft limit on structures not requiring a permit (and/or codes?) in many states. Is the 200 sf the actual footprint on the ground, or could one cantilever beyond the actual ground footprint?

For example, take a 10' x 20' building. If it was up on piers and the piers occupied a 10' x 20' piece of ground, could one extend out (cantilever) past the piers on either side by a foot (maybe more?) and make the living area larger than 10 x 20... say 12 x 20?

Also, the 200 sf footprint limit does not include any deck constructed around, right?

Thank you in advance for your replies.

Hal Nash
Waldport OR

Redoverfarm · January 08, 2013, 03:45:26 PM

Hal someone else discussed this previously and I believe that 200 sq ft was just that 200 sq ft and no more. I may be wrong but I can't recall who/when it was posted only that it was within the last year. Maybe someone else will recall or shed some light on it. It may depend on where you are. Some states the square footage w/o permits is larger and some it is smaller.

There is a thread pertaining to structures under 200 SF. Might find something useful here; http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=641.0

January 08, 2013, 04:38:59 PM

IMO, 200 sq ft means 200 sq ft of floor space. If you engineered it to sit on a pedestal foundation that only covered 9 sq ft of ground in the center it would still be counted as whatever the actual sq ft of the area above was. A space needle sort of thing.

And 'they' measure the exterior not the usable interior space.

Further clarification should be sought from the AHJ folks. Some places get a little more involved with specifying other details that go along with the 200 sq ft permit cut off. Things like, here in NM, they specify "One story detached accessory buildings used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses, and similar uses, provided the floor area does not exceed 200 square feet", so the moment "living" is mentioned a permit is required. I would ask, to know what the state position is. Seems to me that often when we try to circumvent the spirit of the law troubles may follow. Not always, there are variables such as a lax local attitude. Sometimes all it takes is a disgruntled neighbor to make a complaint and then the whole ball starts rolling downhill.

An outdoor deck ... Here's what we have in NM; no permit needed providing... "Deck not exceeding 200 sq. ft. in area, that are not more than 30" above grade at any point, are not attached to a dwelling and do not serve the exit door required by section R311.4."

hnash53 · January 08, 2013, 06:58:27 PM

AHJ? Agency having jurisdiction?

Please clarify.

Thanks.

MountainDon · January 08, 2013, 08:11:42 PM

Authority Having Jurisdiction.... maybe local town or city government, maybe county, maybe state depending on the location. Our home is covered by the city for most permits, our cabin is split between county and state depending on what type of work or planning is being addressed.

January 09, 2013, 12:07:53 PM

In most jurisdictions I've seen it is measured by the outside of the walls. Some have even specified that as the measurement for square footage. Roofs don't usually count. Porches sometimes do.
Almost all jurisdictions that I read had the language "unoccupied" structure and sometimes the word storage.
Once it becomes an occupied structure, such as for a workshop or sleeping, a permit is required. So if you are trying to be cute and get a camping cabin without a permit, they usually have an avenue to fine you anyway. Usually trying to stay off the radar rather than push the envelope keeps a person out of trouble.

BTW, most around me are 140 sq. ft.

hnash53 · January 09, 2013, 03:38:10 PM

With the replies I've received, it seems to beg the question as to why there was ever even a "200 sf Design Contest." Sorry... I really don't mean to offend those who submitted designs... I think many of them that I've looked at are wonderful, and I wish that I could build my own tiny house of that size without the code police getting involved.

But, if indeed the local jurisdictions do not allow such buildings to be constructed and then lived in, what's the use of designing such a thing (or having a contest) if it's going to have to be permitted anyways? I don't mean to be so contrary to all this, but it's so frustrating given the economy, and NOT being able to build and live as one wishes to.

Now I have heard of AOBs... Alternative Owner Builder Codes, but the areas where those are allowed are VERY FEW.

I think we need to start re-thinking... and protesting... the whole idea of live-in dwellings, and give us owner-builders the right to build to suit US, rather than someone else.

I'd really like to hear from others about places where that can happen, 'cuz I want to move there and build there and live out the rest of my days as I see fit.

Please accept my apologies for being so tempestuous about all this.

itpdk9 · January 09, 2013, 04:24:41 PM

we have a thing here called the PA Cabin Affidavit. Basically you apply for it thru your municipality and you can make the cabin as you want under two stories and 1000 square feet and you do not have to follow the building code. It does state some other requirements you can see it below. I would check to see if you have anything like that where you are.

http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/034/chapter403/s403.1.html

Squirl · January 09, 2013, 05:15:10 PM

It really depends on the locality. There are 50 states alone in the U.S. The number of localities and possible permitting processes can be broken down all the way to the HOA level. A one size fits all answer is nearly impossible.

I can build a 200 square foot house to code and live in it. Just becuase they are 200 sq. ft. doesn't mean they can't be built to code.

What do you believe the building code doesn't allow that you want?

January 10, 2013, 08:59:37 AM

Thanks, again, for the replies.

The PA exemption is a very nice feature to have available to the owner-builder. Perhaps I could print it off and present it to the local powers that be and see what they say. I looked around but couldn't find how "recreational cabin" was defined, which seemed essential if one was going to build under 1000 sf, which I would do.

As for what I want to do that the code won't allow, again probably depends on one's location. Foundation types are one thing. Pier-post systems aren't allowed... many areas think that one cannot construct a strong house without using a concrete foundation. Another real stickler is sanitation. Some do not allow composting or waterless toilets, or water cisterns above ground. Others don't allow 12V electrical systems. Deck railings need to be of a certain height with the pickets 4" (or is it 3"?) apart are required. Here in Oregon, the toilet has to be mounted so many inches from the wall on one side and from the sink or bathtub on the other (WTF is that all about?).... Hand railings for 2 or more steps up into one's house... and the list goes on and on and on and....

I appreciate the efforts each of you has made to try and answer my questions. It appears that my best move now is to visit the local county building department with my questions as to what I can, and cannot, do.

Has anyone ever heard of this expression? "It's always easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission."

Thanks again for your informative replies.

Hal Nash

Don_P · January 10, 2013, 09:18:42 AM

QuoteHas anyone ever heard of this expression? "It's always easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission."

I've seen that approach work, can't say it was easier. That person also hasn't driven by jobs with stop work orders posted on them awaiting demolition. It can be a lot simpler to ask first.

Redoverfarm · January 10, 2013, 12:54:46 PM

Quote from: Don_P on January 10, 2013, 09:18:42 AM
I've seen that approach work, can't say it was easier. That person also hasn't driven by jobs with stop work orders posted on them awaiting demolition. It can be a lot simpler to ask first.

Similar: Better to ask for permission than to beg for forgiveness.

MountainDon · January 10, 2013, 03:53:16 PM

QuoteOthers don't allow 12V electrical systems.

There is nothing in the NEC (National Electric Code) that states that one can not use DC power or that one must use AC. The rules in there are numerous and evolving and mainly centered around safety. The NEC rules feed into the IRC and any other building codes there may be. This is another case where, IMO, the offical made an incorrect call. That could be challenged if the owner builder gets familiarized with the applicanle codes. We've run into this sort of thing with structural elements before.

Some building officials may feel uncomfortable when confronted with a plan that does not include standard AC electrical. And there may be some gray areas because it is unusual. When we first were planning our cabin our intent was to use DC. For various reasons that changed. But in the initial conversations we arrived at a consensus that if there was no AC power in the cabin I would not have to have all the required AC receptacles as there would be no AC power. But if I had any AC power in any portion of the cabin, then I would have to follow the precribed path. Their reasoning on that was that if there is one AC outlet, more might be added and someday somebody might hook up to the grid.