Calling any builders! Need feedback on codes for structure.

[BigguyZ]

My brother and I are working on a rennovation of a two homes at the moment. One is my brother's house that was damaged by a tornado, and the other is an investment property.

On both of these projects, we're working with a contractor that we were referred to by a neighbor. The guy seems pretty cool and a genuinely nice fellow, and he should know what he's doing. H's already rebuilt the roof for my my brother's house (complete rebuild- not just shingles here), he's re-roofing the investment property, and building garages for both.

Now today I saw something that concerned me. He had replaced a insulated back door to the investment property that was pretty beat up. He used a nice pre-hung door. It looks like he raised the threshold off of the ground, which I think was a good call. HOWEVER, it looks like he cut into the double header with a recip saw, leaving maybe 1/4" thick of the original 2x4's left holding up the studs above.

Now, I don't want to jump to conclusions here, but I'm concerned that a new double header wasn't installed. There's ample access from the inside, as the walls stripped to the studs (that's why I could see how it was installed). There's no siding on the outside, as that's been all ripped off and is waiting for the siding to be added. I know it's not a weight bearing exterior wall. But even so- isn't a double 2x4 header minumum code requirement over any door?

I'll attach pictures. Please let me know if I'm over-exagerating here. Also, I thought maybe it was an ignorant worker, but it was the main guy himself who did this...

Oh, and one more thing. Maybe not code, but I thought it was basic to make sure that there are shims and a screw through all 3 hinges of the door. In this case, only the bottom 2 hinges have shims and a screw into structure.

[Slik Geek]

(Apologies because I'm not a builder... I just couldn't resist replying)

I think that you have good reason to be concerned. Even if that door is not in a weight bearing wall, it still should have a minimal header, like a single (laid flat) 2x4. What he has done likely cannot meet code, even for non-weight-bearing doorways.

Are you certain that the wall is not weight bearing? A single 2x4 wouldn't be enough in that case. The previous builder may have just done the original header out of habit... or may have done it for good reason.

Any additional local conditions, like seismic risk?

[chopnhack]

A wider pic would do more justice, did he changing the framing above? Are you sure he is finished framing that area? He may have just wanted to get the door hung and come back to "fix" that area - i dont agree with it or do it myself, but that way you can give him a polite out If that area is supported by framing, then w/o an engineer's sign off, the framing has to be put back. Now you can always put in a double header above the new door and install king and jack studs on either side. Have a chat with your builder.

[Kristofor]

There's no siding on the outside, as that's been all ripped off and is waiting for the siding to be added. I know it's not a weight bearing exterior wall. But even so- isn't a double 2x4 header minumum code requirement over any door?

That looks wrong to me (though I'm no carpenter of course)...

How did you determine your external wall was non-bearing? Is it a single story home with rafters/trusses running to the adjacent walls?

Any additional local conditions, like seismic risk?

Not too many quakes in Minnesota thank goodness .

[jking]

Have a talk with your builder. Discuss your concern about the wall above sagging & causing problems with the door since there is no header. Even though it's not load bearing, it is still carrying some load. If it's a gable end, it's going to carry the weight of the wall above. From a real world perspective, if there is plywood on the sheathing on the outside, you may get some strength, but, you don't want to rely on it.

On the hinge, the top hinge is the most important one to shim & screw into the framing.

Is this guy a contractor (licensed, bonded, etc.), or a handyman/fixit type?

[toolguy1000]

fix it now and you can forget about it. make the wrong decision now and it'll haunt you in the future.

[Stytooner]

Whether it meets code or not is really irrelevant. It is done wrong. It needs doing correctly. Here even non load bearing walls need headers. The opening size determines the header size. At the very least, I would say two 2 by 4's. If I was doing it, I would go with double 2 by 6's. I don't use anything less. Lots of reasons to use headers even in non load bearing walls. Falling limbs from trees comes to mind.
Not only that, but you have nothing to nail both the sheet rock and exterior siding to. Nothing as a trim nailer either. Why take all that time to rip a header with a saws all when he could have sliced through the studs and installed a header probably in less time.
I would not let anyone get away with that.
Just mention calmly that you would rather have a header in there and give a few reasons or not. He should know why you want a header.

[BigguyZ]

Why take all that time to rip a header with a saws all when he could have sliced through the studs and installed a header probably in less time.

That's what dumbfounded me. The guy is NOT a hqandyman, he's a liscensed contractor. Even if you're trying to cut down time, I agree that ripping the 2x4 like that had to have taken longer than properly cutting it our and replacing it...

My biggest fear is- if he did this, what else could he have done wrong? I mean, he did my brother's house's roof. Hopefully he did it properly in that case....

[pelligrini]

Maybe he got a new sawsall and was looking for something to use it on.

I agree, that is not the proper way to frame a door, be it load bearing or not. I quickly looked through the 2006 IRC for something in the code last night but I didn't find much on non-load bearing header requirements. I'm not all that familiar with the structural sections of the code. I really don't like those sections either, they give me a headache...

[jking]

My biggest fear is- if he did this, what else could he have done wrong? I mean, he did my brother's house's roof. Hopefully he did it properly in that case....

That's definately something that bothers me. Unfortunately, you probably won't know unless something happens.

This work is all permitted, isn't it? I can't imagine any inspector allowing that hacked up header to pass inspection.

[Stytooner]

One other thing to mention is that headers need pack studs to support them on the sides. Looks like he had enough room on the side for at least a 1 by. That would cut down on all the blocking on the sides.

[jking]

One other thing to mention is that headers need pack studs to support them on the sides. Looks like he had enough room on the side for at least a 1 by. That would cut down on all the blocking on the sides.

Very good point, I missed that on the first picture. Although it looks like the blocking may have been there before.

BigguyZ - The framing in the pictures look like rough saw lumber, is this a really old house?

Who is in charge of the permits & calling for inspections? If it's the contractor, you might want to make sure he's actually holding up his end of the deal.

[conscience]

Minimum code standard for a non-bearing wall, regardless of location, is a single 2x4 installed flat over the door as long at it is not more than 24 inches below the horizontal member above it. You don't need any blocking or cripples over it, either. What he did doesn't meet code since it isn't a full 2x4. (2000, 2003, 2006 and 2009 IRC R602.7.2)

For exterior non-bearing walls, I typically use a 2x6 header, just in case. Someone mentioned tree fall and it happens. Even a large limb could cause some damage in that case. I know it is a fairly long shot of happening, but why chance it?

And while it isn't covered by code, best practice is to shim behind each hinge, if needed, and screw at least the top hinge. It bears the weight. If that one doesn't sag the others should be fine. I always screw them all, just to be safe. You can remove one of the hinge screws and use a longer one with the same finish to avoid having to unscrew the hinge from the jamb.

Jeremy

[pelligrini]

Cool, thanks Jeremy!

Quote below is from the 2009 IRC:

R602.7 Headers. For header spans see Tables R502.5(1) and
R502.5(2).

R602.7.1 Wood structural panel box headers. Wood
structural panel box headers shall be constructed in accordance
with Figure R602.7.2 and Table R602.7.2.

R602.7.2 Nonbearing walls. Load-bearing headers are not
required in interior or exterior nonbearing walls. A single
flat 2-inch-by-4-inch (51 mm by 102 mm) member may be
used as a header in interior or exterior nonbearing walls for
openings up to 8 feet (2438 mm) in width if the vertical distance
to the parallel nailing surface above is not more than
24 inches (610 mm) . For such nonbearing headers, no cripples
or blocking are required above the header.

[Stytooner]

There is a show or several with Mike Holmes. They deal mostly with renovation and code mistakes. Mostly in Canada, but some south of the border. He comments often about the code not being up to snuff in some areas. I tend to agree.
While building below code is generally dangerous, sometimes building just to meet code isn't very wise. I often like to exceed code in some areas so there is no question as to whether it passes or not. In areas like headers, it makes more sense to use substantial sizes throughout the build. The price increase per opening can't be more than about $10.
I have seen builders that black in a house in less than a weeks time. They are gritting their teeth hoping it passes when inspected. They are built just to code.
I would not want to pay today's prices for a home built like that.
I still see homes built using 2x4 exterior walls. 2x6's should be the standard IMO.
Mine is 2x4, but if I was building another, it would be 2x6 exterior studs. Better strength and insulation.

Codes do change and different areas need different safety requirements, but do they change often enough? Mike Holmes doesn't think so.