I Built a Shed (2020)
eduardosasso.co
eduardosasso.co
> PRO TIP Use screws for everything; if you mess up, remove the screws and redo it; with nails, it’s a lot harder to do that.
You absolutely should not do this for framing, and most building codes specify the type and size of nails that you must use when fastening load-bearing structural components.
Screws are convenient, sure, but they are necessarily much harder than nails and are prone to embrittlement and cracking, while nails are soft and pliable. You can get structural screws, but they're uncommon, expensive, and I'd wager they weren't used here (they're much beefier than a similarly rated framing nail).
If he has really wired it as it seems, if anything consequential (unrelated) happens to the property in the meantime they'll use that against him when they inspect post event. They'll try to claim he breached the policy prior to the event.
Is this common elsewhere in the world?
As for code, yeah most cities have codes on the hight and setback of backyard sheds. This shed doesn't look like it meets either.
https://www.strongtie.com/strongdrive_exteriorwoodscrews/sdw...
[Project Farm](https://youtu.be/qmajKElnwfE)
[Vancouver Carpenter](https://youtu.be/5-PlR8tf84c)
The IBC still outlines nails as appropriate light frame fasteners [0], and where I am (on Maui) there's no local provision in the code to allow swapping in screws. The GRKs [1, 2] and Simpson [3] screws others have mentioned are seemingly valid alternatives to 16d nails, but ultimately it's going to come down to what you're comfortable with, the local code, the inspector, etc.
[0] https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IBC2021P1/chapter-23-wood#...
[1] https://www.grkfasteners.com/structural/r4-multi-purpose-scr...
[2] https://www.grkfasteners.com/structural/rss-rugged-structura...
[3] https://www.strongtie.com/strongdrive_exteriorwoodscrews/sdw...
* Plywood thickness required for floor decking
* Min roof slope for asphalt shingles
* Drip edge, where it's required and how to install it
* Roof drainage - probably doesn't matter because California but as a general rule you never want to channel water towards your foundation.
In the grand scheme these are relatively minor. They'll probably need to demolish the thing when they sell the house long before the roof slope causes water issues.
I had to stop reading r/diy because half the stuff in there made me angry. Especially people building lofts to store heavy stuff without knowing anything about construction.
You can’t overlap rooflines like this. That’s how they allow people to build small outbuildings but make large projects have to get permits. If the roofs “touch” then you’re using a loophole to make an illegal addition to your house instead of a shed.
> The way I did it was to run both wires inside a 3/4 inch PVC conduit using 14/2 electrical wiring + 100ft cat6 ethernet cable.
You are going to get somebody killed. I didn’t see you dig a trench, which means you have a single plastic conduit carrying power and data and exposed to the air. It’s supposed to be grounded metal buried conduit to create a faraday cage that can’t be electrified by nearby lightning strikes or hit by a tree or debris in a wind storm. And deep enough the next owner doesn’t kill themselves planting a hydrangea.
I have half a mind to doxx you to your city planning office.
The proper way to do this is to dig a trench and use armored cable suitable for burial without further protection and to use a plastic uninterrupted tube for the cat6 (which you can blow through).
That said, there isn't a lot of difference between a DIY person and a low grade contractor, and a competent DIY'er is probably better than most mid level contractors. The big difference is usually that they have the tools and they're with a couple of people and you're just by your lonesome.
I bought a ton of this stuff surplus from a dam construction, that served me quite well in Canada, some of the outbuildings were quite far away from the main house. It's pretty easy to work with, though stripping it is a bit of an art (you really don't want to damage the inner wires).
For two feet it's overkill, but normally, especially if there is the possibility of going between the two structures, you'd dig down 4', lay down your cable so that it is going down vertically in both structures and is well below the frost line where you bury it horizontally.
I'm sure there are thinner more pliable versions of that stuff available as well and I sometimes see the equivalent tie wrapped for temporary industrial applications to cranes and bridges.
When I put all the cables in the wall for my TV, I ran Romex from the bottom junction box to the top junction box, despite the bottom junction box having a male electrical plug. An extension cord plugs into that from another outlet. (Ideally I would have just hardwired the upper outlet, but that would have been another can of worms.)
Otherwise this would act as a giant loophole around the electrical code, you could simply use a high current plug to connect your distribution panel and call it a day.
https://plasticinehouse.com/can-i-use-an-extension-cord-to-p...
...it basically is? People use it that way. All the time. Whether or not you like like that, it's the way it is.
Personally I'm pretty ok with it. This guy is not actually going to kill someone with his shed.
I really like that because just mentioning code doesn't do any good. Just because code says something doesn't mean that it makes sense. There's tons of omissions in codes or stuff that is unnecessarily restrictive or way not enough to be safe.
Screws are the perfect example. If code forbids screws but you are going to use the proper screws that are (with good reason) allowed in other jurisdictions that has a completely different vibe to it than someone blogging about using dry wall screws to frame a house. One is a safety concern and why inspections are a good thing, while another is a minor case of ignoring code without any concerns and where an inspection would suck (if you were the homeowner doing some work yourself). If they want to use something that is more expensive and let's them do something themselves that they wouldn't be able to do at all if they had to use nails, more power to them! Change code to allow the right type of screws!
Your second part of the reply does the same, it sort of explains why you think it's a bad idea (and I agree that it is for various reasons).
Could you explain why it is not a good idea to overlap roof lines?
You may see properties that have three fairly large but separate buildings, this is often someone skirting building codes in such a way that they stay within the letter of the law.
(Note: there are other things that are suboptimal about my garage, namely that it was built 100 years ago right on the property line and when it was rebuilt sometime later, it was allowed to stay there despite normally having a 5 foot setback requirement. As a result, this concrete block structure itself actually serves as part of the retaining wall and has moisture seepage issues from the uphill side. I actually think having the neighbor’s outbuilding covering that patch of land and managing the rainwater via my downspout helps the matter, because the ground between them gets no rainfall at all.)
It’s not so much that you shouldn’t be able to do it as that there’s no way we can do it without a permit.
So for new construction or reno, absolutely follow code! Why not?
But for old construction that doesn't have obvious dangers and has served its purpose across decades? Why fix what ain't broke? It's entirely possibly it's a perfectly viable alternative solution.
In the original post, he's sloped the new roof back towards the house - huge issue where I live (Atlanta - we got a lot of heavy rain) since that's going to cause water entry in the basement or erosion on the foundation.
It can also be a fire hazard in many situations. Ex - in my area there's a mandated 10ft gap between the property line and any structure. It's there to prevent people from building right up to the property line, essentially creating townhomes, but with none of the fire/safety planning those require.
All that said - I agree with you, this code is likely there to discourage people trying to skirt around inspections (and because it's easy to spot).
Previously lived on clay soil above the freeze line: everything needed substantial gutters and routing away from home.
Now live in sandy soil below the freeze line: most people don't even have gutters.
Also, as mentioned, sheds don’t usually need inspected. Sheds with power that act as extensions to the home should be (should = good idea) but might not be required, depending on location. Basically, some of these rules are to prevent uninspected/unpermitted extensions to the main dwelling.
You could try chatting up your electrician on a simpler house call, or you might be able to chum around on a Habitat for Humanity project and get a hook-up.
Most people try to avoid electrical wiring or plumbing repairs (other than faucets), because the blast radius is so high. The bravest I've gotten is rewiring a light fixture, and I went extra slow to make sure I didn't end up flying off the ladder. I taped a cup over the light switches so nobody could help, and it still felt like when you're trying to fish something out of the garbage disposal and keeping one eye on the switch to make sure nobody even looks at it.
I would argue that if inspections for safety reasons are why this is in code then code needs to remove this restriction and other rules should be put in place and inspections should become less expensive, easier to get done etc. Basically make it easier and less of a problem for people to get inspected. You will still get people that won't do one of course. Make it possible to inspect them anyway. Of course I understand that there are conflicting priorities at work here too. Meaning funding. The optimal way for everyone would be quite expensive. So we get suboptimal solutions that are sometimes "OK" to circumvent and sometimes not.
Here the bylaws for example allow one main structure, a shed and a detached garage (even if you have an attached one already). No need for roof overhang code stuff. The intent of the bylaw is also much more clear.
The guy in the article arguably is creating such a detached building. He is also in violation of rules about how far structures have to be from the property line assuming the rules in his place are like here and that fence is towards the neighbors.
Totally agreed, and this post is the perfect example of why: people should want to be inspected! The whole point of a city building code is to have rules to keep people safe in situations that aren't obvious to, e.g., the DIY shed-builder.
If I'm building a shed in the backyard, and I have the opportunity to call an employed expert to make sure I'm not gonna fuckin' kill somebody? Yes! Give me that!
Instead, permits are a way to find ways to raise assessments and therefore property taxes. Given the recurring costs, it’s no surprise at all that a lot of work is done without inspections.
So unless you have some disagreement with tax in general or property tax specifically, I’ll argue that the permitting and inspection process in most cities is a good thing for society despite the personal hassle. It ensures that buildings are safe and helps the city assess the changing value of homes.
Quick edit: I will acknowledge that your point is correct that inspections and taxes cause a lot of work to be done without notifying the city and hoping they don’t notice.
Thank you for a succinct explanation of the benefits of land value tax over the current system.
I could easily see (and probably agree with) the argument that we should be taxing land and not improvements. It feels a bit unfair to spend time and money to improve your own land, not be able to realize any gain/income from that improvement until you sell it, but meanwhile be on the hook for extra taxes every year.
To be clear, I think property taxes (or land-value taxes) are reasonable: desirable land is a scarce resource, and we should ensure landowners are doing productive things with it. But the current assessment process leaves much to be desired IMO. (And that's without even getting into California's Prop 13 nonsense.)
I'm sure some people would disagree with this argument, but buildings do increase the value of the land, albeit in a temporary manner. I personally would pay more for an acre with a house on it than an otherwise comparable acre with nothing. Sure, land is truly permanent and finite while houses fall apart over a few decades and can be renewed. But for my human timescale, the presence of a building is a valid consideration in the taxable value of land, as much as other things such as the terrain and proximity to water. And if you take a land value tax and also consider the value of the buildings on it then you end up with property tax.
I'd support a different set of taxes in the US (I'm pretty sure that's where OP built the shed). I'd happily let go of property taxes in favor of a wealth tax and a land value tax. I'd even take an honest accounting of how much things cost and forcing the people and politicians to get our tax to align with our spending so we aren't passing ever increasing bills to our children. But with the current political system there is a 100% chance those ideas would be corrupted, so I'll settle with the inefficient taxes we have now and try to be a good sport about paying them.
Some elements are for safety. Some elements are aesthetic: give the town a coherent look and feel. Some elements are economic: promote property value, ban what could be seen as ugly or low class. Some elements regulate interactions between neighboring lots: setbacks, placement of windows, rules for fences and trees, limits on combining adjoining properties. Some elements serve redistributive or consumer protection goals: minimum dwelling sizes and features, standards for light and air. Some elements seek to curate the community's demographics. Obviously we regulate plumbing for safety and sanitation reasons. We also regulate plumbing to prevent illegal second kitchens, which could bring renters or multigenerational (immigrant) households into homes meant for affluent (white) nuclear families.
It is multifaceted, overlapping (safety at all costs? or find a way to price out the dirty poors and blame it on safety?), and different people at different times may be intentionally lying or genuinely confused about the intentions behind and effects of different rules. And that's just in theory. In practice there are whole other layers regarding what goes on at the permit counter, in variance/discretionary review hearings, and in day to day enforcement operations.
Elsewhere in this thread someone mentioned that nails and screws are not interchangeable, but there are situations like decks where nails also aren't sufficient. You need carriage bolts.
Following is for other folks running across this, in case it helps them.
At least in California, I’m pretty sure it’s code compliant to use rated non-metallic conduit for outside high voltage runs for instance. That conduit is made of PVC. It’s the grey plastic electrical conduit at every hardware store (if branded as UV resistant/outdoor rated).
Normal PVC pipe (for water) falls apart at too low a temperature and becomes super brittle when exposed to Sunlight surprisingly quickly.
It’s a much better idea to use EMT or even ‘hard’ conduit depending on how it’s exposed, but it’s not required. EMF protection is nice, but I haven’t seen a such a requirement for power feeds in residential anyway. If using 3 phase and some industrial equipment I imagine you’d be a jerk to not do so, but most residential neighborhoods here have overhead unshielded lines anyway.
Running to a separate detached building has a bunch of rules around grounding (for which you’ll find multiple mutually exclusive and conflicting codes across the county). Many areas don’t have lightning suppression rules though.
Depending on exactly how the building is constructed (technically ‘mobile’ vs ‘fixed) also changes codes a lot. Running the equivalent of an extension cord to a ‘mobile’ structure (which can be functionally fixed) is perfectly fine as long as it’s GFCI protected for instance. Not that he did that.
Ideally it would be a separate sub panel, grounded and protected as such, with proper rated conduit, etc.
But the bar is a lot lower than what you’re saying if someone follows some basic guidelines. And can be done safely.
But yeah, Article Author - you’re going to get someone killed. Jesus.
Data you want shielded, for the reasons I stated. Stringing Ethernet between buildings often ends in tears.
Original poster was running cat6 in the same conduit as high voltage residential Wiring.
That’s scary. The wires in cat6 can carry a surprising amount of current at 120v and wires get chafed or damaged sometimes.
It can be thermal cycling from load, or weather, or a gorilla yanked on them too hard during installation, or whatever.
That can result in 120v or 240v mains voltage at BIGAMPS (most HACR type breakers and residential panels can sustain 10k Amps for a tiny bit) until the wire vaporizes. That’s routine during things like AC compressor startup.
That can make that random ‘should be harmless’ RJ45 plug an immediate danger to anyone nearby. And since the wire won’t vaporize until there is a sufficiently low impedance path to ground, it can stay dangerous for awhile.
Also, different buildings somewhat often have different ground potentials, so running something low voltage and sensitive to voltage spikes and net current imbalance between buildings like Ethernet tends to not go well sometimes. It’s really hard to tell this is happening too, so it sucks to debug.
6 ft away? Probably not a problem if both buildings are grounded decently. Metal conduit helps with that as it acts as a supplemental ground path to reduce any potential differences.
Hundreds of feet? Can be a problem if you do it much.
(I agree that high-voltage wiring needs special care, and that you should follow code.)
You cannot bury EMT underground.
One of the nice things about actual metal conduit, depending on the nature of the soil where you live, is that it only needs to be buried 7" down to meet NEC rules. PVC conduit requires significantly more depth.
18” to the top of PVC conduit (12” for 120V, GFCI protected, 20A max overcurrent protection). If you’re willing to put 2” of concrete over it, PVC drops to just 6”.
Burying EMT in soil or concrete is generally a bad idea and quickly leads to some serious tears - sometimes in a year or two with the right soil or if the concrete is exposed to harsh conditions).
Most codes technically allow it though, sometimes with ‘supplementary corrosion protection’. NEC 358.10(b).
Some electricians use duct tape for the ‘protection’ which is terrible.
Proper pipe wrap is expensive and doing it on your own is a real hassle.
[https://www.electricallicenserenewal.com/Electrical-Continui...] random link with some pictures.
That is one of the areas where plastic really shines - I’ve had great luck with schedule 40 or 80 rated plastic conduit - always go up a step or two in size above what you think you’ll need unless you hate future you. Schedule 80 for anything exposed to impact or exiting/entering the ground or a building.
And if you’re burying something like conduit, it’s almost always better to bury 2 or 3 instead of 1.
You are forcing low voltage and high voltage cables to share their electromagnetic field. That’s never a good thing. It can lead to unstable connection all the way to frying your Ethernet card.
Household current levels don't need to be flowing for it to be dangerous.
But sometimes you are correct. Like in writing where it’s best to know the rules of grammar before you start breaking them, it’s best to know why the building codes exist before you break them as a DIYer.
Electricity can instantly kill you or start a fire, which could kill you and your neighbors. Look at what just happened in Boulder. Fire is dangerous, especially when combined with high winds. I personally saw that play out twice while living in Boston, one of which was determined to have been caused by sparks from unpermitted welding, the other by improper disposal of smoldering construction debris. Both small starts whipped up by winds, both times multiple people died.
The phrase I’ve heard is “regulations are written in blood.”
NM-B is not allowed outdoors (in “wet locations”) [0], and running your Ethernet cable and your power in the same conduit is no good. (Look up the code for feeders supplying structures — this is not even close to how it’s done. Maybe you can squeak by and consider this a structure supplied by a branch circuit, but there are still code requirements to pay attention to.)
Also, that weather resistant barrier…. Imagine you are a drop of rainwater on the outside of that WRB, following gravity. Where do you go? Straight to the exposed OSB sticking out at the bottom. The sheathing is toast in heavy rain.
[0] NM-B has paper running through it. Good old-fashioned water-wicking brown paper. If it gets a bit wet in a flooded conduit (hint: every outdoor conduit can be assumed to flood eventually), it will wick along the cable and never dry.
edit: there is absolutely no requirement that buried conduit be metal. In my experience, despite code allowing various types of galvanized steel conduit to be buried, they tend to corrode severely long before whatever wires are in them are safely disconnected, creating a hazardous situation. You can use PVC, HDPE, etc.
If your point is to educate those without knowledge, a link or spelling some things out is helpful.
Hire someone if you’re not interested in taking the time to learn what minimum code is. It’s not particularly complex and is generally intuitive, but every line is written in blood.
If you are interested, just start with each component. Building a powered workshop is not fundamentally different from building a house, and that’s not recommended for a first project.
Tackle one subsystem at a time. Replace some flooring, some siding, add a receptacle, etc.
Each one will let you learn best practices and minimum code for each part, and put you on the right path.
Moldy Romex wire in a flooded conduit next to some random intended-for-indoor use Cat 6 cable with insulation that may degrade when wet is asking for trouble. 50mA leakage into that Cat 6 cable will kill you 100% dead under the wrong circumstances but will not trip a conventional breaker.
I believe some jurisdictions now occasionally check e.g. Google Maps to look for obvious things like sheds built too close to existing structures (which this one likely is), so it's possible he'll get an unrequested visit from code enforcement anyway.
should be SWA
Same, I don’t want to rain on everyone’s parade, at the same time people should know “that might not be or ISN’T the way to do it…”
I was also wary of what I suspected were a lot of “Here are my before and after shots I took.” Where they didn’t do the work.
That sounds like bike-shedding :D
That's why you toe nail in opposite directions, giving you the best of both worlds.
You don't always want the beefiest screw. Sometimes you want it small and cheap. Most screws a random person would have sitting in their garage are of the small and cheap kind, because they're well-suited for most of the everyday projects people do.
For example, I recently mounted speakers to the walls of my living room. The wires come out of the wall, so to make that work well without just having holes in the wall, I mounted outlet boxes in the wall and covered then with panels that let the wire through. Those outlet boxes are screwed into the studs (the boxes have little channels in them to run the screw through). Those screws aren't structural, and probably wouldn't fit if they were.
Bikeshedding describes our tendency to spend too much time discussing trivial matters, and too little time discussing important matters as a result. It describes the inverse relationship between time spent and the importance of an issue.
(ISMETA)
Agreed that eg GRK R4 structural screws are pricey, but they are widely available. You can buy them at Home Depot, for example. I do like them better than nails for small projects.
This is why we can't have nice, or at least affordable but slightly less than perfect, things. I would also note that, while I'm sure everyone's right about the rules in Santa Cruz, this is jurisdiction specific. In the UK, if your shed is less than 15m^2 and is not used as living accomodation, no building regulations apply, and you can build it with screws, nails, or corrugated cardboard and PVA glue if you're so inclined.
I really enjoyed reading the article just as someone who likes writing and reading. It was very engaging and I enjoyed the process he went through from having an idea to finally committing to it and I especially liked him commenting on things like choosing materials that fit in his car.
I also really am enjoying the comments on HN from knowledgeable, experienced people who know whereof they speak and I appreciate your comment because I spent years homeless and I've studied housing issues and lack of affordable housing is a root cause of homelessness in the US.
So this is a real issue and I'm reminded of the fact that after racist White people burned down "Black Wall Street" they then began interfering with the rebuilding by trying to pass more stringent fire safety codes when building codes had nothing to do with why it burned down. It burned down because hateful people torched it.
And I wonder how we solve this. I wonder how we balance all those concerns of not squelching creative impetus and not squelching a desire to add something cost effectively with real world concerns that "If you do it that way, people die or you burn out your Ethernet card (or whatever)."
Seems like with the internet being a thing, we could find ways to balance those many issues. But so far we really aren't.
People in the know are often comfortably well off. They have no problem with saying "Well, pay the few extra bucks to do it right." and the result is some people are sleeping in the streets and it falls on deaf ears when you try to draw those connections.
It's frustrating.
This 100% has nothing to do with it. Screws aren’t even the easy, cheap, or fast option for construction. Everyone defaults to nails anyway because they’re the cheap, fast, easy, and correct option for framing.
Building a code-compliant small structure is basically trivial these days. The information is readily available from so many different sources that you have to ignore them all and choose to improvise your own thing, such as using screws instead of framing nails in a framing nailer, to get things done.
Many of the code violations in this build are just common sense problems, like putting high voltage wiring in a pipe with low-voltage wiring.
> People in the know are often comfortably well off. They have no problem with saying "Well, pay the few extra bucks to do it right." and the result is some people are sleeping in the streets and it falls on deaf ears when you try to draw those connections.
Construction workers are well-versed in building to code. It’s definitely not causing housing shortages or even remotely related to it. Code isn’t causing houses to not be built, and abolishing building code wouldn’t increase the rate of construction.
Zoning, on the other hand, is a huge problem.
I'm confident that some of the people on HN saying "Oh. God. Don't do that." actually know whereof they speak. But reading the article in no way tripped any warning lights for me. I just thought it was an enjoyable read for other reasons.
This is not the right forum to say that. I said that and it was downvoted and I deleted that comment to leave the one above cuz reasons, not due to the downvote per se, but the downvote helps tell me my enthusiasm for the writing quality etc is unwelcome here because so many people here do know it's bad construction.
I agree zoning is an issue. It's a huge issue, as is car-centric design.
But, no, it's not trivial from my perspective but I feel like it ought to be easier to sort the wheat from the chaff and so forth. The internet seems like a huge opportunity to foster better processes for DIY projects.
But, then, I naively thought nearly two years back that "Surely, the CDC or WHO will have a list of recommended OTC meds for self care for Covid to discourage people from going to the hospital and spreading it." and was unable to find such.
I was at one time pursuing an online degree. I have had a college class in online search. If an officially recommended list of OTC drugs existed at that time and I was unable to find it, I am skeptical that "your average Joe" could find it.
I think there is so much potential to do things better than this. The internet is a tremendous opportunity to help make effective answers available for "free" to the masses and we see some of that happening but I remain shocked and confused by the huge gaps in such that still remain.
(Edited slightly for clarity.)
It's routinely ridiculous levels of drama for me to try to talk about medical topics no matter how carefully I word things. It makes sense to me that the government or some official source should use the internet to inform people on what they can do to mitigate things but from where I sit that appears to not be happening.
In the book The Hot Zone, it was local African tribes who stopped the ebola epidemic and one of their practices was to tell people "Do not go to the White man's hospital." because you would go in with something treatable, like a broken leg, and die of ebola. And it had like a 90 percent death rate.
I've tried to judiciously share things I know are helpful. I was attacked and accused of trying to practice medicine without a license. I've tried to blog. Most of my blog posts get around 25 page views if I don't personally post them to HN and I do not post any of my health writing to HN.
I'm me and that's routinely drama for reasons I often find baffling. It seems logical and obvious to me that putting useful information on the internet from official sources to help empower people to engage in self care of some kind and give them a viable alternative to seeing a physician would be an excellent thing to do when trying to mitigate a global pandemic.
The world mostly seems to think I'm a loon and not worth listening to. So you don't really need to hold your breath and worry about my personal opinions.
I'm on HN because I'm medically handicapped, I'm too screwed up to do anything more productive and I'm just trying to distract myself from the misery that is my life and my terror that I will die on the streets in the near future.
No one is required to care one bit about what I think and most people don't.
Have a good day.
Construction workers don’t get PhDs and a decade of experience before they can build a safe structure.
It’s trivial because you can look up virtually any plans or tutorials and see the accepted ways of doing things. You can type it into Google and get instant results explaining why something is against code.
This person had to go out of their way to spend extra money to do it differently. It’s not even a good example of a pitfall, because everything in framing construction revolves around nails by default.
Some people are exposed to certain things from early childhood and others aren't. Some people have a rich ecosystem of pertinent experiences and are surrounded by knowledgeable people and others don't have those assets.
People who have no friends or relatives who know anything about X real world physical skill and are googling up info online are often poorly positioned to judge the quality of the info in question.
To me, it seems to be a simple and obvious point. I don't know why it seems to be failing to click with you.
Ironically, that's perhaps an example of the kind of disconnect I am trying to describe, though that fact seems unlikely to help me make my case.
We get a particular version of NIMBYism here in Edinburgh with living in a UNESCO world heritage site. There's strong pressure to freeze the city core in its 19th century appearance; I broadly agree with that, except that exceptions seem to be made for the most expensive and ugliest buildings. While round the outside two-floor suburbs are going up.
But yes building in the UK is much freer.
I sense it is much less common (beyond a basic shed or conservatory) though therefore less of an issue to solve.
In many US locations you aren't required to pull a permit and get inspections for sheds below a certain square footage either.
But that's not a free pass to build an unsafe structure. Using (non-structural) screws instead of nails is not a big deal for something this small that won't see snow load, but other things like mixing high voltage wiring and low-voltage wiring in the same conduit are a problem regardless of code.
Connecting something to the electrical system will also invoke code regulations, regardless of the size. There's no free pass for ignoring electrical regulations just because a building is below a certain size in the US, and I doubt there is in the UK either.
Right, this is the case in New Zealand too. Want a sleepout under 10 m^2? Go for it. Want it wired to electricity or plumbed in? Then you need consent.
How is this defined? The purpose of this structure is to be used as an office; they'll presumably spend on the order of 40 hours a week in there. Is it only considered a living accommodation if you sleep in it?
I would expect electrical regs to apply regardless of how the structure is used. And regardless of whether the regulations apply, I would implore anyone reading this to do the electrical safely, not because the law tells you you have to, but because of the "it might kill someone" part.
And is 'temporary', right? I didn't know about the size limit, but I thought it had to be a sort of free-standing structure not fixed into the ground - i.e. you can make a concrete level base, but you can't embed your vertical supports in it?
The subject of building code seems vast. How can you get to the point where you even know what you don't know?
A while back I looked briefly into what it would take to be an electrician, and it seemed like there was quite a lot to know. I wonder how soon you get to the stage where you could wire up a shed like this with full confidence that you've done everything to code.
From there, how many other subjects do you have to get right? I learned how to swing a hammer as a kid but I wouldn't know jack about designing load bearing structures, weather proofing, foundations, hanging windows and doors, etc — let alone plumbing, HVAC, etc.
Also, when applying for a home-owner permit, my city requires you pass a short test showing you know the basics of the code (not nearly as in-depth as certification exams).
And worth it. I have boxes of different sizes of Simpson strong-tie and strong-drive screws and I adore them. And they're mostly available at any Home Depot.
I did my research, understood that nails provide better strength. I chose screws. So do many other shed builders.
I'm all for hack jobs when the consequences are low. This is not one of those situations.
I completely agree that running power and network cables in the same conduit is dangerous. I'm not as certain about the use of screws. To me, it looks that even if the whole shed collapses, the rubble would have hard time seriously hurting the person inside (except for the glass; I hope it's safety glass).
Telling people to not use structural screws is wrong, they are far superior to nails for DIY person. For starters using the right nail isn't that easy either - do you know if you inspector allows clipped head nails? Are you driving them in pressure treated wood? If so, do you have the right nail? With a GRK R4, you don't have to worry about any of those issues. They are easy to drive with an impact driver, for a noob, they are faster than driving a nail by hand, they can be removed, they are less likely to split wood.
The important thing here is that neither nails nor screws are "all the same". Know what you are using them for and use the correct ones. If you use any hangers or other ties, you can generally use screws or nails, but you MUST read the spec sheet from the manufacture to get the correct ones. Even "professional" home builders frequently use the wrong fasteners for these applications.
I think a bunch of folks need to get off their high horses about "building codes" and sort out their perspective. Sure nails might be the correct thing for a much larger structure, but for this piddly wee thing, who cares? If there's an earthquake then the adjacent house is likely to flatten this box regardless of fasteners used.
My only concern would be the electrical and that they'd hooked up a separate breaker for the "crate supply". Yes defo make sure that's correct.
But....It's just a shed
(I enjoyed the article.)
I also wonder from a water damage standpoint if he vented this or he’s counting on the door for ventilation. That won’t always be open.
Since the wall of this building is actually under the roof line, they’ll make him tear this down or reroof his house to move it four inches over (although that might take a permit too, since you’re changing the roofline). Tearing it down is cheaper.
He may also be violating setbacks from the edge of the property, but those have been diluted here so frequently in large cities that he might be okay.
Each member country of the UK have their own different planning regulations - Scotland, England, Wales and NI. Also please cite where having a shed next to your property is illegal in any one of these jurisdictions. Under certain dimensions and heights, planning "law" doesn't apply.
Not gonna pollute with comments about it that others have already made.
I will add that I am making electrical/gas renovations to the house/detached garage.
Basically we are adding LP to the house for my new range, and a gas water heater. Also ran gas to the garage for powering a genset. The past year or so has taught me the import of off grid solutions for certain things like cooking and hot water.
So, I had to dig a trench from the house to the garage. Code called for 18” deep, but I went as deep as my backhoe would allow. Grey pvc conduit was put in for elec, a separate tube for fiber, and pex for water.
The LP co, came and installed a 250gal tank on a pad I poured, then ran gas in some kinda pex-like tubing to the house and garage. County eventually came out to inspect and signed off, allowing me to back fill (partly down now). Next steps are to finish connecting the pvc to the house, finish the water run, and then I need to buy the copper for the elect run - probably $1500 worth.
The only bits I’m concerned about is getting the power shut off, and power lines moved to the underground conduit I’ve placed from the pile to the house as I’ll need an actual electrician or will have to wait a week for the power company to turn back on after the shut off.
Off grid = No need for a permit but more importantly, a proof of concept that with starlink, this small office “shedquarters” could be placed anywhere in the world — say a beach in Costa Rica for example!
We’re 1 year away from a low latency, gigabit speed ”shedquarters” workspace being available anywhere in the world for under $10k.
https://www.homedepot.com/b/Tools-Hand-Tools-Marking-Tools-L...
I was plumbing a wall when I dropped my hammer and had to start all over.
* Ask HN: Why does a busy man build a shed? (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29767682)
* Why I Live In a Shed (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29762145)
Does HN have some kind of mechanism that promotes posts with similar keywords?
Another easy one to spot: there's sometimes clusters of articles from the same site if it's not a well-known one - people look around the site, find other good stuff and submit that too.
I don't say that this bad or anything, in fact I like that every day has a different topic on the front page. If this is a natural phenomenon then I have not heard about it yet (and it might be interesting to research?).
The permits are pretty easy to get.
I think there are still lots of rules to follow.
Well in many jurisdictions the size of this thing (a shed) wouldn't matter, so yes it is bikeshedding. And this thing looks like it's built well enough to be a shed you can go and sit in with a laptop, a nice cup of tea and a biscuit. The overreaction here by HN to this ancient project perhaps explains why we end up with maddeningly overly complex systems to just stick a bloody simple webpage in a website.
I always figured that if I wanted to do a serious project like this, I would first do some volunteer work, maybe with Habitat for Humanity or similar, just to gain some experience.
Does anybody have stories about noobs volunteering to help with construction?
But assuming it’s a fenced in yard in the US, if someone is already in there when they shouldn’t be they’re already quite committed to mischief anyway.
"PRO TIP Use screws for everything; if you mess up, remove the screws and redo it; with nails, it’s a lot harder to do that."
Please don't, screws shear. Don't learn constrtuction from someone who hasn't learnt it himself.
As for writing about your experience like this, write a blog about something in your own field or otherwise don't give advice. It could end up with someone getting hurt.
I don’t get it. I see the majority of us, developers, writing about software without having a deep knowledge on the subject. The author’s shed is no more to me like the usual post “I built Twitter in Rust on a weekend”. Should we all stop giving “PRO tips”?
There are structural screws that are excellent options for framing. GRK and Simpson make extremely well regarded structural screws that, at least in the US, are accepted for framing most/all building code offices.
Here is an example of a Simpson screw: https://www.strongtie.com/strongdrive_exteriorwoodscrews/sdw...
Here is a GRK: https://www.grkfasteners.com/structural/r4-multi-purpose-scr...
And the author is right - if you are a weekend warrior, they are far better than framing nails. You don't need a nail gun, just an impact driver which is usually less expensive and more useful for other tasks. They don't split the wood as much as a framing nailer, are generally more accurate to put in, and can be easily removed if needed.
I like your shed.
I recently snagged the 12x16 with porch plans. I’m excited to give this a shot.
For the in-garage option, I've encountered three fully enclosed and insulated cubicles/offices in garages.
The first was a construction Project manager who built his along one side wall of his garage. I was very curious and talked with them about it and they had a couple good thoughts. The first was that they had a nice big window opening to the garage. Even it only gave them a view of their pickup truck, it really made the office feel less like a closet and could be opened for ventilation. The other advice was to leave enough room by the garage door for a repairman to get at everything; on a long enough timeline it will be necessary.
The other two were built by tradesmen I knew with single bay shops. They both built their offices on big casters for flexibility and one would roll theirs outside when they cleanded the shop.
(pre-painted, Including windows, door, insulation, electrical and Ethernet wiring, fire-proof compliance, able to resist heavy rain)
Six elements total, clickable into each other. Assembly time under one hour.
The author mentioned organizing material transport by figuring out what would fit in his car. I would highly recommend just renting a flatbed truck from home depot to transport your materials home if they don't fit in your car. Its usually something like $20 to rent for an hour.
Also I wonder if the author has any plans to heat/cool the space. Seems like they might live in a temperate area. I'd would probably just install one of those DIY mini-split units to heat/cool the office if necessary.
Anybody looking to do this, you could probably go 8x8 for the same money, plywood comes 4x8 and most lumber comes in 8' lengths.
Not all insulations are the same. You have to research which type is best given your temperature, humidity, etc. Some require special handling and care... For example, you don't want to breathe fiberglass, or to contaminate your workspace with it.
Good air quality in a work area is a must. You want air free of particulate matter and volatile organic compounds. Opening the window when it's raining is not a viable option. You need some form of ventilation and air filtering. Maybe also air conditioning and heating.
You also don't want to build a structure that is against zoning limitations or that brings you tax liabilities.
Note that it’s against code to run electrical and data cable in the same conduit, both for safety and interference. Get outdoor rated cat 6 and leave it out of the conduit instead.
It genuinely is not that hard. I did spend most time working out the right spec (ie safety, structural etc.) and the main build took me about 2 months. I was in by month 3 and fully finished by 4 months.
I am ok with big structural stuff, interior (drywalling for example) I don't have the finesse for, but it looks OK.
I love DIY, it gets me off a keyboard! And scratches the engineering itch I miss as a people leader.
It's not hard though. Like anything it takes a bit of planning and practice. Plus the confidence to have a go.
The fact that you need a shoddily built (I'd be ashamed to post something like this on the internet) 6x6 shed to work in, while you have a perfectly fine house right next to it.
Or how many fear-mongering code NIMBYs there are in this thread. Some even threatening to doxx the OP. Yikes. Do you guys know how much legacy not-up-to-code housing stock there is across the country, that's actually dangerous to inhabit? And you chose to cry wolf about an accessory structure CA?
Screws have the advantage of not backing out. So at right angles (think a deck board attached to the joist) they are preferred. Lateral force will, however, easily snap them. But for framing they are probably a code violation.
The instructions are so well-designed that it's a pleasure to read even if you're not completing the project.
No need to re-recommend it. We read the article :-)
Where I happen to be, I can build what I like without a permit as long as it's under 100 sq ft, doesn't tie in to plumbing or electrical, isn't in lot setback areas, and it doesn't push the lot coverage over the limit but if I were to park a trailer on the property for any other reason than to store it, I'm in trouble.
Never assume. I knew someone in the situation of being on a road that was a zone boundary. Research revealed they couldn't do what they wanted just because the guy across the street was doing it too.
Another angle to look into: Have you considered just buying a travel trailer or pre-built shed to use as an office? More than once I have personally fallen into the trap of spending $100 in materials and $1000 of my time to avoid a $500 expense when my time would have been better spent getting back to work to pay for a bought solution.
I’ll definitely do my research and see what I can come up with.
I would love a general book recommendation, if it exists, for "common construction codes ELI5".
It would be better for helpful best practices to be accessible and easily comprehensible rather than be bound up in some municipal website.
Also isn't this going to get really hot in the summer? A small air con unit could work well with a hole cut for the vent?
I've been looking to scratch a similar itch and your post has inspired me to start looking into it, so thanks for posting!
36 square feet? good to go.
If I were to do it, I'd make it slightly bigger and put a electrical sub-panel in it with an extension cord like an RV has. You could plug it into anywhere with an RV outlet.
It's also easy enough to move any shed like this that's 8 feet wide or less on a car-hauler trailer or with dollys/rollers underneath.
In CA and most of the US there is usually no separate "zoning permit", although it exists in a few places (I see berkeley and sonoma county). Usually zoning and the development and land use codes just say what you're allowed to do, and are enforced based on helpful neighbor-driven complaints. But you usually don't need a permit up front except for things like conditional use and special use permits, certainly not a shed. For things requiring a building permit, the permitted use (zoning) is just part of that process.
The OP can and should check the city/county and find out. The point I'm trying to make is there is actually a fairly high likely hood that even in over-regulated CA you can build a 120 sq. ft. "shed" or "playhouse" in the backyard without a building or zoning permit. Without knowing the exact jurisdiction, this is just general advice about the most usual practices - for example San Diego, LA, San Bernardino cities and counties.
One thing I should mention: technically plumbing/electrical in the shed or calling it or using it as an "office" might not be kosher, but in practice everyone does this with no issue. It's just a very nice "playhouse".
shed > ?
- Do you regret having children?
- Do you regret living together with your spouse?
Obviously, in a pre-Covid world leaving your home to go to work was simply the societal expectation of how to acquire an income. WFH mostly came with economic downsides (lower salary, no promotions).
During Covid and post-Covid it's quite an interesting question why somebody would voluntarily lobby to add unpaid work time in the form of a commute to their day.
When you use your shed, what are the aspects that you came to value? E.g. is it more about the feeling of nature (because the garden is much closer) or is it more about the sound-separation from the rest of the home? Or would you be as happy with a dedicated room within your house?
I was previously working from our bedroom. The main downside was if I wanted to start working while my wife was still asleep.
> When you use your shed, what are the aspects that you came to value? E.g. is it more about the feeling of nature (because the garden is much closer) or is it more about the sound-separation from the rest of the home? Or would you be as happy with a dedicated room within your house?
Sound separation, and not needing to work for my room that also has another purpose. But a dedicated room with in a house is better for me, and when one became available I started working from there instead of the shed.
Which direction of sound separation is more important to you, incoming sound (not being disturbed) or outgoing sound (not disturbing sleeping people with your work)?
The shed has excellent noise separation, however, which occasionally has been useful in letting friends work there for a while.
As long as my door is closed and the kid is not immediately outside it, they're basically inaudible.