Deck ledger though brick a no-no

[Ben H]

I understand the no-no behind not attaching the ledger to the brick veneer. I am to understand now its a no-no to attach ANY ledger through or not to brick house?

http://www.awc.org/publications/DCA/DCA6/DCA6-09.pdf

Page 12.

[Scottpat]

I understand the no-no behind not attaching the ledger to the brick veneer. I am to understand now its a no-no to attach ANY ledger through or not to brick house?

http://www.awc.org/publications/DCA/DCA6/DCA6-09.pdf

Page 12.

Yep, it needs to be free standing... I'm seeing it on new construction in my area.

[mjr6550]

It is generally not recommended. However, those are prescriptive requirements. It could be permitted if designed by an engineer.

[inspector57]

I don't get the difference in your statement / question between the two examples.

The issue is that brick veneer is not a structural member and as such cannot be expected to support a ledger or deck. If the structure of the building extends through the veneer then there COULD be an exception... but then there are water proofing issues. Then there is the requirement that siding be removed to install flashing prior to flashing/ledger placement which is kind of hard to do on brick veneer siding.

[Scottpat]

It is generally not recommended. However, those are prescriptive requirements. It could be permitted if designed by an engineer.

Can you cite where it would be permitted in any publication?

[gtblum]

It is generally not recommended. However, those are prescriptive requirements. It could be permitted if designed by an engineer.

Sure it could. You could probably get that approved by a sanitation engineer, the guy who drew the cartoons for the Tacoma narrows bridge, and maybe even the engineer in charge of Thomas the train.

[Mike Lamb]

Does anyone have documentation of brick veneer failing under the pressure of a deck load? I would be more afraid of the veneer pulling away from the building but I've never read anything about that either.

It is a bad idea and according to the IRC it should never be done, but that is pretty much all I see around here. Ledger fastening schedules and ledger flashing are universally ignored. Personally, I think load bearing ledgers should be outlawed entirely no matter what they are attached to.

I think this doc is from Australia.

"Ledgers or pole plates connected to brick veneer should be thoroughly checked for their adequacy."

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectio ... deline.pdf

[inspector57]

I've seen the brick push in and pull out but I don't have "documentation";

Just anecdotal instances I have personally observed.

If you attach to brick veneer there is no lateral stability which is precisely what is needed. The air gap behind the brick allows the deck to move in or out with little to no resistance.

I've seen bunches of patio roofs built with attachment to brick veneer with moderate success but without additional structure to provide lateral restraint I see failures in the veneer even with light loading.

It is improper and should not be done.

[mjr6550]

It is generally not recommended. However, those are prescriptive requirements. It could be permitted if designed by an engineer.

Can you cite where it would be permitted in any publication?

Scott, engineered solutions are not typically found in any publications. Looking at the compressive strength of a brick wall there is no reason why you could not design a solution that would be tied into the framing but would transfer load to the brick veneer. Proper flashing would also be needed. I'm not saying that its the way to go, but sometimes engineers are called upon to come up with solutions to problems. Just this past week I was asked to design a deck attached to a masonry wall with a brick veneer. Apparently It could not be a free-standing deck because a driveway is below the deck. I did not take the job or see what issues were involved. I made the original comment as a reminder that not everything is automatically wrong if it does not comply with prescriptive codes.