I recently made a deal on a one-acre lot with a dilapidated shed

>>1191422
You could have made the deal contingent on the slab passing your tests, if you cared that much


Otherwise yeah sure, sounds like you know what's up.

>>1191425
This is a good thought. I only started hatching my plans after signing off on it.

The original plan was to simply have a place to park my tiny house, for some cheap living space. The idea of improving the lot through construction occurred to me later.

so this plan is in line with local laws and building codes?

>>1191432
I am currently studying up on local building codes. I'll definitely meet with the building inspector to ensure standards are met. I must admit, I'm fairly overwhelmed by all the regulations, permits and standards needed... it seems impossible to satisfy everybody without paying everybody.

>>1191436
well, they exist to keep idiots from burying themselves alive in underground storage containers

at least you care enough to do it right and are actually making plans that you have the skills to carry out, instead of the usual tiny house threads here

The other things to check for are if the slab has a waterproof membrane under it and allow for the cost of some sort of waterproofing coat if it doesn't, unless you really like rising damp.

Where I live, sites have a ground classification on them all the way from 1) stable to 7) highly reactive clay, and the footing width and design will depend on that classification.

You're also making the assumption that the slab is level enough to build on as is, which, depending on how out of level it is may be a pain to work with.

Worst case scenario, you may simply have a flat area to build up from and do a platform floor.

>>1191422
Sounds like you have a good head on your shoulders. Bottom line is a 35'x35' slab is about two loads of concrete if the one that you have isn't sufficient. A third load would do your footer. Not sure of the cost in your area, but that would run about $3600 here in Colorado. Not too bad.

If you have a tiny house, I would just stick with that. Extremely cost effective.

Some locales do not allow building a footer under an existing slab. Definitely check with the building inspector before doing any work. You may have to cut out squares from the slab and build up piers from there. This would probably work best with a post frame design.

>>1191422
Get a percolation test. Hate to build a nice cabin and turns out you have to either store feces in a bin you didn't intend or embrace third world culture and disease.

>>1191422
Don't, that slab most likely does not have a vapor barrier underneath it.

File: rotary-piling.jpg (21KB, 500x311px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x311px

>>1191422
The slab alone isn't enough to avoid possible (depending on surroundings, land, past activities) subsidence, breakage, instability etc. Is there any evidence that the ground was piled before pouring the slab?


>Inb4 too small to need it, only commercial buildings, high rise etc.

Most modern homes which are built to be cheap and profitable (here in the UK at least) have a concrete footing poured on top of 12ft pilings (at a minimum) rather than a slab covering the entire space. It's a the cheapest way to avoid subsidence down the line.

>>1191894
>Some locales do not allow building a footer under an existing slab.

This somehow doesn't sound remotely true.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underpinning

>>1193036
Should have been clear. Some locales do not allow OP's plan, which is dig out around perimeter and pour a footer.
There a many ways to add a footing to an existing structure, but not everything is allowed everywhere.
OP can consult an engineer for cheap, or simply go to his local building department and ask, for free. It may very well be that an approved method is too expensive and too much work to be worth it.