Hi all,
I am in the process of planning the building of a shed (4 x 2.5m) and have some questions about the foundations. The situation is this: The shed will be at the top of the garden, which is sloping down towards the house. The soil is pretty “clayy”, so it gets waterlogged in winter and rock hard in summer.
I have levelled the shed site somewhat, which has left a vertical soil bank of 1m which needs a retaining wall. The spoil from this has been used to build up the slope on the downhill side. I now have a relatively level site, but one that is made up from a mix of stable soil and compacted spoil.
A foundation here is obviously needed. My thoughts are to go with 9 concrete piers that would support 3 wooden beams which the shed would sit on. The concrete piers would be 20cm diameter and approx. 0.8m deep. This would get down to stable soil and avoid problems with movement due to frost of water absorption.
The advantage of this is that it means that I don’t have to take the whole site down to stable soil – this would need another 75cm down, which would need a very expensive retaining wall – probably with engineering input.
Does this sound like a good plan?
Kind regards
Richard
I am in the process of planning the building of a shed (4 x 2.5m) and have some questions about the foundations. The situation is this: The shed will be at the top of the garden, which is sloping down towards the house. The soil is pretty “clayy”, so it gets waterlogged in winter and rock hard in summer.
I have levelled the shed site somewhat, which has left a vertical soil bank of 1m which needs a retaining wall. The spoil from this has been used to build up the slope on the downhill side. I now have a relatively level site, but one that is made up from a mix of stable soil and compacted spoil.
A foundation here is obviously needed. My thoughts are to go with 9 concrete piers that would support 3 wooden beams which the shed would sit on. The concrete piers would be 20cm diameter and approx. 0.8m deep. This would get down to stable soil and avoid problems with movement due to frost of water absorption.
The advantage of this is that it means that I don’t have to take the whole site down to stable soil – this would need another 75cm down, which would need a very expensive retaining wall – probably with engineering input.
Does this sound like a good plan?
Kind regards
Richard
