(Sub-case to CBRC2024-00195) - Unit 9 (in Bldg 1 - Photo 2) & Unit 13 (in Bldg 1- Photo 5) & Unit 51 (in Bldg 4 - Photo 9) - Balcony framing issued structural violation for having deteriorated post. Post in question has been replaced with new post. New post is similar to other posts supporting other balconies in apartment complex. It's a 4x4 wood post connected at the base and top with what appears to be Simpson PB base an a BC cap (photo 3 & 4). New post appears to be in good condition.
Unit 29 (Bldg 2 - Photo 7) - Balcony framing issued structural violation because parts replaced without permit. Appears new elements were some of the joists, edge beam, and sistered posts. Decking did not appear to be replaced and seemed liked it may be experiencing some deterioration (photo 6). Joists and beam appeared to be in good condition. Corners of the balcony each had new post connected to existing posts with what appeared to b e Simpson LTP connected each. Posts and their connections appeared to be in good condition. Overall, balcony framing appears to be in serviceable condition.
See attached structural assessment report, calculations, and plans.
(Brookside Apts.)Sacramento County · 2024$800
(Sub-case to CBRC2024-00195) - Unit 9 (in Bldg 1 - Photo 2) & Unit 13 (in Bldg 1- Photo 5) & Unit 51 (in Bldg 4 - Photo 9) - Balcony framing issued structural violation for having deteriorated post. Post in question has been replaced with new post. New post is similar to other posts supporting other balconies in apartment complex. It's a 4x4 wood post connected at the base and top with what appears to be Simpson PB base an a BC cap (photo 3 & 4). New post appears to be in good condition.
Unit 29 (Bldg 2 - Photo 7) - Balcony framing issued structural violation because parts replaced without permit. Appears new elements were some of the joists, edge beam, and sistered posts. Decking did not appear to be replaced and seemed liked it may be experiencing some deterioration (photo 6). Joists and beam appeared to be in good condition. Corners of the balcony each had new post connected to existing posts with what appeared to b e Simpson LTP connected each. Posts and their connections appeared to be in good condition. Overall, balcony framing appears to be in serviceable condition.
See attached structural assessment report, calculations, and plans.
(Brookside Apts.)Sacramento County · 2024
This profile was built from public permit records. Claim it free to add your photo, phone, and website, so the homeowners landing here can actually reach you.
Track record sourced from public building-permit records. Figures reflect permitted projects, not self-reported work. Listed on Proven Pros.
$800
(Main) - Unit 9 (in Bldg 1 - Photo 2) & Unit 13 (in Bldg 1- Photo 5) & Unit 51 (in Bldg 4 - Photo 9) - Balcony framing issued structural violation for having deteriorated post. Post in question has been replaced with new post. New post is similar to other posts supporting other balconies in apartment complex. It's a 4x4 wood post connected at the base and top with what appears to be Simpson PB base an a BC cap (photo 3 & 4). New post appears to be in good condition.
Unit 29 (Bldg 2 - Photo 7) - Balcony framing issued structural violation because parts replaced without permit. Appears new elements were some of the joists, edge beam, and sistered posts. Decking did not appear to be replaced and seemed liked it may be experiencing some deterioration (photo 6). Joists and beam appeared to be in good condition. Corners of the balcony each had new post connected to existing posts with what appeared to b e Simpson LTP connected each. Posts and their connections appeared to be in good condition. Overall, balcony framing appears to be in serviceable condition.
See attached structural assessment report, calculations, and plans.
(Brookside Apts.)Sacramento County · 2024$1,600
(Sub-Case to CBRC2023-00056) - Units 6 and 92 have damaged back decks that we will replace per planSacramento County · 2023$15,000
(Main-case) - Units 6 and 92 have damaged back decks that we will replace per planSacramento County · 2023$15,000
Permitted projects on public record. Addresses are omitted for privacy.