Mitigation Workgroup (MWG), Proposed FRSA Language
|
FRSA Proposal |
FRSA Proposal as Amended by MWG |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
101 Retrofits Required. Pursuant to Section 553.844, Florida
Statutes, strengthening of existing site-built, single family residential
structures to resist hurricanes shall be provided. Site built
single-family residential structures shall include only one-family detached
dwellings and appurtenant structures accessory thereto such as garages, pool
houses, etc. |
101 Retrofits Required. Pursuant to Section 553.844, Florida
Statutes, strengthening of existing site-built, single family residential
structures to resist hurricanes shall be provided. Site built single- family residential structures shall mean site built
single family detached residential structures. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Chris,
(def.) applies only to residential structures shall be,… omit etc. Jim R, habitable structures only, Jack,
single family residential structure, Dwight, site built single family
structures only, Cam, hearing 2/6-7, Tom Allen, single family residences
only. Vote: 8/0 [use
only: site built single family detached residential structures] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
101.1 When a
roof on an existing site-built, single family residential structure is
replaced, the following procedures shall be performed by the roofing
contractor: (a) Roof-decking attachment and fasteners shall be strengthened and corrected as required by section 201.1. (b) A secondary water barrier shall be provided as required by section 201.2. |
101.1 When a roof on an existing site-built, single
family residential structure is replaced, the following procedures shall
be permitted to be performed by the roofing
contractor: (a) Roof-decking attachment and fasteners shall be strengthened and corrected as required by section 201.1. (b) A secondary water barrier shall be provided as required by section 201.2. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Eric, code does not dictate who can do what, Cam, bldg
dept do not know how to issue permits, Jack, , Jim Schock, contractor retains the permit to perform
the roofing, Richard, licensing issue, Rick, bo allowed to be done by roofing
contractor, roof to wall connection, Jim R, not in building code, separate
rule, implement provisions licensing not an issue, Jack, restrict to roofing
contractor is within scope of building contractor, Tim, shall be permitted to
do so, does not exclude general contractor, Chris, Joe, manufacturer, Cam not
excluding others from performing, Joe secondary water barrier, Chris open
roof, Jim Schock, homeowners could pull permit, Vote:
7/1 [add: permitted to be] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
101.2 When a roof is replaced on a
building that is located in the wind-borne debris region as defined in s.
1609.2 of the (a) Roof to wall connections shall be improved
as required by section 201.3. (b) Mandated retrofits of the roof-to-wall
connection shall not be required if the estimated cost of the
investigation and execution of the retrofits, as prepared by the prime
contractor (typically the roofing contractor) and presented to the building
official, exceeds
|
101.2 When a roof is replaced on a
building that is located in the wind-borne debris region as defined in s.
1609.2 of the (a) Roof to wall connections shall be improved
as required by section 201.3. (b) Mandated retrofits of the roof-to-wall
connection shall not be required beyond a 15 percent increase in the cost of
re-roofing. (c) Where complete retrofits of all the roof-to-wall connections as prescribed in Section 201.3 would exceed 15 percent of the cost of the re-roofing project, the priorities outlined in Section 201.3.5 shall be used to limit the scope of work to the 15 percent limit. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Jim Schock, is unenforceable, use level of alteration, Jim
R, can only consider cost, owner builder exceed costs, Richard, strike
typically roofing contractor, 7/1, Cam need guidance, Jack, 15% more
important not roofing contractor establish roof to wall cost, Jim,
engineering evaluation needed to determine 15%, Billy second? Chris, roofer
not licensed to make connection, establish standard pricing? Matt, roof to
wall connection, removing plywood included?
Mo, standard does not provide descriptive requirements, use language,
engineering evaluation and estimate, Tim, prescriptive language included to
establish priorities, need simple procedure, rule limits what can do, another
phase of construction, go back to roofing language, Billy, should have been
tied to retrofit of home, not a roofing element, see no 3, one prescriptive
method in rule, investigation cost should be in addition to 15%, enforcement
problem, produces lawsuits, can’t force homeowner to only repair part of
roof, unfair to homeowner to spend 15%, tie to retrofit of home, 25% or more
brought to code, Steve, if can’t do mitigation for 15%, let contractor make
the call, Chris, footage? how many connections for each corner? Rick, 3-4, Chris, quantify # corners and #
connections, average price/connection, can determine cost, Richard, not easy
to quantify roof to wall connection without an inspection, if can not tie
down all the corners, can improve the strength of the building, can do every
corner, not costly, retrofit all the corners, Chris, prevailing wind from the
east, do east corners, not in favor, Richard, can’t guard against all
potential winds, Jim Schock, access code uses disproportionate cost, feasible
to have list of items, an owner could choose from, mitigation defined by
owner? Jim R, no, Tim, cost
estimating, limited to corners, start with gable end, can make rational
decisions, priorities, basis for protection, Billy, some not all, specific in
code, must do at least one of corners code takes liability, gable ends e/w
failure, hip roofs did not fly off the house, make voluntary, Trent, General
Counsel, liability for roofers, which corner needs to be retrofitted? Liability, Loraine, remediation, liability
of untested systems, asphalt shingles sold meet test requirements, Rick,
small houses, reroofing, worthwhile to put 15% into house? Chris, need priority list, integrity of each
section of the roof, gable ends, hip corners, etc., Billy, who does 15%, is
outside roofer’s scope of work, liability for both parties, Tim, don’t throw
out the priorities, find common ground, Chris, 201.3.5 has a priority list, gable
ends first, Jeff, include original 101.2 FRSA?, Jim R, put priorities with
threshold of 15% in 201.3.5, keep as is, establish priorities and floor in
201.3.5, Tim, if can do gable ends for 15% then, Rick clarify what is in 15%,
Billy, if it can’t be done for 15%, then do not have to do it, Rick, clarify
investigation is retained in 15%, Billy, who determines 15%, Jim R, building
dept determines permit, Chris, licensing board determines, Billy, gable end
bracing is voluntary, Tim, if you can, do the gable ends, Jim R, clarify
elements, roof wall connections not
voluntary, Bill, skip gable end bracing? Yes, could skip bracing and go to
the 4 corners, concept Vote: 7/1 [keep 101.2 as is and add priorities list to 201.3.5
in concept] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
101.3 No change. |
No change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
101.4 No change. |
No change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201
Roof System Mitigation
Techniques. Roof sheathing fastening,
secondary water barriers, roof to wall connection and gable end bracing shall
be permitted pursuant to this section. |
No change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.1 Roof
sheathing fastening for site-built
single family residential structures. For site-built
single family residential structures the
fasteners and spacing required in Table 201.1 are deemed to comply with the
requirements of Section 507.2.2, of the 2004 |
No change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Board roof decking
secured with at least two 8d nails into roof framing members shall be deemed
to be sufficiently connected. Board
roof decking secured with smaller fasteners than 8d nails or with fewer than
two 8d nails per board shall be deemed sufficiently connected if two 8d
clipped head, round head, or ring shank nails are in place on each framing
member. |
No change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Supplemental fasteners as required by Table 201.1 shall be 8d
ring shank nails with round heads and the following minimum dimensions: 1. 0.113 inch nominal shank diameter 2. Ring diameter of 0.012 over shank diameter 3. 16 to 20 rings per inch 4. 0.280 inch full round head diameter 5. |
Supplemental fasteners as required by Table 201.1 shall be 8d
ring shank nails with round heads and the following minimum dimensions: 1. 0.113 inch nominal shank diameter 2. Ring diameter of 0.012 over shank diameter 3. 16 to 20 rings per inch 4. 0.280 inch full round head diameter 5. Ring shank to extend a minimum of 1 ½” from the tip of the
nail.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Chris, what is length of 8d nail? Billy, see Existing code, Eric, testing, Tim, 2 3/8”, 2 ¼ is typical, the code has 2”, need to change the code, Billy, remove #5. Tim, missing length of shaft that has to have rings, 1 ½ inch ring shaft, no national standard, Chris, no standard, minimum 2 ¼ inch nail length, 7/1, Tim, add #6, ring shank to extend a minimum of 1 ½” up from the tip of the nail, Vote: 7/1 [add item 6, “ring shank to extend a minimum of 1 ½” from tip of the nail and add “minimum” to #5] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table 201.1 Supplement Fasteners at Panel Edges and
Intermediate Framing
a. Maximum spacing determined based on
existing fasteners and supplemental fasteners. b. Maximum spacing determined based on
supplemental fasteners only. |
Table 201.1 No change
to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Tim, table does not match above, differentiate nails from
ring shank nails which are stronger, footnote b, should not have to add nails
beyond the 6” along the edge of panel, need extra nails in middle of panel,
Billy, 2004 FBC, allows use of existing fasteners, 8d nail works as in code,
Chris, 6” on gable end? Tim, Gable
truss in HVHZ is 4”, need 4” oc. If
use ring shank, do not need 4”, edges of panels in HVHZ 4”, gable ends within
8 ft most critical sheathing edge, Chris, poor wording, change to “fastener
spacing shall be no greater than”, Jeff, 4/4, Rick, proposed 8’ from gable
ends? Tim, bring in special cases, would support. Billy, only required to bring building up to
existing code, Commission may bring to code.
Cam, it is not happening, can’t wait for next meeting, will ask for
conference call meeting of Commission, Tim, ring shank within 8’ of gable
ends, 6” oc, not at edges of panel, Mo, IBHS, Billy strikes and changes
footnote to a, Tim, trying to address the edges of the panel, does not make
sense as written, Mo, latest version from the workshop, Billy, fix it later, Vote: 8/0 [No
change to FRSA proposal.] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.2 Roof secondary water barrier for site-built
single family residential structures. A
secondary water barrier shall be installed using one of the following methods
when |
201.2 No change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
a) All
joints in roof sheathing or decking shall be covered with a minimum 4 in.
wide strip of self-adhering polymer modified bitumen tape applied directly to
the sheathing or decking. The deck and
self adhering polymer modified bitumen tape shall be covered with one of the
underlayment systems approved for the particular roof covering to be applied
to the roof. |
a) No
change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
b) The
entire roof deck shall be covered with an approved self-adhering polymer
modified bitumen |
b) No
change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
c) The entire roof deck shall be covered with an approved asphalt
impregnated 30# felt underlayment installed with nails and tin-tabs as
required for the HVHZ. |
c) No
change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
d) Outside
of the HVHZ, a layer of asphalt
impregnated #15 or #30 felt shall be
installed. The felt is to be fastened with 1” round plastic cap or metal cap
nails, attached to a nailable deck in a grid pattern of 12 inches (305 mm)
staggered between the overlaps, with 6-inch (152 mm) spacing at the
overlaps. For slopes of 2:12 to 4:12
an additional layer of felt shall be installed in a shingle-fashion and
lapped 19” and fastened as described above. |
d) Outside
of the HVHZ, a layer of asphalt
impregnated approved #30 felt shall be
installed. The felt is to be fastened with 1” round plastic cap or metal cap
nails, attached to a nailable deck in a grid pattern of 12 inches (305 mm)
staggered between the overlaps, with 6-inch (152 mm) spacing at the overlaps. For slopes of 2:12 to 4:12 an additional
layer of felt shall be installed in a shingle-fashion and lapped 19” and
fastened as described above. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: [Loraine proposed substitute language, 2 page document on water barrier section separating HVHZ from the state, butt ends, not overlap, ventilate attic, added synthetic underlayment] Chris, layer in addition to underneath roofing system? Billy, it is not additional layer, 2 layers required in code, an underlayment is a secondary water barrier, can’t install it as in the current code or 30” oc as in HVHZ, only need to meet current code, Chris, underlayment be no less than required in HVHZ, section c, d, Billy, leave fastener pattern for clarity, Chris, not spelled out in c, Rick, satisfy rule challenge, Jack, Loraine references attic ventilation, some systems require attic ventilation, will a system work with an unvented attic? Loraine, felt systems work with unvented attics, Billy, unvented attic designed by engineer. Jack will these require venting attic? Loraine, no standards attached to language, need standards added, Chris, will be bound by the document? Rick, glitch process to add to 2007 code, settlement challenge, Chris uncomfortable with 15’felt, outside HVHZ, enough fasteners to hold in place, needs secondary water barrier, Billy, changed at Commission? Frank leaving out new products, Loraine, no def secondary water barriers, are adding materials that are tested as assemblies, no test data standard, Vote: 7/1 [remove “#15 or” and add “approved”] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
EXCEPTIONS: 1. Roof slopes < 2:12 having a continuous roof
system shall be deemed to comply with section 201.2 requirements for a
secondary water barrier. 2. Clay and Concrete tile roof systems installed
as required by the
|
EXCEPTIONS: No change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.3 Roof-to-wall connections for site-built single family
residential structures. Where required by Section 101.2,
the intersection of roof framing with the wall below shall be strengthened by
adding metal connectors, clips, straps, and fasteners such that the
performance level equals or exceeds the uplift capacities as specified in
Table 201.3. As an alternative to an
engineered design, the prescriptive retrofit solutions provided in Sections
201.3.1 through 201.3.4 shall be accepted as meeting the mandated roof-to-wall
retrofit requirements. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Where it can be demonstrated (by code
adoption date documentation and permit issuance date) that roof-to-wall
connections and/or roof-to-foundation continuous load path requirements were
required at the time of original construction. |
201.3 No change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.3.1 Access for Retrofitting Roof to
Wall Connections. These provisions are not intended to limit
the means for gaining access to the structural elements of the roof and wall
for the purposes of retrofitting the connection. The retrofit of roof to wall connections can be made by access
through the area under the eave, from above through the roof, or from the
interior of the house. Methods for
above access include removal of roof panels or sections thereof or removal of
portions of roof paneling at selected locations large enough for access,
viewing, and installing the retrofit connectors and fasteners. Where panels or
sections are removed, the removed portions shall not be reused. New paneling shall be used and fastened as
in new construction. |
201.3.1 No change to FRSA proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: 8/0, Chris, methods
for above access, concept Vote: 8/0 [As proposed] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.3.2 |
201.3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Tim, limit length of rafter to 8’, remove exposed, Chris,
method of access, they won’t be exposed, Tim, the anchorage within 6’ of the
corner of the house would be inspected, Richard, minimal 6’ from the corners,
Chris, do not limit to 6’, open selected locations for access inspection,
Richard, costs, not do the whole wall, limit to corners will keep costs down,
is a high load area, Billy, not have a minimum of 6’, Vote: 6/2 [Add: within
6 ft of the framing members as measured from the corner along the exterior
wall on each side of each gable end] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.3.3 |
201.3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
201.3.4 |
201.3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Billy, 15% needs to go under each paragraph, Tim, use IBHS language, hip roof is different, Richard, are manufactured 5 ways, Tim, see IBHS language, Chris, what is a hip girder? Vote: 6/2, [Use IBHS language] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
201.3.5 Priorities for mandated roof-to-wall retrofit expenditures. (a) Roof- to- wall connections
shall not be required unless evaluation and installation of connections at
gable ends or all corners can be completed for 15% of the cost of roof
replacement. (b) For houses with both
hip and gable roof ends, the priority shall be to retrofit the gable end
roof-to-wall connections unless the width of the hip end is more than 1.5
times greater than the width of the gable end. Priority shall be given to connecting the
corners of roofs to walls below where the spans of the roofing members are
greatest. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Jim’s language, inspection is related to roof to wall
connections Vote: 8/0, [unless evaluation and execution of roof to wall connections
identified with respect to gable ends as applicable, or each of the corners
of the structure can be completed for 15% of the cost of roof replacement or
less, work related to roof-to-wall connections shall not be required.] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||