proposed wit mit form

[Brian C. Hoagland]

What is up with the wording of question # 5 on the proposed wind mit form changes? The B answer for flat roof would seem only to apply to multiple >5 unit dwellings and even then the 10% rule would seem to have been reversed to 90%. The calculation on other residences would eliminate the flat roof option leaving the answer as other. The calculation would now be done only on perimeter measurements of the "main roof system" what is a main roof system". If you should decide to measure the perimeter of the "main roof" would that perimeter include the portion of the main roof adjacent to the area that is not the "main roof? OR does the 'main roof system refer to all types of roofing configurations?

Once again the form is open to interpretation. I know how I interpret it but it would be nice if someone would define some of the terms being used. To me it is misleading as the term "main" would seem to imply the type which covers the greatest area. Also under the new form an 80 sq ft flat roof combined with a 10' gable would render most 2500 sq ft homes as other. Formerly the other catagory would seem to have not included flat roofing in the calculation

This new form will once again change the credit, not due to prior inaccurracy or improper inspection work but due to the changes in the form. Round 3. Still don't know if total roof area should be calculated using the pitch or sq. area under roof. I'm O.K. with that though because nobody else knows either.

[Michael J. Meeker]

The constant changing of things is why no one will ever be held accountable for the crap they do.

The OIR is the one who should write a course on exactly what they want and that will never happen. Everyone else's courses are just opinions and we all know what opinions are like.

[Brian C. Hoagland]

Originally Posted by mmeeker

The constant changing of things is why no one will ever be held accountable for the crap they do.

The OIR is the one who should write a course on exactly what they want and that will never happen. Everyone else's courses are just opinions and we all know what opinions are like.

Hey Mike let's play nice here what would your definition of a "main roof system" be? And don't be telling me it is one on a home in Maine. I already thought of that... let's call Marcel.

[John Shishilla]

Brian some of us local guys are goingnto get together next week about the form. if you want in let me know.

[Michael J. Meeker]

Originally Posted by bhoagland

Hey Mike let's play nice here what would your definition of a "main roof system" be? And don't be telling me it is one on a home in Maine. I already thought of that... let's call Marcel.

a simple rectangle house with a gable roof and a flat roof patio. I would call the roof that is the majority of the structure the main roof. In that case the gable. But who knows without a real defination.

[Nick Hernandez]

Originally Posted by bhoagland

What is up with the wording of question # 5 on the proposed wind mit form changes? The B answer for flat roof would seem only to apply to multiple >5 unit dwellings and even then the 10% rule would seem to have been reversed to 90%. The calculation on other residences would eliminate the flat roof option leaving the answer as other. The calculation would now be done only on perimeter measurements of the "main roof system" what is a main roof system". If you should decide to measure the perimeter of the "main roof" would that perimeter include the portion of the main roof adjacent to the area that is not the "main roof? OR does the 'main roof system refer to all types of roofing configurations?

Once again the form is open to interpretation. I know how I interpret it but it would be nice if someone would define some of the terms being used. To me it is misleading as the term "main" would seem to imply the type which covers the greatest area. Also under the new form an 80 sq ft flat roof combined with a 10' gable would render most 2500 sq ft homes as other. Formerly the other catagory would seem to have not included flat roofing in the calculation

This new form will once again change the credit, not due to prior inaccurracy or improper inspection work but due to the changes in the form. Round 3. Still don't know if total roof area should be calculated using the pitch or sq. area under roof. I'm O.K. with that though because nobody else knows either.

Lawyers need work, too. The inspectors doing the mits should carry their E & O insurance for the mits. Special rates $1300 yrly. So let's look from outside the box, lawyers get work, insurance companies get work, inspectors get work, clericals get work, the shutter wizards get work, etc...
Who would get work if the form was simple, made sense and used construction terminology (eg. clips, single wraps, SWR, instead of straps, Secondary Water Barrier- FBC 2007 Existing Buildings, Alterations
Reroofing 611.7.2) We might even see prices at $20 per inspection. So be happy it's screwed up.

[Brian C. Hoagland]

Originally Posted by nhernandez1

Lawyers need work, too. The inspectors doing the mits should carry their E & O insurance for the mits. Special rates $1300 yrly. So let's look from outside the box, lawyers get work, insurance companies get work, inspectors get work, clericals get work, the shutter wizards get work, etc...
Who would get work if the form was simple, made sense and used construction terminology (eg. clips, single wraps, SWR, instead of straps, Secondary Water Barrier- FBC 2007 Existing Buildings, Alterations
Reroofing 611.7.2) We might even see prices at $20 per inspection. So be happy it's screwed up.

Not my way of looking at things but you are entitled to believe in chaos theory if it suits you. Seems to run every aspect of the universe anyway. Jesus loves me . This I know. Because the bible tells me so.

I want a wind mit bible. I want god to write it. If He is not available I'll do it myself but I want god status when I'm done for myself and all and any who are willing to collaborate(only with respect to the bible for wind mits) no lawsuits possible.

[Michael J. Meeker]

Originally Posted by bhoagland

I want a wind mit bible. I want god to write it. If He is not available I'll do it myself but I want god status when I'm done for myself and all and any who are willing to collaborate(only with respect to the bible for wind mits) no lawsuits possible.

The OIR would seem to be the logical choice seeing that they design the damn form. I know that they will NEVER step up so I agree and give you my blessing to create it.

There should be only one."wind mit bible" Just like highlander.

[Brian C. Hoagland]

Originally Posted by mmeeker

The OIR would seem to be the logical choice seeing that they design the damn form. I know that they will NEVER step up so I agree and give you my blessing to create it.

There should be only one."wind mit bible" Just like highlander.

OIR is not the logical choice, no offense to the people working there but when it comes to inspections, construction, code compliance and enginneering the only licensed authorities capable and experienced are... dare I say it HOME INSPECTORS.

I know we aren't code inspectors, or are we? OIR ought to be telling the insurance companies what the discounts should be dependent upon the CODE COMPLIANCE CRITERIA for the location. Allowing the insurers to demand compliance with Miami-Dade/ Broward for maximum discounts in areas outside of the HVHZ is a fault of the system in place. Who are we kidding, the entire form is about enginneering and code compliance. It is becoming even moreso with this new generation/abomination. Eventually we will be filling out a 50 page form that is even more obtuse, I think it's like the financial instuments designed to insure mortgages. If no one can understand it they won't be able to question the veracity.

[Michael J. Meeker]

The wind mit does not have much to do with code compliance. It is just reporting the facts. Some things are above and beyond code.

[John Shishilla]

We will be getting together to discuss the new wind mit form next week. A group of us Brevard guys will be gathering before the meeting in Tallahassee to discuss the new form if you would like to attend. It should be a rather small group. We will meet at Pizza Uno in Viera next Wednesday 5pm. If you are interested please let me know.

[John Shishilla]

Originally Posted by jshishilla

We will be getting together to discuss the new wind mit form next week. A group of us Brevard guys will be gathering before the meeting in Tallahassee to discuss the new form if you would like to attend. It should be a rather small group. We will meet at Pizza Uno in Viera next Wednesday 5pm. If you are interested please let me know.

Bump


This Wednesday! If anyone else has a comments please forward it.


john@honorconstruction.com
321-626-8153

[Michael J. Meeker]

if I remember correct I think they want roof permit Numbers.

If this is true have any of you ever gotten the info off of the inter net and seen numbers like roof 000-000-00. That is not an exact example but I know I have seen at least 2 instances where the permit number was not on the permit inspection report and numbers similar to what I just posted was there. They were legit and the rest of the info was correct. What will we do then. Or should I say what will the customer do then.

[Eric C. Van De Ven]

Originally Posted by mmeeker

if I remember correct I think they want roof permit Numbers.

If this is true have any of you ever gotten the info off of the inter net and seen numbers like roof 000-000-00. That is not an exact example but I know I have seen at least 2 instances where the permit number was not on the permit inspection report and numbers similar to what I just posted was there. They were legit and the rest of the info was correct. What will we do then. Or should I say what will the customer do then.

If they have the permit or invoice, I take a picture of it and include it in the report.

[Michael J. Meeker]

here is what I was talking about. note the permit info:

Inspection Type Detail

Inspections for Permit Number:

000 000 BRF 00 - BUILDING PERMIT

Inspection type/sequence:

BLDG, ROOF FINAL/0004

Inspector assigned:

LION, DON E.

Schedule Date:

05/12/99

Results Date:

05/13/99

Results Status:

APPROVED