I have a hip roof but it has 4 little dutch hip type 8 foot gables. On the old form it would pass as a hip as all are less than 50% of the wall and they’re not to be added together. On this form I’m not sure if I’m to add them together which would be 32 linear feet and the perimeter is 240 feet which would be more then 10%. Can I get an opinion if they’re to be added. Thanks. Bill
You have to add them all together as far as I am concerned.
Non hip. You have to add all roof lines.
They really are reducing the discounts on every angle. Thnak-you again Mike and John
Hip roof with no other roof shape greater than 10 % of total building perimeter.
Those Dutch gables are Gables. It does not matter if the gable originates from a roof or wall.
Determine the the perimeter of total building and the base of each gable, then apply the 10% rule.
If the gables are frame, are you adding that to the Wall Construction percentages?
I did exactly that. However talking to new Allstate agent yesterday, he said his underwriters are going to qualify it as a hip. He said they do not count them into the equation unless they are continuous from the wall. I did consider them part of the roof system and not part of the wall calculations. Would you consider them as up to code as far as gable end bracing as the code doesn’t require bracing if they’re 3 feet ?Thanks.
One other question. My policy has been if there is no rebar at window or door openings but is at corners it is un-reinforced. Is that the consensus?
For me to classify as reinforced I need to find re-bar in 3 distinctly unique locations (above windows, alongside windows and doors, and in corners). I would consider yours un-reinforced.
With the form specifying only reinforced masonry and unreinforced masonry, it leaves much to the inspectors discretion.
I look for poured cap block/ tie beam as a reinforced masonry.
The form does not place limitation to steel in the columns, window headers, door jams, etc. The form does not make any requirement to the size of the steel or the number of bars, etc.
Unreinforced masonry certainly applies to brick construction or the cbs block construction where the top layer of block is not poured solid with steel.
The former MySafeFlorida guys may have a different take on this.
Simply put, I need to see a** ‘continous reinforced tie beam’**. A term used through out the Building Code.
My training came from a continuing education class over a year ago from the CILB in which their method was unless there is poured reinforcement at all openings it should be considered un-reinforced. Most I run into have reinforced corners and tie beams. I think they started reinforceing the openings in the 90’s.
Counting three corners(MSFH) and tie beam and you should be fine.
Concrete block homes from the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s mainly had 8"x 16" tie beam with 4 #5 horz. bars – or two course beam block with 1 #5 bar in ea course. Many vertical cells were poured solid on sides of doors and windows, but were not reinforced with steel. This was mainly done for door and window buck fastening to prevent the hollow block from failing when using cut nails. Vertical steel reinf. during these years was usually placed in corners and about every 12’ - 16’ o.c. (or more) – better built homes would have vertical reinf. on at least one side of an opening - especially sliding glass door openings, french doors and single exterior doors (hinge side), but often i have found that this steel did not terminate into the slab or tie beam as current ACI code would spell out. Late 80’s and ninety’s the spacing between vertical reinf. shortened to around 8’ o.c. The same tie beam reguirements applied as in previous years. In 2001-02 the vertical stl. reinf. again changed - this time by code to 4’ o.c. and every side of every opening, with corners receiving 3 filled cells (1 #5/cell). Overhead garage doors would normally have a minimum of 2 reinforced filled cells on each side of the overhead garage door (not including additional reinforcing in corners of block wall). I could be more specific if needed, but that is generally what you will find. Its pretty obvious that a home built in the 80’s that would be considered reinforced in its time, would not be considered reinforced by todays standard. So what does Citizens want??? Who knows. Their main concern should be filled cells on both sides of every opening, since that is what is needed to adequately secure door and window frames. But technically, a house built in the 80’s with a tie beam, corner reinforcement and a few intermitent filled cells is “reinforced”
I still can’t answer the original question – sorry
Thanks for all the imput. I agree that if the corners and tie beams are reinforced. The building is structurally reinforced. As Dennis pointed out, the window and door attachment requirement is for 2 and a half in. tapcons and that is the reason for opening poured reinforcment. As hollow cells would not create the neccessary support. I’m not sure that they give a great deal of discount difference between the 2 choices.