• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Poor roof design, but no violation to prevent it?

M

MikeC

REGISTERED
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
240
Location
NW Pennsylvania
These plans were dropped off to me last week. The area that this house will be built is know for ice build up along eaves. The pictures explain my concern. While I don't like this design and foresee problems in the future, I cannot find a code section which this design violates. I have recommended changing the gable dormers to shed dormers, but the owner says "no". They are concerned about what that will do to the aesthetics of the house. The builder has also discussed this with them. His answer is extra flashing and ice / water guard.Is there a violation here that I am missing?

View attachment 1856

View attachment 1857

View attachment 1856

View attachment 1857

/monthly_2013_07/Resampled_2013-07-09_22-33-27_508.jpg.1dd1d6500b576bb93a9ff1dd70a95367.jpg

/monthly_2013_07/Resampled_2013-07-09_22-33-57_265.jpg.db0e28eae7d8f5cf1679a680d85c35dd.jpg
 
I have personally inspected 2 houses with the same/similar setup that has sever structural damage from rot within 5 years. Still searching for a code section to help you ore than the one I provided.
 
Did an architect draw that?

If so, you should forward it to your state architects board as a complaint of negligence.

If it was not draw by an architect, you should inform the applicant they are getting what they paid for.

I would Absolutely not approve that design.
 
Did an architect draw that?

If so, you should forward it to your state architects board as a complaint of negligence.

If it was not drawn by an architect, you should inform the applicant they are getting what they paid for.

I would Absolutely not approve that design.
 
It's not your job to design it, and it's not your job to waterproof it.

You don't like the design, too bad. Don't hunt for a Code section to suit your taste.

There's no reason a competent builder couldn't flash that properly even if it means I&W shield, copper flashing or EPDM.

mj
 
mjesse,

Water and ice will be diverted to the side of the house with this design. Over time this will create a problem that can be avoided with some design changes. I am doing my job and protecting future owners of the home.

This house is going to be built under contract from the City's Office of Economic and Community Development and then put on the market for sale. I met with their construction guy yesterday about this issue. I think I am going to meet with him again. The number 1 question will be "If this was your house.........". If that doesn't work, I may shoot for R903.4 idea. Let them appeal it. This design is a problem and their band-aide approach to the problem isn't going to solve it.

BTW, the plans aren't from a local designer. They were out-sourced to a building design firm in Portland, OR to save money. There is not a state registered/licensed profession stamp anywhere on the plans. That gives me alot more leeway to push my issues.
 
MikeC said:
This house is going to be built under contract from the City's Office of Economic and Community Development and then put on the market for sale. ....That gives me alot more leeway to push my issues.
Click to expand...
Well that's a whole 'nother story!

Push away - Bad design

mj
 
903 - Where is the parapet/flat roof?

It's not really our job to reject a design just because we think it won't work; we should be looking at it from the Code prospective only
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No mention of a parapet or a flat roof in R903.4.

R903.4 Roof drainage. Unless roofs are sloped to drain over roof edges, roof drains shall be installed at each low point of the roof. Where required for roof drainage, scuppers shall be placed level with the roof surface in a wall or parapet. The scupper shall be located as determined by the roof slope and contributing roof area.
Click to expand...
It is my opnion that the section in question is not sloped to drain over the edge, but instead, sloped to drain into an exterior wall where there will be seams in the siding. The water will then be diverted to run down the wall onto another roof / wall seam. To add to the issue, not that it really matters, this is a party wall.

Regardless, I asked the question of the professionals in this case - the contratcor who is doing the building and the Construction Manager for OECD - if you were building this for you, would you allow this? Both answered "no". The contractor did manage to come up with a fix that we all feel good about, will add less than $100 to the cost of the project, and will retain the asthetics of the building. Win win for all.
 
I think you are over reading the Code, MikeC. It's a bad design, true; I'm not sure it's a code issue as much as poor practice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top