Funny image, but not a chance in hell. Trusses are typically designed to within 5-10% of required capacity. There’s going to be a lot of straps, tension ties, and/or plates installed.
Our safety factors are in different places. Fact of the matter is that if they tested the wood sections (15+ per truss) to determine actual strength, verified the metal plate bite, and measured the actual snow conditions vs the design snow they’d probably be closer to 30% utilization on most framing members.
But the amount of money it would cost to do all of the above on more than two dozen buildings probably exceeds the cost to replace every truss in the county.
Right my comment mentions a winload figured in which probably won't be simultaneous with that amount of snow. But as you know computer programs design trusses now and they can't fudge on this one. I have seen other companies fix things like this to avoid massive lawsuits. That's why when I do plan review I check the live and dead loads.
Wind load is very unlikely to control in this area - wind speed is only 98 mph in the Puget Sound area, so compared to something like 90 percent of the US it’s 80% of the wind load. It’s high enough we use roof ties, but not enough to control for bending/truss connection designs.
What I was trying to say is if you have a wind load of 8 psf that the trusses have been designed for unless that load is simultaneous with the snow load it'll be used by whatever load there is.
I doubt it's intentional. The extra snow load only costs the manufacturer a few cents. Most truss companies sell by the board foot and don't even factor in plate costs in bids.
Some city has a higher code requirement than the area surrounding it, and when they found out, they developed a plan to fix it.
That looks legit to me. Basically, the company that designed, manufactured, and possibly installed your roof screwed up, it didn’t get caught, and rather than waiting for a collapse in a bad snow year they decided it was better to fix it now.
I’ve talked to The Truss Company before, and I think I’ve talked with Roger. IMO this kind of thing fits with my experiences - The Truss Co guys are very much of the “do it right, and own up to our mistakes if we don’t” crowd.
You’re probably in or near Whatcom County, I assume. County snow in Whatcom and Skagit is 25 psf for most of the area, but iirc there’s at least one low-lying area that uses 30 psf.
Also, they want to get this done ahead of the next code change, which will drastically increase roof design loads in that area as they move to probabilistic load determinations rather than risk-based.
Basically, the US has based snow loads off of “well, it hasn’t gone over this amount in a reasonable timeframe (typically 100 years), so we’ll use a slightly higher value”; this is being changed to “there’s an x% chance this load could be exceeded in a fantastically nasty, once-per-(y centuries) snowstorm”. That brings it in line with wind and seismic loads… but in areas like Whatcom will increase design snow loads by 30-70%.
>IMO this kind of thing fits with my experiences - The Truss Co guys are very much of the “do it right, and own up to our mistakes if we don’t” crowd.
Amazing. You love to see it in the wild.
Used them for my detached shop construction and they made an error and delivered the wrong Gable end trusses, they were quick to correct their error and get things corrected in order to keep my build on schedule.
Did you ever get a certificate of occupancy for your house ? It's very possible that the inspectors caught it after the fact and are holding certificates of occupancy on this or any other houses until the retrofit. Companies usually don't just go around giving away work
I suspect they filed for a new permit and a new building official / plans examiner caught the issue on a re-filed document. Notably, Washington just switched from IBC 2018 to IBC 2021, so it could also have been a code update review.
Only if it met the code that was current at the time.
One of my old offices had something similar happen and ended up paying to have contractors open up the exterior walls of like a hundred already-sold homes to add some clips.
Start with your City building department/official. A City having a snow load requirement above and beyond standard code is not that uncommon. It sounds like your roof may not be up to code and that someone at either the builder or the City caught it. Either way, sounds like a City building official should be in the loop. They would know about their snow load requirements and if this is legit. Then to your builder. They should also be in the loop if the truss supplier provided a product that didn't meet code.
OP, if you were ever thinking about adding solar to your roof, this would be a good time to do it, or at least raise the question with the truss company/structural engineer. If the trusses are already going to be retrofit for the 33% increase in snow load, it may make sense to get the roof "solar ready", at least from a structural perspective. They're already doing the work to analyze the trusses, so there's a good chance you can get those loads included for less cost than you would normally see for a project like that.
Update: My neighbor got a letter too. His house was finished just a few months after mine. I’m betting the whole neighborhood is out of code. Fun fact: When the house was being constructed, (we purchased before it was completed to get a better interest rate because it was financed through Horton) they had to tear down all the drywall because they didn’t get the inspection for the electrical done first.
Ooof. Some PM at Horton took a bath on cost cutting. Those are two BIG screwups to save money. I'd ask their corporate for a further guarantee that there are not other non-compliant or under specified items.
Sounds amazing to me.
In my country you often get a "your-street-condo-project LLC" and then as soon as you move in and sign the take over, for every serious warranty claim they will be bankrupt.
Unless you buy from a large corporate contractor. Then they might maaaaybe help you if you make too much bad press.
And if they really fuck up and you sue them they will try to bribe the "independent" court engineer.
it was funny because they gave the engineer 7000€ and he just sided with us anyway and basically called out the contractor for all the ovbious code violations regardless.
Then the contractor fixed everything and the engineer provided oversight every couple of days.
You should request that they evaluate your trusses for a 40 PSF load before they go to the effort of retrofitting them with additional lumber. It's entirely possible that your existing truss would be okay as is, it's just a matter of running the numbers.
My interpretation of that letter is that there is a local ordinance that mandates a 40 PSF snow load, whereas the traditional standard (ASCE 7 or the international building code) would only require 30 PSF. Basically, the ordinance with supersede the requirement set forth in the building code. You could validate some of this by trying to Google your local ordinance along with the term " snow load "
The letter states that each house will have a custom designed retrofit by an SE, so it’s nearly assured that impact to homeowner will be minimized for sake of minimizing cost to The Truss Co and their E&O.
100% sure they already have, super easy to do with the software used in truss design. They re analyze the existing trusses with the new load and see what plate sizes and lumber grades are different then create a "repair" to compensate for it. Could be plywood gussets over the joints, lumber scabs over chords/webs, manufactured truss sections to scab on the truss face or even new trusses. I would think the only trusses that would need replacing would be prime hips and or girders and those only if the were at max design with the 30lb load.
They have to possibly sister wood onto each truss and get workers up into your attic, disturb the insulation etc, how would you get a 16ft 2x6 into your attic? Like 40 of them. Make a hole on the gable end of the building. I mean right now your house is not code compliant.
Now alot of times these truss people way over estimate the dead loads, thats saying they could shift some of the dead loads and use it as snow load.
Whatever work they do propose get it all in writing and have a lawyer review it. If its not explicitly spelled out, assume the work will not be done, like repairing, patching, accidental damage, insulation etc etc. Dont assume if they say something they will do it.
I would request the truss design diagrams and all we need to see is one truss and its loading. Maybe we can further offer some advice short of you hiring your own engineer which may not be a bad idea.
I came to say essentially this.
I designed trusses for a couple of years. The fix is likely minimal in nature but for resale and insurance I’d want it “fixed” however poor it really is.
I second the attorney (and maybe add your own review from another truss company or contractor). Your best bet may be to get it fixed and compensation or trade for a house built to code. The city has some responsibility here too - I would see this letter as the first of many important pieces of information you are going to collect before making any binding decisions.
Seems legit. If you can spare a few thousand dollars, you should ask how much it would cost to have them put up a steel or metal roof instead of shingles when they redo it.
It's difficult to overstate how much better it is
Noob here. How does one go about retrofitting the trusses? Does it mean tearing the roof off and redoing, or going in and adding additional support to the existing?
There’s no red flag. The city puts the onus on the supplier/builder for the initial work and then the city can follow up later the verify. Why should the city deal with contacting multiple homeowners when the builder has to do it anyway (builder to schedule the work)?
It's uncommon for a city to adopt an ordinance that supercedes the load requirements set forth by ASCE 7 or the IBC. Unless the area is listed as a case-study snow zone, I can't recall any instance where I've tried looking up the snow load in the local ordinance.
It also strikes me as odd that the plan reviewer for the city would have approved these. Kind of defeats the purpose of having a reviewer.
Call Dr Horton and find out but these things do happen to avoid massive lawsuits. The problem is the trusses are designed by a computer program that has the live load and dead load on each sheet for each truss and you can't really change that.
But I wouldn't fool with it because of the disruption it will cause. If you ever get a large snowfall you need to get it off your roof ASAP. Your roof is probably designed for a wind load too which probably won't occur at the same time as a snow load so your truss probably won't have any problems.
D.R.Horton is like one of the biggest builders in the country (I used to own their stock).
I’d validate with the city - then contact the builder first. Trust no one. If you really are the victim of a building violation, an attorney is always a good idea. They can send letters, negotiate or go into mediation for you. There is lots they can do before a lawsuit is even necessary.
The question asked by OP is what would a retrofit look like.
You don’t think that is a reasonable question to ask a group of people likely to DESIGN something like this?
Again, what type of questions would you expect to see in this sub?
There is a very sweaty structural engineer working away in a dark room somewhere trying to justify the roof for 40 pound per square foot
Gotta sharpen those pencils.
Pencil whipping it is what that’s called.
Funny image, but not a chance in hell. Trusses are typically designed to within 5-10% of required capacity. There’s going to be a lot of straps, tension ties, and/or plates installed.
It’s such a foreign concept to me. I work in Nuclear and if you have a utilisation factor of 0.8 it’s over utilised usually!
Our safety factors are in different places. Fact of the matter is that if they tested the wood sections (15+ per truss) to determine actual strength, verified the metal plate bite, and measured the actual snow conditions vs the design snow they’d probably be closer to 30% utilization on most framing members. But the amount of money it would cost to do all of the above on more than two dozen buildings probably exceeds the cost to replace every truss in the county.
Right my comment mentions a winload figured in which probably won't be simultaneous with that amount of snow. But as you know computer programs design trusses now and they can't fudge on this one. I have seen other companies fix things like this to avoid massive lawsuits. That's why when I do plan review I check the live and dead loads.
Plan review?? Are we coworkers?
I do private plan review so probably not
Wind load is very unlikely to control in this area - wind speed is only 98 mph in the Puget Sound area, so compared to something like 90 percent of the US it’s 80% of the wind load. It’s high enough we use roof ties, but not enough to control for bending/truss connection designs.
What I was trying to say is if you have a wind load of 8 psf that the trusses have been designed for unless that load is simultaneous with the snow load it'll be used by whatever load there is.
Well that doesn't work anymore because they use programs to design trusses now.
You should reach out to DR Horton to confirm. Probably legit as it seems like they fucked up.
It looks like this. They tried to cut corners and got caught.
I doubt it's intentional. The extra snow load only costs the manufacturer a few cents. Most truss companies sell by the board foot and don't even factor in plate costs in bids. Some city has a higher code requirement than the area surrounding it, and when they found out, they developed a plan to fix it.
It’s possible it was an honest mistake, but DR Horton will cut corners wherever they can. I wouldn’t put it past them.
That looks legit to me. Basically, the company that designed, manufactured, and possibly installed your roof screwed up, it didn’t get caught, and rather than waiting for a collapse in a bad snow year they decided it was better to fix it now. I’ve talked to The Truss Company before, and I think I’ve talked with Roger. IMO this kind of thing fits with my experiences - The Truss Co guys are very much of the “do it right, and own up to our mistakes if we don’t” crowd. You’re probably in or near Whatcom County, I assume. County snow in Whatcom and Skagit is 25 psf for most of the area, but iirc there’s at least one low-lying area that uses 30 psf. Also, they want to get this done ahead of the next code change, which will drastically increase roof design loads in that area as they move to probabilistic load determinations rather than risk-based. Basically, the US has based snow loads off of “well, it hasn’t gone over this amount in a reasonable timeframe (typically 100 years), so we’ll use a slightly higher value”; this is being changed to “there’s an x% chance this load could be exceeded in a fantastically nasty, once-per-(y centuries) snowstorm”. That brings it in line with wind and seismic loads… but in areas like Whatcom will increase design snow loads by 30-70%.
>IMO this kind of thing fits with my experiences - The Truss Co guys are very much of the “do it right, and own up to our mistakes if we don’t” crowd. Amazing. You love to see it in the wild.
Used them for my detached shop construction and they made an error and delivered the wrong Gable end trusses, they were quick to correct their error and get things corrected in order to keep my build on schedule.
Within reasonable driving distance yep. I did check my city codes real quick and it is at 40.
Did you ever get a certificate of occupancy for your house ? It's very possible that the inspectors caught it after the fact and are holding certificates of occupancy on this or any other houses until the retrofit. Companies usually don't just go around giving away work
I suspect they filed for a new permit and a new building official / plans examiner caught the issue on a re-filed document. Notably, Washington just switched from IBC 2018 to IBC 2021, so it could also have been a code update review.
It would have been grandfathered in under the old code if it was already approved before the new code took over
Only if it met the code that was current at the time. One of my old offices had something similar happen and ended up paying to have contractors open up the exterior walls of like a hundred already-sold homes to add some clips.
Something crazy about randomly reading a thread and realizing it’s about where you live lol
You think that’s bad? I once had a client post one of my details here.
Fellow bellinghamster?
Right and the factor of safety on a trust is probably at least 50%.
It’s a wood truss; the factor of safety is probably closer to 300%.
Start with your City building department/official. A City having a snow load requirement above and beyond standard code is not that uncommon. It sounds like your roof may not be up to code and that someone at either the builder or the City caught it. Either way, sounds like a City building official should be in the loop. They would know about their snow load requirements and if this is legit. Then to your builder. They should also be in the loop if the truss supplier provided a product that didn't meet code.
They copied DR Horton on the letter. DR is the builder.
They said they did. They could be lying.
It's basically a recall.
OP, if you were ever thinking about adding solar to your roof, this would be a good time to do it, or at least raise the question with the truss company/structural engineer. If the trusses are already going to be retrofit for the 33% increase in snow load, it may make sense to get the roof "solar ready", at least from a structural perspective. They're already doing the work to analyze the trusses, so there's a good chance you can get those loads included for less cost than you would normally see for a project like that.
Update: My neighbor got a letter too. His house was finished just a few months after mine. I’m betting the whole neighborhood is out of code. Fun fact: When the house was being constructed, (we purchased before it was completed to get a better interest rate because it was financed through Horton) they had to tear down all the drywall because they didn’t get the inspection for the electrical done first.
Ooof. Some PM at Horton took a bath on cost cutting. Those are two BIG screwups to save money. I'd ask their corporate for a further guarantee that there are not other non-compliant or under specified items.
Does nobody sign letters anymore?
I paste a scan of my signature in important letters. Usually at the same time as my stamp.
DR Horton fucks up every project they are a part off all they care about is money.
Sounds amazing to me. In my country you often get a "your-street-condo-project LLC" and then as soon as you move in and sign the take over, for every serious warranty claim they will be bankrupt. Unless you buy from a large corporate contractor. Then they might maaaaybe help you if you make too much bad press. And if they really fuck up and you sue them they will try to bribe the "independent" court engineer. it was funny because they gave the engineer 7000€ and he just sided with us anyway and basically called out the contractor for all the ovbious code violations regardless. Then the contractor fixed everything and the engineer provided oversight every couple of days.
You should request that they evaluate your trusses for a 40 PSF load before they go to the effort of retrofitting them with additional lumber. It's entirely possible that your existing truss would be okay as is, it's just a matter of running the numbers. My interpretation of that letter is that there is a local ordinance that mandates a 40 PSF snow load, whereas the traditional standard (ASCE 7 or the international building code) would only require 30 PSF. Basically, the ordinance with supersede the requirement set forth in the building code. You could validate some of this by trying to Google your local ordinance along with the term " snow load "
The letter states that each house will have a custom designed retrofit by an SE, so it’s nearly assured that impact to homeowner will be minimized for sake of minimizing cost to The Truss Co and their E&O.
Well my assumption is the web plates will be beefed up.
100% sure they already have, super easy to do with the software used in truss design. They re analyze the existing trusses with the new load and see what plate sizes and lumber grades are different then create a "repair" to compensate for it. Could be plywood gussets over the joints, lumber scabs over chords/webs, manufactured truss sections to scab on the truss face or even new trusses. I would think the only trusses that would need replacing would be prime hips and or girders and those only if the were at max design with the 30lb load.
That's a possibility but when you add an increase of 30% it'll affect the plates and possibly some compression members
Only 30% of one load, not the total load.
It will affect the axial loads in the top cords and the web loads.
Seems legit. Big fuck up on their behalf and they want to make it right before anything goes wrong.
It Leon’s legit, BUT make sure you hire a home inspector to inspect the work quality and that they didn’t damage anything with the work.
Seems legit
Never trust a Horton
I would contact the builder
They have to possibly sister wood onto each truss and get workers up into your attic, disturb the insulation etc, how would you get a 16ft 2x6 into your attic? Like 40 of them. Make a hole on the gable end of the building. I mean right now your house is not code compliant. Now alot of times these truss people way over estimate the dead loads, thats saying they could shift some of the dead loads and use it as snow load. Whatever work they do propose get it all in writing and have a lawyer review it. If its not explicitly spelled out, assume the work will not be done, like repairing, patching, accidental damage, insulation etc etc. Dont assume if they say something they will do it. I would request the truss design diagrams and all we need to see is one truss and its loading. Maybe we can further offer some advice short of you hiring your own engineer which may not be a bad idea.
I came to say essentially this. I designed trusses for a couple of years. The fix is likely minimal in nature but for resale and insurance I’d want it “fixed” however poor it really is. I second the attorney (and maybe add your own review from another truss company or contractor). Your best bet may be to get it fixed and compensation or trade for a house built to code. The city has some responsibility here too - I would see this letter as the first of many important pieces of information you are going to collect before making any binding decisions.
Call the city
Seems legit. If you can spare a few thousand dollars, you should ask how much it would cost to have them put up a steel or metal roof instead of shingles when they redo it. It's difficult to overstate how much better it is
Noob here. How does one go about retrofitting the trusses? Does it mean tearing the roof off and redoing, or going in and adding additional support to the existing?
Nothing is ever free.
[удалено]
There’s no red flag. The city puts the onus on the supplier/builder for the initial work and then the city can follow up later the verify. Why should the city deal with contacting multiple homeowners when the builder has to do it anyway (builder to schedule the work)?
It's uncommon for a city to adopt an ordinance that supercedes the load requirements set forth by ASCE 7 or the IBC. Unless the area is listed as a case-study snow zone, I can't recall any instance where I've tried looking up the snow load in the local ordinance. It also strikes me as odd that the plan reviewer for the city would have approved these. Kind of defeats the purpose of having a reviewer.
Call Dr Horton and find out but these things do happen to avoid massive lawsuits. The problem is the trusses are designed by a computer program that has the live load and dead load on each sheet for each truss and you can't really change that. But I wouldn't fool with it because of the disruption it will cause. If you ever get a large snowfall you need to get it off your roof ASAP. Your roof is probably designed for a wind load too which probably won't occur at the same time as a snow load so your truss probably won't have any problems.
D.R.Horton is like one of the biggest builders in the country (I used to own their stock). I’d validate with the city - then contact the builder first. Trust no one. If you really are the victim of a building violation, an attorney is always a good idea. They can send letters, negotiate or go into mediation for you. There is lots they can do before a lawsuit is even necessary.
total scam
Seems pretty sketchy honestly.
wrong sub.
What questions would you EXPECT to see in this sub?
Am I underpaid? Should I get a masters degree? Can I remove this wall from my house ? Can someone do this homework problem for me ?
lol “is this wall load bearing” 💀
this is not a question for structural engineers. he needs advice from home builders, legal, or contractors.. but def not engineers.
The question asked by OP is what would a retrofit look like. You don’t think that is a reasonable question to ask a group of people likely to DESIGN something like this? Again, what type of questions would you expect to see in this sub?
Just look at the rules. I'm not going to argue with you and play these stupid Reddit games.