Welcome to the club!
As you, I was shocked by the inexplainable policies of the City of
Irvine (and other jurisdictions). The simpliest structural
calculations show that the LFRS of the 20-year-old houses was neither
designed, nor built, to withstand the seismic loads from the heavier
roofs by the current (and even previous)versions of the UBC.
I was a vice-president of my HOA when ore-roofing had started. I was
able to convince the Board not to allow the roofs heavier than the
pre-existing wood shake. The decent alternatives are: a) wood
shakes; b)asphalt shingles; and c) metal tiles. The (b) option
appears to be the most justified from all points of view.
Having spent a lot of time assessing the damage from the 1992 and
1994 earthqaukes, am honestly puzzled by the re-roofing activity of
the HOAs in Irvine (e.g., in Woodbridge), as well as by the PEs and
SEs in the Irvine City Hall. Haven't they heard about the recently
discovered next-door fault?
As far as the insurance companies are concerned, they care less about
the earthquakes than about fires. Hence, heavier but non-combustable
roofs are more desired. Besides, after Northridge, we DO NOT have
earthquake insurance; the one offered is a joke.
Finally, the seismic load on heavier roofs is not the worst thing.
The weight of the tiles (particularly, flat ones) causes creep-
related distortion of the light roof framing. Just look at the 2-3-
year-old roofs - all of them are wavy. So much for the
desired "decent" looks of the tile-roofed house...
Vyacheslav "Steve" Gordin, S.E., Irvine
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com