Wind Mitigation

Masonry building with detached garage. Singles wraps at main house but clips at front and rear porch and wood frame detached garage. Gable roof on both buildings. Weakest roof to wall connection is clips right? I want to make sure our client gets the right category. Any help out there would be appreciated. I have photos of single wraps and clips both of which appear to proper. Do we check clips? Interior walls on main building are masonry as well so the porches do extend out from the main house walls.


Sounds like clips to me

The weakest link is what they ask for so clips sounds right.

clips assuming front and back porch are attached to the main house.
Why are you worried about a detached garage?

I know the carrier wants clip but the house is single strap. a strap makes little difference on an open roof configuration such as a porch. the upload is at the house roof to wall connection which is strapped. there is little upload on an open porch as it is more horizontal than vertical. I would give credit for single strap.

It is not up to us to give any credits, but only report what it there. it is up to the underwriter to decide which credits to issue.

That is not necesarily true the tie downs can be at the wall or the porch header or both.

That is true, John and there are probably other truss configurations as well. My point is, a porch header is just that and it may or may not have any relationship to the uplift of the roof of the home. One big problem with the 1802 is the lack of consideration of the design windload. I’m certainly not an architect but I routinely see clips on porches and garages and double strapping on the main house and the truss systems are independent. This is very common on new construction and they do not need a wind mitigation inspection - so, if they did, it would be rated clip? Try explaining this to a HO.

My point is you do not know without a proper explanation or visiting the property. Technically, if you are counting the porch/patio roof and it has clips then the weakest connection on the patio is the weakest per the 1802 form.

We are not debating construction techniques or building principles, we are filling out an insurance inspection form. Many houses do not fit the mold(form) but many of those decisions can not be made by a Home Inspector or a Claims Adjuster. Many contractors should not be making that call either, technically it can be a call for a structural engineer depending on several factors including spans on the patio.

It is what it is, as defined by the 1802. Which may differ from what it is in the real world.


My observation is that too many inspectors in the past with good intentions were trying to give the discount when that is not our mission. Specifically, the form spells out certain guidelines and based on the information obtained by the inspector, the underwriter (regrettable but the nature of the beast) makes the final determination. If an inspector finds a clip and strap on the same structure in an applicable area and knowingly chooses strap so the home owner gets the discount (when the weakest connection is a clip) that inspector has committed fraud per the form (in the area inspector signs). The form is what it is per the Office of Insurance Regulation in Florida.

I don’t disagree with anyone - the form is the form. Just saying, it ain’t exactly right.

John, you don’t need a structural engineer to determine windloads. Florida also recognizes a certified residential windload designer.


I agree the Florida program is not perfect. Why are we allowing credits for all-a-carte items that have no bearing on damage reductions unless they are part of system of components that can, if properly designed, reduce damage?

For instance, we allow credits for clips/straps but the roof could be old or worse tile and the deck attachment may be staples. The clips/straps in this case do not provide any reduction in damage because a minimal hurricane can damage the roof covering and decking causing significant water damage and interior loss.

As stated by many above, the Florida Mitigation Credits are what they are and the program is in the hands of the legislature and OIR so we have a duty to comply with the definitions in the form or be subjected to penalties, fines, suspension, or imprisonment per s. 627.711(4).

I disagree with the premise that porches pose less of threat, they are by definition “partially enclosed” structures and subject to considerably more uplift during wind events. They need to be tied down to the beams and the beams and columns should also be tied down to transmit loads to the foundation. Otherwise they become extremely large airborne missiles capable of significant damage to the host or surrounding structures.

If these form a part of the host roof structure (structurally attached) or are enclosed they are counted in terms of geometry, roof covering, decking, and roof to wall. If they are not enclosed and attached only to the wall or fascia of the host structure they are ignored. Hope this helps.