Home / Roofing Permits / Can You Roof Over It? Layer Limits and Tear-Off Rules by Jurisdiction
Can You Roof Over It? Layer Limits and Tear-Off Rules by Jurisdiction
Before you price a re-roof you need one answer: can a new layer go over the existing one, or is this a full tear-off? Jurisdictions answer it very differently, and the split does not follow state lines the way you would expect. Oklahoma is the cleanest case in the country — all sixteen Oklahoma jurisdictions we cover require a tear-off, not because each city decided so, but because the state did: the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission amended IRC R908.3.1.1 to bar a re-cover “where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles,” a de facto statewide one-layer cap that individual cities cannot loosen. Texas sits at the opposite end, and Dallas is the outlier of the entire corpus: it amended the recover trigger UP from two layers to three, so a Dallas roof carrying two existing coverings may still legally take a third. Colorado is the most internally divided state we cover — sixteen of its jurisdictions require tear-off while twelve allow one overlay, so neighboring Front Range towns give opposite answers. Nebraska’s metro cities (Omaha, Bellevue, Papillion, and Douglas County by incorporation) deleted the roof-recover section from their adopted code outright. Kansas is stranger still: the Wichita–Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code deletes the re-covering provision and enacts nothing in its place, so Wichita, Sedgwick County, Andover and Haysville have no local layer cap at all, while the Kansas City–side suburbs 200 miles away allow exactly two. Watch the conditional cases — Superior CO permits a single overlay only with an engineer’s report certifying the structure can carry the load, Golden CO allows one overlay but caps the combined weight at 750 pounds per square, and La Vista NE and Sarpy County NE bar overlays on asphalt specifically in hail-exposure areas. Every card quotes the jurisdiction’s own text; where a jurisdiction states no layer rule, we say so rather than inferring one. A layer limit is not the same thing as a repair-permit threshold — for how big a repair can get before it needs a permit, see the repair-threshold facet.
No overlay — full tear-off required — Colorado (16)
Adams County - Building Safety Division (Adams County, Colorado (unincorporated))
"The maximum number of layers of roofing permitted is one (1), per Ordinance No. 12 and amendment to R908.3 of the 2024 IRC." "The maximum number of layers on a flat roof is one (1)."
City of Brighton - Building Division (City of Brighton, Colorado)
"New roof coverings shall not be installed without first removing existing roof coverings" -- Building Division policy effectively bars roof recover/overlay; full tear-off is required for re-roofs. (Code references in this document are to the 2021 IRC.)
City of Centennial - Building Division (City of Centennial, Colorado)
"Roof replacement shall include the removal of all existing layers of roof coverings to the deck." Existing-roof repair/replacement work "shall meet the requirements of chapter 9 section R908 of the 2021 International Residential Code." Materials removed from one roof cannot be reused on any other roof ("harvested material shall be considered used material and are not allowed"). (City of Centennial, Residential Roof Repairs and Re-Roofing policy page.)
City of Fort Lupton - Building Department (City of Fort Lupton, Colorado)
"Tear-Off: All existing roofing materials must be removed down to the deck before applying new materials (one-layer overlay is rarely permitted under modern fire and wind codes)." FAQ: "How many layers of roofing are allowed? All existing layers must be removed down to the decking."
City of Fountain (permits via Pikes Peak Regional Building Department) (City of Fountain, Colorado)
"Section R908.3.1 Roof-recover. Delete." (RBC303.4.73) -- the IRC's roof-recover allowance is removed from the adopted code, so full tear-off of existing roof coverings is required for asphalt shingle re-roofs. Two exceptions added to R908.3 Roof Replacement (RBC303.4.72): complete/separate roofing systems such as standing-seam metal that transmit roof loads directly to the structure without relying on the existing roof for support do not require removal of existing coverings; and metal panel, metal shingle, or concrete/clay tile coverings may be installed over existing wood shake roofs per Section 908.4. Per PPRBD guidelines, which govern permits for Fountain.
City of Littleton - Building and Code Compliance Division (City of Littleton, Colorado)
"R908.4 Roof recover not allowed... A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: a. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. b. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. c. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering d. The roof has one or more existing layers of asphalt shingles." Section R908.4.1 (Roof recovering over wood shingles or shakes) is deleted in its entirety. (Sec. 4-1-5, Amendments to the 2024 IRC.)
City of Longmont - Building Inspection Division (City of Longmont, Colorado)
"How many layers of roofing are allowed? Roofs are allowed to have only 1 layer of shingles." (Single Family Residential Re-roofs guide; commercial roofs are handled separately and allow up to two layers on low-slope built-up roofing.)
City of Northglenn - Building Division (City of Northglenn, Colorado)
"How many layers of roofing are allowed? All existing layers must be removed." Combined with the re-covering-versus-replacement conditions in the same guide (existing roof water-soaked/deteriorated; existing covering is wood shake, slate, clay, cement, or asbestos-cement tile; two or more existing applications; or asphalt shingles subject to moderate/severe hail exposure), new roof coverings are not to be installed without first removing existing roof coverings -- i.e. full tear-off, no recover.
Douglas County - Building Division (Douglas County, Colorado (unincorporated))
"One layer is permitted. Asphalt shingled roofs shall not be overlaid with an additional layer of asphalt shingles." (Douglas County roofing-permits FAQ, "What is the maximum number of layers of asphalt shingles permitted?")
Jefferson County - Building Division (Jefferson County, Colorado (unincorporated))
"SECTION R908: REROOFING. In section R908.4 (Roof recover) add a new Exception 4. as follows: Exceptions: 4. Where the existing roof covering is asphalt shingles." (Jefferson County Supplement to the 2024 IRC.) This bars roof recover/overlay over an existing asphalt shingle roof, so a full tear-off is required. The county's separate roofing notice restates the same rule in plain language: "Only one layer of asphalt shingles will be allowed per Jefferson County Code Supplement R908-4 exc.4 NO OVERLAYS, COMPLETE TEAROFF REQUIRED." An identical Exception 4 is added for commercial buildings at Section 1512.3 (Roof recover) of the Jefferson County Supplement to the 2024 IBC.
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department (El Paso County region, Colorado (including Colorado Springs and surrounding municipalities))
"Section R908.3.1 Roof-recover. Delete." (RBC303.4.73) -- the IRC's roof-recover allowance is removed from the adopted code, so full tear-off of existing roof coverings is required for asphalt shingle re-roofs. Two exceptions added to R908.3 Roof Replacement (RBC303.4.72): complete/separate roofing systems such as standing-seam metal that transmit roof loads directly to the structure without relying on the existing roof for support do not require removal of existing coverings; and metal panel, metal shingle, or concrete/clay tile coverings may be installed over existing wood shake roofs per Section 908.4.
Town of Firestone - Building Division (Town of Firestone, Colorado)
"R908.3.1.1 Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any roof covering, all old material must be removed. Roof recover is not allowed."
Town of Frederick - Building Department (Town of Frederick, Colorado)
"All old layers to be removed per the 2024 International Residential Code (IRC), Chapter 9, Section R908."
Town of Johnstown - Building Department (Town of Johnstown, Colorado)
"Tear-Off: All existing roofing materials must be removed down to the deck before applying new materials (one-layer overlay is rarely permitted under modern fire and wind codes)." Phrased as a general tear-off expectation rather than a numeric layer cap or an explicit R908.3.1.1 citation -- weaker/less quantified than neighboring jurisdictions' layer-limit language; flagged in report.
Town of Monument (permits via Pikes Peak Regional Building Department) (Town of Monument, Colorado)
"Section R908.3.1 Roof-recover. Delete." (RBC303.4.73) -- the IRC's roof-recover allowance is removed from the adopted code, so full tear-off of existing roof coverings is required for asphalt shingle re-roofs. Two exceptions added to R908.3 Roof Replacement (RBC303.4.72): complete/separate roofing systems such as standing-seam metal that transmit roof loads directly to the structure without relying on the existing roof for support do not require removal of existing coverings; and metal panel, metal shingle, or concrete/clay tile coverings may be installed over existing wood shake roofs per Section 908.4.
Town of Parker - Building Division (Town of Parker, Colorado)
"No Overlays for asphalt shingles. All other materials will be required to meet code or manufacturer specs." (Number of Layers Allowed row, Re-Roofing Requirements handout, revised 7/1/2026). This is consistent with the town's codified 2021-IRC-era amendment at Parker Municipal Code Section 11.02.050(25) (Ord. 4.91.8 Section 1, 2022), which deletes Subparagraph 3 of IRC Section R908.3.1.1 (Recovering versus replacement) and replaces it with: "Where the existing roof has one or more applications of any type of roof covering" -- i.e. roof recover is barred once any covering layer already exists, so a full tear-off is required.
No overlay — full tear-off required — Kansas (1)
No overlay — full tear-off required — Missouri (2)
City of Belton - Community Development Department (City of Belton, Missouri)
Belton UDC Sec. 10-9(b) (adopting the 2018 International Existing Building Code with local amendments) deletes IEBC "Section 705.3.1 Roof recover," "Section 705.3.1.1 Exceptions," and "Section 705.4 Roof recovering" in their entirety, and amends "Section 705.3 Roof Replacement" to read: "Roof replacement shall be in accordance with 1511.31 of the International Building Code." The recover-vs-replace pathway is eliminated under the City's adopted IEBC -- reroofing routes through the IBC's roof-replacement provisions rather than a recover option. (Ord. No. 2022-4738, § 2, adopted 9-27-2022.)
City of Gladstone, Missouri - Community Development Department (Building and Construction Division) (City of Gladstone, Missouri)
"Only ONE layer of roof covering is allowed" for both residential and commercial reroofing (City of Gladstone roofing requirements page). Corroborated in the adopting ordinance itself: Chapter 200's 9.200.020.3 DELETIONS (2021 IBC) omits "1512.2.1 Roof recover.", "1512.2.1.1 Exceptions.", and "1512.3 Roof recovering." in their entirety, and 9.200.040.3 DELETIONS (2021 IRC) likewise omits "R908.3.1 Roof recover.", "R908.3.1.1 Roof recover not allowed.", and "R908.4 Roof recovering." -- the recover/overlay pathway is deleted from both the commercial and residential codes as adopted, leaving full tear-off as the only path to a new roof covering.
No overlay — full tear-off required — Nebraska (4)
City of Bellevue - Permits and Inspection Division (City of Bellevue, Nebraska)
Bellevue City Code § 8-18.6(MM)-(NN) (amending the 2021 IRC) deletes "Section R908.3.1, Roof recover," in its entirety and amends "Section R908.3.1.1, Roof recover not allowed" to read: "A roof recover shall not be permitted." (Ord. 4033, passed 5-4-2021.)
City of Omaha Planning Department - Building & Development Division (City of Omaha, Nebraska)
"Section R908.3.1, Roof recover. Delete this section in its entirety. Section R908.3.1.1, Roof recover not allowed. A roof recover is not allowed. Section R908.4, Roof recovering. Delete this section in its entirely [sic]." (Complete 2018 IRC Amendments, effective July 1, 2020, p. 445) -- full tear-off of all existing roof coverings is required; no conditional recover/overlay allowance remains under the local amendment.
City of Papillion - Building & Fire Safety Department (City of Papillion, Nebraska)
"R908.3.1 Delete; Roof Recover. Section R908.3.1 of the International Residential Code is hereby deleted." "R908.3.1.1 Amended; Roof recover not allowed. Revise to read: A roof recover is not allowed." "R908.4 Amended; Complete Roof Replacement vs Repair. When it is determined that over 50% of the roof is in need of repair, the entire roof covering and underlayment will be replaced with compliant materials and methods." (Papillion Municipal Code § 92-15(B), Ordinance No. 1934; consistent with the City of Papillion Roofing Requirements handout, "Roof Recover (908.3.1.1 Amended): Roof recover is not allowed.")
Douglas County Environmental Services - Permits and Inspections (Douglas County, Nebraska)
Douglas County's Residential Building Code is adopted "as amended by the City of Omaha - 2018 IRC" (county's Current Building Codes page). Under that incorporation, Omaha's amendment governs: "Section R908.3.1, Roof recover. Delete this section in its entirety. Section R908.3.1.1, Roof recover not allowed. A roof recover is not allowed. Section R908.4, Roof recovering. Delete this section in its entirely [sic]." (Complete 2018 IRC Amendments, effective July 1, 2020, p. 445) -- full tear-off of all existing roof coverings is required.
No overlay — full tear-off required — Oklahoma (16)
City of Bethany - Community Development Department (City of Bethany, Oklahoma)
Bethany's Code of Ordinances § 150.001 does not amend Chapter 9 (Roof Assemblies) of its adopted Residential Code -- its only Table-R301.2(1)-area amendments are the climatic design criteria and Section 2603.5.1 -- so the operative text is the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission's 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)), which amends R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover to read: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (Provenance: JQ-002 adopted-unamended ruling; Bethany's own ordinance cites an outdated OUBCC subchapter number for this incorporation -- see report.)
City of Bixby - Development Services Department (City of Bixby, Oklahoma)
"R908.3.1.1 Roof Re-Cover - OUBCC Amendatory. ... 'R9083.1.1 Roof Re-Cover. A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted.'" (Bixby Code of Ordinances, Title 9, IRC 2018 Chapter 9 Roof Assemblies -- note the section number is misprinted "R9083.1.1" in the live ordinance text; quoted verbatim as a transcription artifact, not corrected.)
City of Broken Arrow - Community Permitting and Licensing Division (City of Broken Arrow, Oklahoma)
Sec. 6-37 (Ord. No. 3746, 9-20-2022; Ord. No. 3826, 4-16-2024), read in full from (a) through (y), does not amend IRC Chapter 9 Roof Assemblies at all -- no R908 provision appears anywhere in the ordinance's amendment list -- so the statewide OUBCC rule governs directly: "R908.3.1.1. Roof re-cover. A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)). (Provenance: same adopted-unamended pattern already used for this record's drip_edge_required field -- amendment instrument read in full.)
City of Claremore - Community Development Services, Permits & Inspections (City of Claremore, Oklahoma)
Oklahoma's operative residential code is the OUBCC 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (effective 9-14-22), whose amended R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover states: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: (1) Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing[;] (2) Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile[;] (3) Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering[; and] (4) Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles[,] additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." Condition 4 -- added by the OUBCC amendment -- is a de facto one-layer cap on asphalt-shingle re-roofs statewide. The joint City of Claremore-Rogers County Metropolitan Zoning Ordinance, Appendix G (adopts the IRC 2009 edition "or the latest revision thereof adopted by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission" -- currently the 2018 edition per the county's own FAQ), read in full, does not amend R908.3.1.1, so this state-amended rule stands unmodified for Claremore.
City of Edmond Department of Building & Safety (City of Edmond, Oklahoma)
"If my shingle manufacturer does not allow my existing (1x8, 1x10 etc.) deck to be used as a base for their product, do I have to remove the old decking or can new OSB or plywood sheathing be installed[?] The 2018 International Residential Code (IRC) does not require you to remove the existing deck material prior to installation of a new sheathing substrate except in very unusual circumstances where the existing roof framing is inadequate. Roof replacements do require the removal of all existing layers of roof covering (shingles)." (City of Edmond Department of Building & Safety, Storm/Re-Roof Information FAQ). Confirms that a roof replacement requires full removal of the existing shingle layer(s) -- no shingle-over-shingle recover.
City of Jenks - Building Inspections Department (City of Jenks, Oklahoma)
Jenks Code of Ordinances Sec. 4-1-1(A) "Adoption of Codes" adopts the 2018 IRC "as amended and modified by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission (OUBCC) as if fully set out at length herein," with no Jenks-specific amendment to IRC Chapter 9 anywhere in Article 1 (Building Code and Regulations) -- confirmed by reading Sec. 4-1-1 through 4-1-8 in full; none addresses roofing/recover. The governing text is therefore the OUBCC's own statewide R908.3.1.1: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)).
City of Mustang - Community Development Department (City of Mustang, Oklahoma)
City of Mustang Ordinance No. 1269 (Sec. 18-33.B, 35 numbered amendment items) does not amend Chapter 9 (Roof Assemblies) of the adopted 2018 IRC -- none of its 35 items touch R905 or R908. The operative text is therefore the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission's 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)), which amends R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover to read: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (Provenance: JQ-002 adopted-unamended ruling -- Mustang's amendment instrument read in full, Chapter 9 confirmed untouched.)
City of Norman Development Services Division (City of Norman, Oklahoma)
"How many layers of asphalt shingles can we have installed on the roof? Answer: 1 (one). (R908.3.1.1 and OUBCC Amendment) Roof re-cover not allowed. A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. [existing roof covering is] water soaked or deteriorated[.] 2. [existing covering is] slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile[.] 3. [existing roof has] two or more applications [of any roof covering][.] 4. [existing roof has] one or more application of asphalt shingles[;] additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (City of Norman "Common Questions for Roofing with Asphalt Shingles," Development Services Division / Building Permits and Inspections). Only one layer of asphalt shingles is allowed; recover over an existing shingle layer is prohibited and full tear-off is required.
City of Sand Springs - Neighborhood Services Department (City of Sand Springs, Oklahoma)
Oklahoma's operative residential code is the OUBCC 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (effective 9-14-22), whose amended R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover states: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: ... (4) Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles[,] additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted" -- a de facto one-layer cap on asphalt-shingle re-roofs statewide (also barred: water-soaked/ deteriorated existing roofs, slate/clay/cement/asbestos-cement tile, or two or more applications of any covering type). The City's own Title 15 Sec. 15.24.010 adopts the IRC "as adopted and amended by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission (OUBCC)" and, read in full, amends only Section P3008.1 (sewage backflow/backwater valves) -- it does not touch R908.3.1.1, so the state-amended rule stands unmodified for Sand Springs. This matches the city's own roofing FAQ, which separately states in plainer language: "Building codes only allow one layer of shingles above the decking. This means old roofing materials must to be removed before new roofing materials are installed."
City of Sapulpa - Building Inspections Office (City of Sapulpa, Oklahoma)
Oklahoma's operative residential code is the OUBCC 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (effective 9-14-22), whose amended R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover states: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: ... (4) Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles[,] additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted" -- a de facto one-layer cap on asphalt-shingle re-roofs statewide (also barred: water-soaked/ deteriorated existing roofs, slate/clay/cement/asbestos-cement tile, or two or more applications of any covering type). The City's own Code of Ordinances Sec. 5-101.B adopts the Residential Building Code "as adopted and amended by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission (OUBCC)," with codification occurring automatically on OUBCC publication, and Part 5 Chapter 1, read in full, contains no local amendment to R908.3.1.1 -- so the state-amended rule stands unmodified for Sapulpa. This matches the city's own roofing FAQ, which separately states in plainer language: "Building codes only allow one layer of shingles above the decking."
City of Shawnee Building Inspections Division (City of Shawnee, Oklahoma)
City of Shawnee Code of Ordinances Sec. 7-462 amends only R101.1, Table R301.2(1), and P2603.5.1 of the adopted 2018 IRC -- it does not touch Chapter 9 (Roof Assemblies). The operative text is therefore the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission's 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)), which amends R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover to read: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (Provenance: JQ-002 adopted-unamended ruling -- Shawnee's Sec. 7-462 amendment list read in full, Chapter 9 confirmed untouched.)
City of Tulsa Development Services Department - Permit Center (City of Tulsa, Oklahoma)
"R908.3.1.1. Roof re-cover - Amendatory. A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." Net effect: full tear-off is required once a roof already carries two layers of any covering, or already carries one layer of asphalt shingles (a second asphalt layer is barred), or the existing covering is water-soaked/ deteriorated, or is slate/clay/cement/asbestos-cement tile.
City of Yukon - Development Services (City of Yukon, Oklahoma)
City of Yukon Ordinance No. 1414 (Sec. 204-138, Chapter 9 Roof Assemblies, adopted Aug. 18, 2020) amends R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover to read: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted."
Oklahoma County Planning Commission (Oklahoma County, Oklahoma)
Resolution No. 2024-5421 (eff. 1-1-2025) adopts, for unincorporated Oklahoma County, "the 2018 International Residential Code (IRC) as modified by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission (OUBCC) with the 2022 Oklahoma Amendments"; its own 3-page text and addendums do not further amend any roofing section, so the OUBCC's statewide text controls. The OUBCC 2018 IRC Permanent Rule amends Section R908.3.1.1 Roof recover to read: "A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: (1) the existing roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated; (2) the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile; (3) the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering; (4) the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles -- additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." In effect, only one layer of asphalt shingles is allowed and a full tear-off is required before any re-cover.
Rogers County Building Safety & Inspection Services (Planning Commission) (Rogers County, Oklahoma)
Oklahoma's operative residential code is the OUBCC 2018 IRC Permanent Rule (effective 9-14-22), whose amended R908.3.1.1 Roof re-cover states: "A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: (1) Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing[;] (2) Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile[;] (3) Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering[; and] (4) Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles[,] additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." Condition 4 -- added by the OUBCC amendment -- is a de facto one-layer cap on asphalt-shingle re-roofs statewide. The joint City of Claremore-Rogers County Metropolitan Zoning Ordinance, Appendix G (adopts the IRC 2009 edition "or the latest revision thereof adopted by the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission" -- currently the 2018 edition per the county's own FAQ), read in full, does not amend R908.3.1.1, so this state-amended rule stands unmodified for unincorporated Rogers County.
Tulsa County Inspections Department (Tulsa County, Oklahoma)
Tulsa County has no locally codified amendment to IRC R908 (confirmed by a prior wave's read of the county's inspections/building PDFs, and by this wave's read of the state rule -- no county-specific building-code ordinance amending Chapter 9 was located), so the applicable rule is the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission's own statewide R908.3.1.1, in force as the mandatory minimum "for residential building construction for one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses in Oklahoma pursuant to 59 O.S. Sec. 1000.23," which "may only be amended or altered by other jurisdictions pursuant to Oklahoma law" (OAC 748:20-6-2): "R908.3.1.1. Roof re-cover. A roof re-cover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. Where the existing roof has one or more application of asphalt shingles additional applications of asphalt shingles shall not be permitted." (OAC 748:20-6-14(13)).
No overlay — full tear-off required — Texas (1)
One overlay allowed — two layers maximum — Colorado (12)
Arapahoe County - Building Division (Arapahoe County, Colorado (unincorporated))
"The installation of a new roof covering over an existing layer shall be permitted per the limitations of IRC Section R908.3.1. As per IRC Section 908.3.1.1, a roof re-cover shall not be permitted where the existing roof has two or more applications of any roof covering, or where the existing layers must be removed prior to new roof installation. Any water damaged or rotted decking must be replaced and inspected prior to concealment."
City and County of Broomfield - Building Division (City and County of Broomfield, Colorado)
"Roof recover not allowed: Existing layers must be removed if soaked or deteriorated, wood shake/slate/tile, or two or more layers, to the roof deck. Exception: One asphalt overlay is allowed if adequate by code and or manufacturer." (Building Division Re-Roofing Guideline Policy, effective 4/15/2026, implementing the 2024 IBC/IRC; this is administrative policy, not text amended directly into B.M.C. Chapter 15-05.)
City and County of Denver - Community Planning and Development (City and County of Denver, Colorado)
"Existing roofs must be removed to deck and replaced where two or more layers of any roof covering exist" (Roofing Guide Sec. 3.A). The companion Roofing Checklist item #3 (IRC R908.3.1.1(3)/R908.3, IBC 1511.3.1.1/1512.2) states: "Existing roof covering must be removed down to deck unless re-covering a single layer" -- a roof recover is permitted only over one existing layer; two or more layers force full tear-off.
City of Arvada - Building Division (City of Arvada, Colorado)
"The installation of a new roof covering over an existing roof covering shall be permitted per section R908.3.1 of the 2018 IRC" -- Arvada allows recover; no explicit maximum layer count beyond the underlying R908.3.1 recover conditions is stated on this page.
City of Dacono - Community Development Department (Building Division) (City of Dacono, Colorado)
"How many layers of roofing are allowed? No more than two (2) layers are allowed upon completion of installation." R908.3 Roof Replacement further requires full removal of existing roof coverings down to the roof deck where: (1) the existing roof or roof covering is water-soaked or deteriorated beyond use as a base for additional roofing; (2) the existing roof covering is wood shake, slate, clay, cement, or asbestos-cement tile; or (3) the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering.
City of Englewood - Building Division (City of Englewood, Colorado)
"HOW MANY LAYERS OF ROOFING ARE ALLOWED? A maximum of two layers are allowed." (Residential Re-Roofing Guidelines FAQ.)
City of Golden - Building Division (City of Golden, Colorado)
"Only one overlay is allowed on existing asphalt or wood shingles. T-Lock shingles cannot be overlaid. The total weight of the combined roof layers must not exceed 750 pounds per square unless verified by a structural analysis." Separately: "If a repair exceeds 25% of the total roof area, the entire roof must be replaced. Roof replacement shall include the removal of all existing layers of roof coverings down to the roof deck." (IRC 2024 R908.3 and IBC 2024 1512.2, per the city's Roofing and Re-Roof Covering Requirements summary.)
City of Lafayette - Building Division (City of Lafayette, Colorado)
Asphalt roofs shall have no more than two (2) layers.
City of Westminster - Community Development (City of Westminster, Colorado)
"A roof recovering is permitted in accordance with IRC 908.3.1 and per manufacturer's instructions." (Residential Re-roofing Guide, "based on the 2021 International Residential Code as amended by the City of Westminster.")
Town of Berthoud - Planning and Building Department (Town of Berthoud, Colorado)
"Roof recover not allowed where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. (R908.3.1.1)" Tear-off clause: "All roofing material shall be removed prior to new application (except one (1) layer of asphalt shingles is allowed to have an additional layer of asphalt shingles applied)" -- i.e., a maximum of two total layers (one existing plus one new) before full tear-off is required.
Town of Timnath - Building Services (Town of Timnath, Colorado)
"How many layers of roofing are allowed? No more than two (2) layers are allowed upon completion of installation." Also, Section R908.3 Roof Replacement requires full removal of existing layers where "the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering," among other tear-off triggers (water-soaked or deteriorated decking; existing wood shake, slate, clay, cement, or asbestos-cement tile).
Town of Windsor - Building Department (Town of Windsor, Colorado)
"How many layers of roofing are allowed? No more than two (2) layers are allowed upon completion of installation." Section R908.3 Roof Replacement requires full tear-off to the deck where, among other triggers, "the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering."
One overlay allowed — two layers maximum — Kansas (3)
City of Olathe - Building Codes Division (City of Olathe, Kansas)
"Roof Recovering Not Allowed - A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur. R908.3.1.1: Where the existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. Where the existing roof covering is slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering." (City of Olathe official "Roofing" reroof-code summary, citing IRC R908.3.1.1 -- not separately amended by Olathe Municipal Code Chapter 15.04, so this reflects the base 2018 IRC text as applied in Olathe. Note: unlike neighboring Johnson County's amended R908.3.1.1, Olathe's item 2 does NOT list "asphalt shingle" or "wood shake" among the covering types that bar recover -- quoted verbatim as published.)
City of Overland Park - Building Safety Division (City of Overland Park, Kansas)
"No more than two layers of any type of covering may be placed on a roof. If two or more layers of roofing are in place, all layers must be removed before installing additional roofing." Additionally, "Adding an additional layer of roof covering is not permitted in the following conditions: Where existing roof or roof covering is water soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. Where the existing roof covering is slate or clay. Cement or asbestos-cement tile. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roofing covering." (City of Overland Park official "Residential Building Permit Exceptions and Guidance" page, "Roofing and Re-Roofing" section, citing IRC R908.3.1.1. The odd "clay. Cement" punctuation is reproduced verbatim as published.)
City of Prairie Village - Community Development Department (City of Prairie Village, Kansas)
"New roof coverings shall not be installed without first removing all existing layers of roof coverings where the existing roof or roof covering is water-soaked or had deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing; or where the existing roof covering is wood shake, slate, clay, cement, or asbestos-cement tile; or where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. Where the existing roof assembly includes an ice barrier membrane that is adhered to the roof deck, the existing ice barrier membrane shall be permitted to remain in place and covered with an additional layer of ice barrier membrane." (City of Prairie Village Codes Department official "Roofing Permits" brochure, "Code Requirements" section, applying IRC 2018 R908.3.1.1 as the basis for the city's re-roof/tear-off rule.)
One overlay allowed — two layers maximum — Missouri (1)
One overlay allowed — two layers maximum — Nebraska (2)
City of Lincoln - Building & Safety Department (City of Lincoln, Nebraska)
"Section R908.3.1.1 Roof recover not allowed. A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: Where the existing roof or roof covering is water-soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. Where the existing roof covering is wood shake, slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering." (Lincoln Municipal Code 20.12.650, Section R908.3.1.1 Amended; Roof Recover Not Allowed; Ord. 20937 Section 129, June 29, 2020). Corroborated by the department's Re-Roof Policy: "If the existing roof has two (2) or more layers of any type of roof covering, all of the layers must be removed."
Lancaster County - Building & Safety (City of Lincoln) (Lancaster County, Nebraska)
Lancaster County shares the City of Lincoln's Building & Safety Department and its joint 2018 IRC adoption ("The City of Lincoln & Lancaster County has adopted and enforces all sections of the 2018 International Residential Code (IRC)..." -- Re-Roof Policy). Under that joint code, LMC 20.12.650 (Section R908.3.1.1 Amended) governs: "A roof recover shall not be permitted where any of the following conditions occur: ... Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering." Corroborated by the Re-Roof Policy: "If the existing roof has two (2) or more layers of any type of roof covering, all of the layers must be removed." No separate Lancaster County building department exists; see the paired City of Lincoln, Nebraska record.
One overlay allowed — two layers maximum — Texas (3)
City of Garland - Building Inspection (City of Garland, Texas)
"Per the 2015 edition of the International residential Code all roofs are allowed up to two layers of shingles. If a third layer is needed, you must tear off the existing layers and start over." (City of Garland Building Inspection, Re-Roofing page.)
City of McKinney - Building Inspections (City of McKinney, Texas)
"New roof coverings shall not be installed without first removing all existing layers of roof coverings where any of the following conditions exist: Where the existing roof or roof covering is water-soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. Where the existing roof covering is wood shake, slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering." Exceptions: complete/separate roofing systems (e.g. standing-seam metal) that transmit roof loads directly to the structure do not require removal of existing coverings; a new protective coating over existing spray polyurethane foam roofing is permitted without tear-off; an existing ice barrier membrane adhered to the deck may remain in place and be covered with an additional layer of ice barrier membrane. (McKinney Roofing Guide, "Minimum Requirements for Re-Roofing Projects," effective January 7, 2020; work shall comply with the 2024 IRC per the current guide header.)
City of North Richland Hills - Building Inspection Department (City of North Richland Hills, Texas)
"Please be aware that only 2 layers of shingles are allowed on the roof. We will require all shingles to be removed if more than 2 layers exist when the final inspection is performed." (City of North Richland Hills Building Inspections & Permits FAQ, "Do I need a permit to re-roof a home or commercial building?")
Three layers allowed — Texas (1)
Overlay allowed only on a stated condition — Colorado (2)
Town of Castle Rock - Building Division (Town of Castle Rock, Colorado)
"SECTION R908.4, ROOF RECOVER, IS DELETED IN ITS ENTIRETY" (Section 15.06.030.K of Ordinance No. 2026-017, adopted June 2, 2026, effective June 30, 2026). The ordinance text located does not include the superseded content of the deleted section, so the practical effect (e.g. whether any recover is still permitted under R908.3) could not be independently confirmed from this instrument alone.
Town of Superior - Planning and Building Department (Town of Superior, Colorado)
"A single roof overlay is allowed provided an engineer's report stating the roof structure is adequate to support the additional loading and the shingles meet the current code requirements." (Separately, "[t]ile roofs replacing other types of roof covering must have an engineer's report stating the roof structure is adequate to support the additional loading.")
Overlay allowed only on a stated condition — Nebraska (2)
City of La Vista - Building Department (City of La Vista, Nebraska)
La Vista Municipal Code § 150.01(C)(2)(j), "Re-covering versus replacement" (adopted in lieu of IRC § R908.1): "New roof coverings shall not be installed without first removing existing roof coverings where any of the following conditions occur: 1. Where the existing roof or roof covering is water-soaked or has deteriorated to the point that the existing roof or roof covering is not adequate as a base for additional roofing. 2. Where the existing roof covering is wood shake, wood shingles, slate, clay, cement or asbestos-cement tile. 3. Where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roof covering. 4. For asphalt shingles, when the building is located in an area subject to moderate or severe hail exposure according to § R905.1." Exceptions: "a. Complete and separate roofing systems, such as standing-seam metal roof systems, that are designed to transmit the roof loads directly to the building's structural system and that do not rely on existing roofs and roof coverings for support, shall not require the removal of existing roof coverings. b. Installation of metal panel, metal shingle, and concrete and clay tile roof coverings over existing wood shake roofs shall be permitted when the application is in accordance with § R908.4. c. The application of new protective coating over existing spray polyurethane foam roofing systems shall be permitted without tear-off of existing roof coverings." (Ord. 1439, passed 2-1-22.)
Sarpy County Planning & Building Department (Sarpy County, Nebraska)
Resolution 2024-150, Exhibit B (amending the 2018 IRC), adds to "R907.3 Re-covering versus replacement" condition number 4: "For asphalt shingles, when the building is located in an area subject to moderate or severe hail exposure according to Figure R903.5" -- an added trigger requiring full tear-off/replacement rather than re-covering over existing asphalt shingles in the county's hail-exposure areas. (Resolution 2024-150, effective 6-4-2024.)
No local layer cap stated — Kansas (5)
City of Andover Building & Inspections Department (City of Andover, Kansas)
Sec. 2.4.560 of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code (Article 2, Section 4): "Re-covering versus replacement. Section R907.3 of the International Residential Code is hereby deleted." No substitute or replacement provision is enacted in its place. The UBTC does not separately amend IRC R908 (roof replacement/layer-count), so the base 2018 IRC R908 provisions govern by default (not locally amended, not quoted here).
City of Haysville - Public Works Department (City of Haysville, Kansas)
Sec. 4-309 of the Code of the City of Haysville, Kansas: "Those provisions of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code, as adopted through Article 12 below, applicable to the Residential Building Code are found in Article 2, Section 4 of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code, except as supplemented herein." Haysville's own Sec. 4-310 supplement does not independently address roof recover/replacement (no R907 provision appears in it), so Haysville inherits Sec. 2.4.560 of the county UBTC by incorporation: "Re-covering versus replacement. Section R907.3 of the International Residential Code is hereby deleted," with no replacement provision enacted.
City of Leawood - Code Services / Building Permits (City of Leawood, Kansas)
R907.7 Partial Replacement (added by Section 4-954A): "Where only a portion of the existing roof coverings are being replaced, the replacement roof coverings shall be the exact brand and type, and shall exactly match the color of the existing roof coverings. Where over 50% of the roof coverings are being replaced, complete replacement of all roof coverings is required." Exception: wood shakes and wood shingles that are the exact brand, type, and original color of the existing material are permitted to be replaced in amounts less than 50%.
City of Wichita - Metropolitan Area Building & Construction Department (MABCD) (City of Wichita, Kansas)
Sec. 2.4.560 of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code (Article 2, Section 4): "Re-covering versus replacement. Section R907.3 of the International Residential Code is hereby deleted." No substitute or replacement provision is enacted in its place. The UBTC does not separately amend IRC R908 (roof replacement/layer-count), so the base 2018 IRC R908 provisions govern by default (not locally amended, not quoted here).
Sedgwick County - Metropolitan Area Building & Construction Department (MABCD) (Sedgwick County, Kansas (unincorporated))
Sec. 2.4.560 of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Unified Building and Trade Code (Article 2, Section 4): "Re-covering versus replacement. Section R907.3 of the International Residential Code is hereby deleted." No substitute or replacement provision is enacted in its place. The UBTC does not separately amend IRC R908 (roof replacement/layer-count), so the base 2018 IRC R908 provisions govern by default (not locally amended, not quoted here).
Get the Front Range Re-Roof Cheat Sheet (free PDF)
One printable table — permit thresholds, drip edge, ice & water shield, mid-roof inspections, and Class 4 mandates across the Front Range. We email you the download link.