Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Housing Performance Objectives

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

-----Original Message-----
From:	FredT5(--nospam--at)aol.com [SMTP:FredT5(--nospam--at)aol.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, December 03, 1997 10:34 AM
To:	Rick.Drake(--nospam--at)fluordaniel.com; seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
Subject:	Re: Housing Performance Objectives
To Dennis, Frank and others, thanks much for the kind and thoughtful words.
Its an interesting issue, but not nearly as pressing as lack of code
enforcement and poor quality in construction.

Fred

[Dennis S. Wish]  Your welcome Fred, but you can't enforce what isn't specified clearly. First things first. I know it's like the old chicken and the egg question. IMHO you must first define the correct procedure before you enforce it. This thread has become as complicated as the code itself.
1. Change the philosophy of minimum standards to include ecconomic considerations in addition to life safety.
2. Reunite two sections of the code for matching minimum standards (one standard for all)
3. Reword the code to be understood by non-technical persons who are required to design and build by the provisions.
4. Provide sketches and tables to simplify the construction methodology and refer interpretive sections back to compliance with chapter 16 sections. In other words, don't create a more complex code by expanding the definition of conventional framing to areas where a possible discontinuity can occur - such as with manufactured roof trusses and conventional framed walls.
5. Keep the provisions simple for stacked box systems where shearwalls align and there is only regularity in the shape of the structure - ie, no considerations for unusual drags, re-entrant corners etc.
6. Work on local building departments to adopt the provisions as emergency provisions to ensure that new provisions are used as soon as possible and are easily enforcible and able to be inspected in the field.

Remember, most building departments are not as well qualified in field inspectors as Los Angeles and other large cities. The area's of new growth are outlying and the inspectors are still learning. 

Thanks for putting up with my doubling of the daily posts.
Dennis
 

<<application/ms-tnef>>