Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Repair Standards before the next one.... -Reply

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Tim McCormick wrote:
> 
> Rick & Fred,
> 
> One frequent question LA had to answer immediately after the EQ was
> "What is the required level of repair? " Our code, as well as the UBC, did
> not always have the answer.  When the code was silent, we created
> policy. Insurance companies prefer a legal precendence and apparanely
> so does FEMA.
> 
> The required level of repair obviously makes a big difference
> to the insured, the insuracne companies and the structural designer
> trying to find his/her legal responsibilities. THe UBC is written primarily for
> new construction and does not adequately address repair,
> replacement and demolition issues.
> 
> I strongly support a complete CA repair code standard. 
_______________________________________________________________________

I strongly support a repair code too, for the fairness of both the
owner, occupant and insurance company.  I recall that, due to lack of
repair code, everyone was trying to define the 10% damage guideline of a
shear wall line, structure etc, as imposed by LA City after the
Northridge EQ.  That had created a tug of war between the owner's
engineers and the insurance co.'s engineers.  We certainly need to
define what cracks can be defined as damage on concrete wall, stucco and
drywall etc. ( I know LA City has some guidelines on drywall and stucco
wall repairs)and put them in the Code and define what has to be
restored.  This will definitely saved all parties time on trying to
argue with each other. We can then spend most of our efforts on
restoring the damaged structure to a safe structure.

Tom Chiu, SE