Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Food for thought[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
- Subject: Re: Food for thought
- From: "Bill Cain, S.E." <bcain(--nospam--at)ebmud.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 09:14:04 -0700
At 17:51 4/19/98 -0700, Bill Allen wrote: >The California Building Code is the version of the UBC required for the >design of schools and hospitals. These projects require, among other things, >submission to the Division of the State Architect, Testing & Inspection and, >of course, structural plans and engineering prepared by a licensed S.E. > >Now do you see how this would affect supply and demand? > >Regards, >Bill Allen [Bill Cain] Not Exactly. The California Building Code is basically the Uniform Building Code adopted by the State with modifications. These modifications vary by which state deparment has jurisdiction. There entire adoption becomes the building code for each jurisdiction in Cailifornia IF the local agency does not adopt the UBC within 6 months of when the State adopts it. Within the 6 month window following State adoption, cities and counties can adopt their own version including their own amendments and requirements. Departments such as DSA, HUD, OSPHD, etc. have additional requirements that amend the basic adoption and these are what many people refer to as the California Building Code. However, the California Building Code is actually ALL of what the State adopts including the basic UBC, the ammendments and the application matrices which describe the special rules put forth in the amendments (e.g., DSA, HUD, OSHPD, Etc.). If the adoption were changed to be the more restrictive versions promulagted by DSA and OSHPD with all the T&I requirements, safer structures would result, demand would outstrip supply and the building owners would get the code changed in the next cycle to allow them to cheap-cheap their projects. _______________ BILL CAIN, SE OAKLAND, CA _______________
- Re: Food for thought
- From: Bill Allen, S.E.
- Re: Food for thought
- Prev by Subject: Re: Food for thought
- Next by Subject: Re: Food for thought
- Previous by thread: Re: Food for thought
- Next by thread: Re: Food for thought