Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Residential Engineers and Architects Council on Housing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I have been in contact with a representative of the NAHB who is discussing the creation of a new association - Residential Engineers and Architects Council on Housing. I have been asked to be a part of the creation of this organization with the hopes of bridging the gap that exists between Architects, Engineers and Home Builders. It is intended to find a common ground where discussions and goals can be set that may ultimately create new standards improve the quality of home construction.
It was evident from my conversations that NAHB understands the problems associated with conventional construction, but has not looked into the issue from an engineering position. Conversely, I discovered the process from permit issuance to inspection that is used in other area's of the country and which lends itself to many discontinuities between the professions that lead to quality failures.
NAHB is considering starting a listservice for Architects, Engineers and Builders to discuss these issues and to try and work out a solution that will improve construction quality and define the rolls that each profession plays from design to finish.
 
I feel that SEAint is in a position to help establish this listservice. I think it is in keeping with our goals to help unite those professionals in the building industry. Here are some questions I'd like to pose and get your opinions about:
 
1. Is it appropriate to open our present list to Architects and non-professionals in the building industry who wish to participate in discussions related to construction (any type of construction)?
 
2. Should SEAint work with NAHB on establishing a web and listservice presence so that we can keep issues that involve engineering closer to home?
 
3. The problems we have discussed with conventional framing are due, in part, to the lack of voting power on the floor of ICBO. NAHB is a political organization with clout. The NAHB prepared the research work for AISI which was adopted as the Cold-form Steel design section of the '97 UBC. This was done with the help of LGSEA but was organized by NAHB. It seems important to me, should we be able to propose revised prescriptive codes that we have the support of NAHB who is closely linked to other building associations as well as the AIA. Because of this, should SEAint take an active interest in the work done by this organization?
 
These are some of the questions I think we need to address. As of this time, our list is technically oriented from and engineering point of view. Are we receptive to these types of changes or should we be considering enlarging our scope to include other lists?
 
Your comments would be appreciated.
 
Dennis S. Wish PE