Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: RE: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not
- From: Charles Greenlaw <cgreenlaw(--nospam--at)speedlink.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:22:50 -0800
At 05:09 PM 10/27/98 -0800, Dennis wrote: I have discussed it with the >own, his wife and the designer at the same meeting. I told them that the >home (they just purchased it)was laterally supported by stucco walls only. I >suspect that the home is governed by wind loads, but portions of the new >addition will govern by seismic loads. >Let's see what other comments come in. __________________________________________ As was noted, the code only requires that the addition not make things worse. You seem to have that part under control. The Bldg Official's interpretation does not require any separate upgrade. It would therefore appear that the public interest is satisfied, which leaves the question of upgrading as a private matter between you and the owners. I encounter this issue fairly often, and I recommend what I think is a useful array of upgrades to correct the worst of the Achilles' heel deficiencies. remember that UBC is not a code dealing with upgrade of existing buildings, the UCBC is, and it makes concessions to the nature of the situation. And again, the owner is boss of what, if anything, is to be done. You are the expert however, and the quality of your advice to your "consumer" client is what you can be judged on. Let your "care" be to a reputatable, solidly professional standard. Your inquiry about this matter has the purpose of better establishing what such a standard looks like. You already have a strong sense of the inadequacy of this existing construction for seismic resistance in your area. Tell them what you've told us in past postings. They're your professional opinions, and they are reputable. Now for my opinions: Whether wind controls or not, seismic is the real risk. Walls fail long before 2x roof decks do. You can replace lots of half-inch interior gypsum board with 15/32 inch OSB or 1/2 inch MDO -faced plywood that can be finished like drywall without thickening the wall up. You can epoxy dowel the mudsills to the slab for sliding resistance and secure the nuts with plate washers. At exterior and bearing walls you can add nail-on or screw-on holdowns to numerous studs and edge nail to all of them. Etc. etc. Leave the stucco as is; shear the interior faces. Recommend enough to feel good about, and don't worry about satisfying the worst of the seismic bluenose perfectionists, because it can't be done and its none of their business anyway. Charles O. Greenlaw, SE Sacramento CA PS: Bruce Resnick's posting came in and I agree completely. Josh Matthews has a good point on sale disclosure. Again, recommend an upgrade that discloses as a positive accomplishment. It could be the best house in the neighborhood for seismic resistance. Even the best bagels have a residual deficiency: the hole. Yet bagel makers are accomodated about this.
- Prev by Subject: Re: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not
- Next by Subject: Re: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not
- Previous by thread: Re: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not
- Next by thread: Re: Wood Framing - Upgrade or Not