Subject: RE: Strange stuff that I don't understand.
From: "Mark E. Deardorff" <MarkD(--nospam--at)DandDEng.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 14:07:21 -0700
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JohnOttCE(--nospam--at)aol.com [mailto:JohnOttCE(--nospam--at)aol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:12 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: Strange stuff that I don't understand.
> My reluctance to turn anything into the building official, is
> that in some
> locations I am not so sure that they will even act. I had
> situation in the
> foothills of the western slope of the high sierra's where in
> seismic zone 3 I
> designed a residence, performed all of the calculations and
> turned out a plan
> for the owner to submit to the building official for permit.
> The results were
The place to turn is not the building official but the state board of
licensure. It is the responsibility of the design professional to comply
with the code as you did. In the case of the "engineer" you dealt with, HE
should be investigated by the board and his license should be revoked. In
fact, by failing to do that, you are implicitly (though not intentionally)
validating his behavior. These guys are dangerous and should be relegated to
the EIT list. In addition, building officials are not truly accountable to
the general public and, unless they are known to you to be reliable should
not be counted upon to stick their necks out.
All engineers have a duty that transcends their personal wellbeing. In your
case, not only is the engineer dangerous for being a "yes man" to the
architect, the architect is also dangerous by not having half-an-ounce of
common sense. He should be reported to the board also.
Of course, its easy for me to sit back and tell you what to do. But in a
world where ethics is equated with expediency it is important for us to take
every opportunity to demonstrate virtue.