Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Wood: Are you as confused as I?????

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In a message dated 8/18/99 10:24:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
FSRahbar(--nospam--at) writes:

<< Dennis:
 I totally agree with you. However, City of Los Angeles, has had his own 
 Building Code for ever and they did what ever they thought was right.
 The information I had received from Mr. Dang at The City, was not his 
 or his interpretation of the code. It was City of Los Angeles Policy. At 
 least, this was what I was told. There is a big difference between someone's 
 interoperation of the code and the City Policy.
 Anyway, I have a feeling that all of us will be dragged into court and 
 bars if the "Code Writers" don't get their act together.
 F S Rahbar, S.E. >>

Careful here, I only know of one instance in my time in Los Angeles where the 
city code was less restrictive than the published state code. This was in the 
design of Unreinforced Masonry. In the pier design section, the City of Los 
Angeles allowed all interior partitions to be considered while the state code 
eliminated the consideration of interior partitions and adjusted the rocking 
shear formula's to be limited. However, I think that this was because the 
code originated from the work done in the City of Los Angeles under their RGA 
1-91 provisions. This is a case where the code was published after the work 
was completed in LA based on an ordinance and not a mandatory state measure.

Each of the structural provisions that I recall have been in excess of the 
UBC minimums and not less than.

I think this is an important point simply because too many individuals are 
under the impression that if they comply with the building official they are 
satisfying the code which is not the case if the building official agrees to 
something less than minimum required in the published code.

If you have to protect your butt, it's better to keep that rule of thumb in 
mind than be lead down the wrong path by a well intending city employee who 
will never need to answer for his or her mistake. I'm not trying to flame 
building department personel by any means, but there are well intended 
individuals who believe strongly in the science and wish to set rules without 
understanding the liability issues. It's the engineer of record that 
ultimately takes the fall.