Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Turkey Earthquake and Moral Responsibilities

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

rdavis(--nospam--at)sdsarch.com wrote:

<<  It is not that way because
 developers have more influence with code committees than do engineers and
 architects. >>

Dennis Wish responded:
. Substitute Building
Industry Association, National Association of Home Builders ect into the
sentence. The developers have virtually no influence on structural
engineering committees except in the case of engineers who may be
representing their
Dennis, aren't these the same people?
.
rdavis(--nospam--at)sdsarch.com wrote
>"If a change is to occur I think it will have to come because insurance
companies >either lobby for changes in the code or they offer preferential
rates for engineered >buildings"

Dennis Wish responded:
The insurance industry was the strongest lobby in creating a model
residential retrofit code - although it is not a mandatory measure. At least
the public is informed by the disclosure act in California that requires
these deficiencies to be disclosed to the buyer.

Why is not possible to circumvent the construction industy and shepard a
bill
that requires the disclosure of methodology in residential construction. The
public, albeit uneducated in technical matters, will be forced to learn
about
what they are purchasing insteading of being bombarded with marketing hype
that fails to identify the difference between prescriptive and engineered
designs.

I think that a buyer would look at required disclosure in a different way.
If the building was built using the perscriptive method the buyer would say
"It meets code".  If it were engineered, the buyer would say "It meets code,
but, for the extra expense of the engineer, I could buy a bigger or fancier
"perscriptive" house."

Roger Davis
SDS Architects, Inc
205 N. Dewey Street
Eau Claire, WI 54703
715-832-1605
rdavis(--nospam--at)sdsarch.com