Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
IBC/2000 - Too Much, Too Fast[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: SEAOC Listservice <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: IBC/2000 - Too Much, Too Fast
- From: Roger Turk <73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:27:09 -0500
In September, the International Code Council/ICBO at its annual meeting adopted the IBC/2000. It will be available in the spring of 2000. Proposed changes to the IBC/2000 had to be submitted by November 1, 1999! Hearings on these proposed changes will be held in April 9-20, 2000! Nobody has used the Code yet --- it hasn't even been published, let alone adopted, so how can anyone say that the proposed changes are appropriate, necessary, and, above all, safe? How, until the IBC/2000 has been used, can anyone really address the provisions? Isn't this the same thing we are experiencing with regard to the redundancy factor? At least with the UBC we had, except when entire chapters were rewritten, a slow progression towards change so that we could see the effect of changes. When entire chapters were rewritten, new problems were introduced and this should have been recognized as what would happen many times over in rewriting an entire code based on a mish-mash of provisions from three different model codes. Witness the change from the previous UBC seismic provisions to provisions based on the NEHRP provisions that were justified by the argument (empty that it is) that the NEHRP provisions had been successfully adopted by BOCA, which encompasses an area that doesn't have or doesn't design for earthquakes. A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural) Tucson, Arizona
- Prev by Subject: I have asked to be dropped from the list server at least 4 days in a row and many times per day
- Next by Subject: Ideas???
- Previous by thread: RE: DeVere (vs. Madden)
- Next by thread: Effectiveness Date for 2000 IBC and the fate of the UCBC