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

Re: Code Soil Values vs. Site Specific

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Title: RE: Code Soil Values vs. Site Specific
Stan
 
What one has to remember that Edmonton has 5 Cups, Dallas 1.  And we love to come back as underdogs.  But they are young.
 
Bruce Davison, P.Eng.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 10:33 AM
Subject: RE: Code Soil Values vs. Site Specific

In Edmonton, Alberta building officials are enforcing Article 2.3.4.6 of the Alberta Building Code (National Building Code) which requires a geotechnical investigation for each project falling under Part 4 of the Code (ie structures over 6000 sf).

 
My practice has, and continues to be requiring geotechnical information either by prior investigation or confirmation of assumed conditions by direct inspection and field tests during construction by the structural engineer of record or his represenative.  Assumed conditions are obtained from previous geotechnical investigations near or adjacent to the specific site.

My own experience has shown that construction method has had a greater impact on cost than design method.

B.Davison, P.Eng
RND Engineering Ltd
Edmonton, Alberta

******************************************

Dear B. Davison:

It appears that Dallas and Edmonton have something in common after all!  I am amazed that site-specific geotechnical investigations are not required everywhere in North America, considering that foundation problems annually result in more property damage than all other causes combined.

I am sorry about the recent performance of your Oilers, but they will soon be out of their misery for another year!;^> 

Regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.
Hockey Heaven, Texas