Subject: RE: East Coast IBC Adoption (was ASCE 7-93)
From: Albert Meyer <Ameyer(--nospam--at)martinaia.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 08:39:08 -0500
I guess I should probably have been more specific. The project is in North
Myrtle Beach, SC, so I assume that the city has adopted the IBC 2000. I
believe that the architect told me that SC had adopted the code, but I did
not research this myself. At this time I don't know of any amendments to
the code, and I'm doing my review based on the standard version.
Albert J. Meyer, Jr., P.E.
(215) 665-8570 Tel
(215) 561-5064 Fax
From: Michael Zaitz [mailto:mzaitz(--nospam--at)hgbd.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 3:40 PM
Subject: East Coast IBC Adoption (was ASCE 7-93)
When I talked with a building official for a project in SC I was told that
mandatory adoption date was end of June based on the Legislature. I wonder
any of the local building departments have already adopted it (still trying
find that out for the project I am working on)? Do you know if SC has done
amendments to the code? Have not found anything one way or the other on it.
Also, Georgia has adopted the IBC 2000 Plumbing, Mech and Elec codes but not
rest of it. People I have talked to in GA suggest it may be as long as 3
before the rest is adopted. I have heard that Florida is going to use it's
code but we have not done any design in Florida so I have not talked to
to verify. So much for one code! Should also make it interesting now that
Seismic forces actually have a chance of governing over wind (just from a
preliminary look at the IBC).
Albert Meyer wrote:
> FYI, South Carolina has already adopted the IBC as the code of choice and
> are reviewing a multi-family housing project which is currently under
> construction for conformance to the IBC. The project was designed using
> 1997 SBC.
> Albert J. Meyer, Jr., P.E.
> Martin-Espenlaub Engineering
> (215) 665-8570 Tel
> (215) 561-5064 Fax
> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard lewis [mailto:rlewistx(--nospam--at)juno.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 1:11 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: ASCE 7-93 Wind Design
> I was in Charlotte in January to discuss the project with the city
> building officials. They told me NC planned to adopted the IBC on
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:03:29 -0500 "Michael Zaitz" <mzaitz(--nospam--at)hgbd.com>
> > Just a question regarding NC codes. Is NC going to adopt the IBC in
> > any way
> > shape or form?
> > "Effland, Greg" wrote:
> > > The ASCE7-93 and ASCE7-88 wind loads are the same. The big
> > difference, as
> > > you mentioned, is between 7-93 and 7-95 when the winds changed
> > from fastest
> > > mile winds to 3 second gusts.
> > >
> > > You are also correct in that the current NC code (1996) refers to
> > ASCE7-93
> > > for wind loads...
> > >
> > > Greg Effland, P.E.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: richard lewis [mailto:rlewistx(--nospam--at)juno.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 2:15 PM
> > > To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> > > Subject: ASCE 7-93 Wind Design
> > >
> > > I am designing a building in North Carolina. The current NC code
> > > requires the wind loads be calculated using ASCE 7-93. I have a
> > 7-88 and
> > > a 7-95, but not a 7-93. I know there was a drastic change between
> > 7-93
> > > and 7-95 for wind loads. Can somebody who has the 7-88 and 7-93
> > code let
> > > me know if there is a major difference in calculating the wind
> > loads
> > > between these codes?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help.
> > >
> > > Rich Lewis
> > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> > > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> > > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> > > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
> > >
> > >
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: