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

Building Separation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
UBC 87 clause 1633.2.11 says
1. Separations shall allow for the displacement DM
and also
2. When a structure adjoins a property line not common to a public way,
that structure shall also be set back from the property line by at least
the displacement DM of that structure

I'm designing my new CBD building and my neighbour's building is hard on
the common boundary. I can comply with paragraph 2, but this will not
achieve sufficient separation between our buildings which I assume is the
basic intent of this clause. My neighbour may even be a heritage building
that will be there "forever".

Is it your normal practice to just set your own building back DM from the
boundary and ignore the neighbouring building or if your neighbour is hard
on the boundary do your local authorities require you to set your own
building back further? The approach of Example 50.3 from Vol 1 of the
SEAOC Seismic Design Manual is to ignore the neighbouring building (their
Structure 2).

Thanks for your comments,

David Carolan

Taylor Thomson Whitting
dcarolan(--nospam--at)rad.net.id


______________________________________
This email was sent using radmail
http://radmail.rad.net.id


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********