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

RE: UBC Live Load Reduction

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Gary:

Possibly:


1)	He has a comment sheet to try and fill up...

	Or 

2)	hours to bill?

	Or

3)	He's jealous...



With exception to Scott and all the other fine plan reviewers on this list:

(who are exempted 	from these comments...)

"Those who can, design; those who cannot, are plan examiners"



(I better go hide...)





David L. Fisher  SE  PE
Senior Principal 
Fisher + Partners Structural Engineers inc
372 West Ontario 
Chicago 60610         
 
312.573.1701
312.573.1726 fax
312.622.0409 mobile
www.fpse.com         

David L. Fisher  SE  PE
Director
Head of Design and Construction
Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd
75 Fort Street
Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
mobile 312.622.0409
www.ccgch.com











-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Grinstead [mailto:Gary.Grinstead(--nospam--at)ci.stockton.ca.us] 
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 11:21 AM
To: T.W.Allen(--nospam--at)cox.net; seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: UBC Live Load Reduction

I've never heard of such an interpretation.  It sounds like the plan
reviewer has never designed a building in his life.


>>> T.W.Allen(--nospam--at)cox.net 05/13/05 9:03 AM >>>
O.K., I realize I haven't worked with the building code for very long
(tongue firmly planted in cheek), but I recently received a set of plan
check comments including one that has caught me off guard.

 

The plan check comment is as follows: "The live load reduction shall not
apply to the footing design." I called the plan reviewer (outside
consultant) to find out the section of the code which states this and he
told me section 1607.4 and 1607.6. I scanned these two sections during our
telephone conversation and still could not find where it said that I could
not take a live load reduction for the footing design. He told me that the
referenced sections stipulate live load reduction for beams and, since it
does not specifically permit a live load reduction for footings, no
reduction can be made. I hung up (politely) almost in shock and read the
referenced sections again. I know I'm not a good reader (otherwise I would
be an attorney), but the sections read (to me) "structural members", not
"beams". I thought a footing was a "structural member", but if not, why did
he not cite columns as well?

 

Anyone else have an interpretation?

 

TIA,

 


T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E. (CA #2607)


ALLEN DESIGNS


Consulting Structural Engineers


 <http://www.allendesigns.com/> http://www.AllenDesigns.com 


V (949) 248-8588

.

F (949) 209-2509

 



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


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