Alquist Priolo Occupancy[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "SEAOC List" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- From: "Paul Feather" <pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:51:27 -0700
We have a current project where the entitlement package is indicating the ramp to underground parking (covered as part of exterior courtyard) is crossing a designated Alquist Priolo fault trace.
My interpretation would be this is not permitted. The Architects interpretation is that it is permitted as this is not an occupied structure (2000 hours per year). I question this as, apart from the obvious problems of the retaining walls and ramp plus covering slab suffering differential movement crossing the fault trace, the courtyard is elevated and it is hard to quantify the occupancy. The ramp is a means of egress with constant daily vehicle use, but also hard to quantify occupancy.
Any input from my peers? Am I reading too much into this? I know pools and hardscape are permitted to cross the fault trace, but they do not typically form a collapse mechanism.
- Prev by Subject: Re: Allowable Stress for flexural members with yield points greater than 65ksi
- Next by Subject: Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- Previous by thread: RE: Raised concrete floor slab
- Next by thread: Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy