Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Soils Reports under CBC 1802.2

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Hi Brian;
	It's still up to the local Building Official to determine where the
potential for ?liquefaction and soil strength loss? detailed in CBC Section
1802.2.7.2 would generate the requirement for a Soils Report.  The potential
for ?liquefaction and soil strength loss? in our Mother Lode area of
California is VERY low therefore BO's should be allowed to waive the
requirement for a Soils Report.   Outside of our 0.4 Ss area, we get SDC D
for most of the non-residential buildings.  It's ludicrous for Building
Departments to require a Soils Report just because of that section of the
Code when there is no chance for "liquefaction and soil strength loss? on a
project.  Where is the out? We have one jurisdiction saying they will not
generally require a Soils Report and three saying "We're not sure yet"....
	This portion of the code is very poorly written and I hope it will
be revised in the next cycle.

Terry Weatherby
Engineering and Design
Jackson, CA 
From: Brian Gerving [mailto:bgerving(--nospam--at)] 
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:01 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: RE: Soils Reports under CBC 1802.2

Why the indecision?  Building officials certainly do have personal liability
if malice or forethought is involved in a given decision.  Discussing issues
like this ad nauseam, which believe me, building officials around the state
have done, definitely qualifies as forethought.

Regarding the ability of building officials to waive soils reports, please
read the text of the exception to Section 1802.2:

?The building official need not require a foundation or soils investigation
where satisfactory data from adjacent areas is available that demonstrates
an investigation is not necessary for any of the conditions in Sections
1802.2.1 through 1802.2.6.?

Note that the exception does not apply to Section 1802.2.7, which is what
triggers soils reports for structures assigned to SDCs D, E, and F.  


From: Rhkratzse(--nospam--at) [mailto:Rhkratzse(--nospam--at)] 
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 12:30 PM
To: chuckuc(--nospam--at); seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Soils Reports under CBC 1802.2

In a message dated 2/15/08 12:23:24 PM, chuckuc(--nospam--at) writes:
I have one local CBO who doing the same (& another who is can't make up
his mind).
Chuck Utzman

Why the indecision?  From this side of the fence -- the practicing engineer
side -- the BO's are in the enviable position of having *all* the power and
of being able to make decisions for the good of society as they see it,
WITHOUT having to worry about being sued.  Not a bad position to be in; I
wish I were in the same position and could actually design what I felt was
the best structure for the situation without worrying about having
*everyone* second-guessing me because I dropped a 4th decimal place in some
arcane wind calculation or missed some obscure code requirement that's
hanging on from many decades ago but just never got rooted out.  

I'm dead serious. 

End of vent. 


The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. Go to AOL

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) 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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********