Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]
[no subject]
[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- From: "Tom VanDorpe" <tvandorpe(--nospam--at)vcaengineers.net>
- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:57:11 -0800
George, Many of us have seen the code grow and have formed our opinions, however there's a bigger issue on the horizon: The UBC is no longer in production. ICBO is committed to the production of the IBC, which is fine except the NFPA has elbowed their way in with their code. What I'm thinking about is the impending showdown. The City of Pasadena is blazing a trail by recognizing the IBC. That's a bold move - consider that significant cost savings for developers with the relaxed allowable areas, etc when compared to the current 1997 UBC requirements. When the showdown occurs, our headache issues like load combinations will take on as much weight as a cork bobbing in the ocean. It will be interesting to see what the Ca Building Standards Commission does. If anyone on the list attends the meeting, please share! Tom VanDorpe VanDorpe Chou Associates, Inc. (714) 978-9780 From: "George Richards, P.E." <george(--nospam--at)BORM.com> To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org> Subject: IBC in California You guys have got to be kidding. As it is now the 1997 has three ways to design a building: Ultimate Strength, Working Stress and Alternate Working Strength and who knows how many interpretations. Now we will all have the IBC. Hell is not ICBO still issuing errata's to their errata's? We have still not settled on what the '97 wants and now we get to start arguing about what's in the IBC. Tom, time to raise those plan check fees of yours. George Richards, PE thinking I am going to have to add an Esq. in there just to figure out how to be a PE. -----Original Message----- From: Yousefi, Ben [mailto:Ben.Yousefi(--nospam--at)ci.sj.ca.us] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 9:30 AM To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org' Subject: RE: IBC in California The California building standards commission is apparently going to discuss an action item on March 7 in regard to asking for the Attorney General opinion on the Pasadena ordinance.
- Prev by Subject: [no subject]
- Next by Subject: [no subject]
- Previous by thread: cast iron plumbing spiders in concrete slabs
- Next by thread: Foundation Program: STADD vs. SAFE
- About this archive
- Messages sorted by: [Subject][Thread][Author][Date]