| TOPICS of INTEREST |
| MY FEATURED LISTINGS |
welcome to:
| COMPANY NAME |
| 3 bdrm Home $585,000 |
| 3000 sqft $600,000 |
| Condo $1,000,000 |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| YOSEMITE CHAPTER of the INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL |
| El Capitan |
| Half Dome |
A new State Assembly Bill 2472 has been proposed that would allow local
jurisdictions to adopt an "experimental permit program" and issue permits for
buildings exempt from the California Building Standards Code in order to
facilitate "environmentally sustainable building materials, methods and designs."
Read the text of the bill here. Isn't that what the Green Building Code is for?
3/15/2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Senate proposes to turn permitting for construction of elementary, high
school and junior colleges over to local building departments. If passed, SB 1227
would remove plan check and inspection of these buildings from the authority of
DSA and transfer those duties to the County or City in which the school is
located. Read the proposed text here.
3/15/2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Official Overrode Computer in Approving Natomas Home Permit
Transfer www.sacbee.com
Published Tuesday, Oct. 20, 2009
The son of a Sacramento city councilman overrode a computer system to permit
a home builder to construct homes within the Natomas flood zone earlier this
year, an apparent violation of a federally mandated building ban, city officials
said Monday.
Dan Waters – son of Councilman Robbie Waters and a customer service
supervisor in the Community Development Department – signed off on a request
by K. Hovnanian Homes to build 35 homes in its Westshore project, west of
Interstate 5 and south of Del Paso Road, according to permits obtained by The
Bee.
Those actions have resulted in a Federal Emergency Management Agency
inquiry, an internal investigation by city officials and a third-party audit of the
Community Development Department.
Federal regulations barred the city from issuing building permits after Dec. 8,
2008, for new homes in Natomas – unless they were elevated 33 feet to keep
them dry in a catastrophic flood.
K. Hovnanian had obtained 35 permits for Westshore before the building ban,
but in April asked that they be transferred to more marketable lots, according to
an internal memo by City Attorney Eileen Teichert. City code prohibits a transfer
of permits from one property to another, Teichert wrote.
Community Development Department head Bill Thomas said there was "no direct
evidence of any malfeasance," but that it appears Waters' actions were "blatant"
and "intentional."
"There were overrides made on these permits," Thomas said. "The computer
says wait, it's in a FEMA zone and you have to trick the computer to go around
that."
Thomas said Waters has been with the department for more than three years and
has FEMA training. Thomas said Waters would "without question" be disciplined.
Dan Waters referred questions to a city public information officer when reached
at the public counter of the Community Development Department on Monday.
Robbie Waters, running for re-election in the council district that covers the
Pocket and Valley Hi, said he and his son do not speak about city business
regularly and that he first learned of the situation two weeks ago from Thomas.
Dan Waters is his father's campaign treasurer.
"Danny has not lived in this house for over 13 years," Robbie Waters said. "He's
out on his own. He's 38 years old and I knew nothing about this until Oct. 7 when
it was brought to my attention."
According to Teichert's memo, K. Hovnanian's construction of new homes began
in May, although permits were not issued until last month and $61,000 in
deferred fees were not collected until Sept. 22.
Teichert said the action could cause the federal government to downgrade the
city's flood prevention rating, which could raise flood insurance rates.
Thomas' department discovered the permit transfers last month after the city's
Department of Utilities' quarterly exam of FEMA compliance in Natomas showed
two questionable construction jobs.
An inquiry by the development department found the 35 transferred permits, and
work was halted on those homes immediately, Thomas said. FEMA was notified by
the city last week, Thomas said.
A FEMA official will meet today with city officials to begin a formal review of the
permits.
"We are meeting with Sacramento officials, at which time they will present us
information and documents which we will be reviewing at our office," Oakland-
based FEMA spokeswoman Franceska Ramos said.
Ramos said FEMA staffer Cynthia McKenzie, an Oakland-based planner for
national flood insurance programs, will review potential actions after a meeting
with the city. Ramos said there is no timeline for the review and declined
comment on possible violations at stake.
Sacramento building inspectors Monday also told K. Hovnanian that the city
would not inspect any of the new homes until the question of the permits' validity
is resolved. Without inspections, homes cannot be sold and occupied.
"That, by necessity, stops construction," said the home builder's Sacramento
attorney, Courtney McAlister.
K. Hovnanian maintains it did nothing wrong. The firm simply moved building
permits it already received before Dec. 8, company officials said again Monday.
The builder said smaller homes originally intended for the permits were not
selling as well as hoped. So it asked to transfer the permits to other better-
selling "villages" in its Westshore project.
"The city ordinance code says nothing about transferring from one property to
another," said K. Hovnanian's McAlister. "That's what happened here. It was not a
transfer from one entity to another, just from one lot we owned to another we
owned."
According to Teichert's memo, K. Hovnanian has closed escrow on four of the
homes, which now have people living in them. Eight more have been sold, but
escrow was not closed. The others are under construction.
McAlister said it's likely that most homes under construction have buyers
committed to moving in when they are finished. He said the company hopes the
issue will be resolved this week.
McAlister said halting construction on the houses is having financial
consequences.
"With respect to economics, they are what you would imagine," he said. "There
are people for whom their employment relies on the continuation of this
subdivision. And subcontractors are in the same boat."
In addition to McAlister, K. Hovnanian is represented by Gregory Thatch, a land-
use attorney who has a street named after him in North Natomas. Thatch is also
the finance co-chairman for Robbie Waters' re-election campaign.
Thatch said Monday that he was out of the country for most of the last month and
that he doesn't know much about the situation. He said there was no connection
between his relationship with the Waters family and K. Hovnanian, and the
transferred permits.
"It's a fair question, but it's preposterous," he said.
Assistant City Manager John Dangberg said there was nothing to show that
Thatch had influenced the permit transfers, but "if any pattern emerges that
raises a red flag, we'll investigate further."
Dangberg said development officials are examining permits throughout Natomas
to see if this was an isolated incident.
City Manager Ray Kerridge has called for a third-party audit of the development
department, Dangberg said.
Thomas said his department already has implemented new safeguards, including
retraining for all employees and a policy that any unusual permit requests be
approved by two supervisors.
Mayor Kevin Johnson said Monday that he would also encourage an outside
exam of the development department.
"This could have been avoided," he said. "I've been a proponent of audits for
every department. We need to look at possibilities of waste, fraud and abuse."
Councilman Ray Tretheway, whose district includes Natomas, said the city "must
make sure everyone is held accountable."
"We have to prove to FEMA this is a singular incident, the city caught it, the city
corrected it and the city has put into place measures that it won't happen again,"
he said.
Call The Bee's Ryan Lillis, (916) 321-1085.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
02/15/2008 - Tired of talking liquefaction with soils engineers when you don't
speak their language? Read this report and you will have a better
understanding of liquefaction and how it relates to the Building Codes we are
charged with enforcing.
property. One major item that contributes to liquefaction on a site is high ground
water (generally within the top 50' of soil). If you have drilled a well recently and
can provide a copy of the drilling logs showing water was hit below the magic 50'
level, you have just removed one of the major threats and possibly reduced the
costs of your soils report.
yourselves and the public.
Richard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
01/08 - Compliments of Imad Naffa's Building Discussion Group - A timely
Discussion on Soils Reports & the 2007 CBC:
To help decipher the foundation and soils report requirements found in the 2006
IBC, the following article from Structural Engineer Magazine may be helpful.
http://gostructural.com/article.asp?id=2376
=============================================
Section 1802: Foundation and soils investigations
S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and Susan Dowty, S.E.
Section 1802.2 of the 2006 IBC specifies where a foundation and soils
investigation (hereinafter referred to as a soils report) is required to be
submitted to the building official. There are some specific cases set forth in the
IBC where soils reports are required, such as in the presence of questionable
soil, expansive soil, and a high groundwater table. These triggers are
irrespective of the seismic design category (SDC). What may come as a surprise
to the code user is that even when these specific situations do not exist, the IBC
requires a soils report for a structure assigned to SDC C, D, E, or F. And there is
a laundry list of issues that need to be addressed in the soils report, including
slope stability, liquefaction, and surface rupture. In SDC D and higher, the lateral
pressure on basement and retaining walls due to earthquake motions needs to
be determined. This requirement for a soils report can very much work to the
engineer's and owner's advantage, because the soil type is conclusively
determined, which may mean a more favorable SDC assigned to the structure.
What may come as even more of a surprise is that the exception for a soils
report found in Section 1802.2, which reads as follows, is not applicable to
structures assigned to SDCs D through F:
Exception: 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.
A code user may not initially recognize that the exception does not apply to
structures assigned to SDCs D through F. However, upon close reading of the
exception, one notices that it only references Sections 1802.2.1 through 1802.2.6,
and it is Section 1802.2.7 that requires a soils report for any structure assigned
to SDC D, E, or F. This mandatory requirement of the IBC for a soils report for any
structure assigned to SDC D, E, or F will result in a major change in California
practice where the UBC has not automatically required a soils report based on
seismic zone.
Answers to FAQs:
Q: My structure has been assigned to SDC D. Section 1802.2.7 mandates quite an
extensive list of requirements for the soils report. Are there any applicable
exceptions? The exception for an investigation in Section 1802.2 does not apply
to Section 1802.2.7. How does the exception at the end of Section 1802.2.7 work?
A: There are no exceptions to the requirement for a soils report for an SDC D, E,
or F structure. The exception at the end of Section 1802.2.7 applies only to the
site-specific study requirement for the purpose of determining the peak ground
acceleration. The peak ground acceleration needs to be known by the
geotechnical engineer to evaluate the potential for liquefaction and soil strength
loss. The exception allows an estimate of SDS/2.5 to be used to represent the
peak ground acceleration.
Q: Can you cite any references on the seismic design of retaining walls?
A: Following is a list of references for the seismic design analysis of "yielding"
retaining walls (walls that can move sufficiently to develop minimum active earth
pressures), such as that illustrated in Figure 1806. These references (and
others) and their application are discussed in Section 7.5 of the 2003 NEHRP
Commentary.
Nadim, F., and R.V. Whitman. 1984. "Coupled Sliding and Tilting of Gravity
Retaining Walls During Earthquakes." Proceedings of the Eighth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 477-484.
Seed, H.B., and R.V. Whitman. 1970. "Design of Earth Retaining Structures for
Dynamic Loads," Proceedings, ASCE Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in
the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures, pp. 103-147. Ithaca, New
York: Cornell University.
Siddarthan, R.S. Ara, and G. Norris. 1992. "Simple Rigid Plastic Model for Seismic
Tilting of Rigid Walls," Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, pp. 469-487.
Steedman, R.S., and X. Zeng. 1996. "Rotation of Large Gravity Retaining Walls on
Rigid Foundations Under Seismic Loading." Analysis and Design of Retaining
Walls Against Earthquakes, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication 60, edited by
S. Prakash, pp. 38-56. New York: ASCE.
Following is a reference for the seismic design analysis of "nonyielding"
retaining walls (walls that cannot move sufficiently to develop minimum active
earth pressures), such as a basement retaining wall.
Wood, J.H. 1973. Earthquake-Induced Soil Pressures on Structures, Report EERL
73-05. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology.
S.K. Ghosh Associates Inc., is a structural, seismic, and code consulting firm
located in Palatine, Ill., and Laguna Niguel, Calif. President S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and
Susan Dowty, S.E., are active in the development and interpretation of national
structural code provisions. They can be contacted at skghosh@aol.com and
dowtyskga@cox.net, respectively, or at www.skghoshassociates.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Bee Story Compliments of Imad Naffa
Visionary law's litigious legacy:
California allows uniquely generous payouts to disabled people who sue private
businesses and public agencies for violations of the federal Americans With
Disabilities Act. That has sparked a wave of lawsuits and made the state a magnet
for lawyers; By Marjie Lundstrom and Sam Stanton - Bee Staff Writers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$4.5-Million Ruling Goes Against O.C.
The planning department overcharged for building fees and then misspent the
money, a judge says.
By Jean O. Pasco, Times Staff Writer - January 6, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-20-2004 -- News from Tom Liberty -- Aloha Everyone,
I've changed jobs again. I am a Project Engineer. Soon to be Project
Manager. This time I should be set for quite a few years. I'm working for
Metzler Contracting Co., LLC. We build very upper end homes in a couple of
the resort area on the Kohala Coast just North of Kailua Kona. These houses are
taking between 14 and 18 months to complete. The workmanship is just perfect.
Amazing finish work!!!
Aloha to all!!!
My email has changed to liberty@metzlercontracting.com
Aloha,
Tom Liberty
Metzler Contracting Co., LLC
808-325-0819 808-325-9848 Fax 808-936-6596 Cell
jurisdictions to adopt an "experimental permit program" and issue permits for
buildings exempt from the California Building Standards Code in order to
facilitate "environmentally sustainable building materials, methods and designs."
Read the text of the bill here. Isn't that what the Green Building Code is for?
3/15/2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Senate proposes to turn permitting for construction of elementary, high
school and junior colleges over to local building departments. If passed, SB 1227
would remove plan check and inspection of these buildings from the authority of
DSA and transfer those duties to the County or City in which the school is
located. Read the proposed text here.
3/15/2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Official Overrode Computer in Approving Natomas Home Permit
Transfer www.sacbee.com
Published Tuesday, Oct. 20, 2009
The son of a Sacramento city councilman overrode a computer system to permit
a home builder to construct homes within the Natomas flood zone earlier this
year, an apparent violation of a federally mandated building ban, city officials
said Monday.
Dan Waters – son of Councilman Robbie Waters and a customer service
supervisor in the Community Development Department – signed off on a request
by K. Hovnanian Homes to build 35 homes in its Westshore project, west of
Interstate 5 and south of Del Paso Road, according to permits obtained by The
Bee.
Those actions have resulted in a Federal Emergency Management Agency
inquiry, an internal investigation by city officials and a third-party audit of the
Community Development Department.
Federal regulations barred the city from issuing building permits after Dec. 8,
2008, for new homes in Natomas – unless they were elevated 33 feet to keep
them dry in a catastrophic flood.
K. Hovnanian had obtained 35 permits for Westshore before the building ban,
but in April asked that they be transferred to more marketable lots, according to
an internal memo by City Attorney Eileen Teichert. City code prohibits a transfer
of permits from one property to another, Teichert wrote.
Community Development Department head Bill Thomas said there was "no direct
evidence of any malfeasance," but that it appears Waters' actions were "blatant"
and "intentional."
"There were overrides made on these permits," Thomas said. "The computer
says wait, it's in a FEMA zone and you have to trick the computer to go around
that."
Thomas said Waters has been with the department for more than three years and
has FEMA training. Thomas said Waters would "without question" be disciplined.
Dan Waters referred questions to a city public information officer when reached
at the public counter of the Community Development Department on Monday.
Robbie Waters, running for re-election in the council district that covers the
Pocket and Valley Hi, said he and his son do not speak about city business
regularly and that he first learned of the situation two weeks ago from Thomas.
Dan Waters is his father's campaign treasurer.
"Danny has not lived in this house for over 13 years," Robbie Waters said. "He's
out on his own. He's 38 years old and I knew nothing about this until Oct. 7 when
it was brought to my attention."
According to Teichert's memo, K. Hovnanian's construction of new homes began
in May, although permits were not issued until last month and $61,000 in
deferred fees were not collected until Sept. 22.
Teichert said the action could cause the federal government to downgrade the
city's flood prevention rating, which could raise flood insurance rates.
Thomas' department discovered the permit transfers last month after the city's
Department of Utilities' quarterly exam of FEMA compliance in Natomas showed
two questionable construction jobs.
An inquiry by the development department found the 35 transferred permits, and
work was halted on those homes immediately, Thomas said. FEMA was notified by
the city last week, Thomas said.
A FEMA official will meet today with city officials to begin a formal review of the
permits.
"We are meeting with Sacramento officials, at which time they will present us
information and documents which we will be reviewing at our office," Oakland-
based FEMA spokeswoman Franceska Ramos said.
Ramos said FEMA staffer Cynthia McKenzie, an Oakland-based planner for
national flood insurance programs, will review potential actions after a meeting
with the city. Ramos said there is no timeline for the review and declined
comment on possible violations at stake.
Sacramento building inspectors Monday also told K. Hovnanian that the city
would not inspect any of the new homes until the question of the permits' validity
is resolved. Without inspections, homes cannot be sold and occupied.
"That, by necessity, stops construction," said the home builder's Sacramento
attorney, Courtney McAlister.
K. Hovnanian maintains it did nothing wrong. The firm simply moved building
permits it already received before Dec. 8, company officials said again Monday.
The builder said smaller homes originally intended for the permits were not
selling as well as hoped. So it asked to transfer the permits to other better-
selling "villages" in its Westshore project.
"The city ordinance code says nothing about transferring from one property to
another," said K. Hovnanian's McAlister. "That's what happened here. It was not a
transfer from one entity to another, just from one lot we owned to another we
owned."
According to Teichert's memo, K. Hovnanian has closed escrow on four of the
homes, which now have people living in them. Eight more have been sold, but
escrow was not closed. The others are under construction.
McAlister said it's likely that most homes under construction have buyers
committed to moving in when they are finished. He said the company hopes the
issue will be resolved this week.
McAlister said halting construction on the houses is having financial
consequences.
"With respect to economics, they are what you would imagine," he said. "There
are people for whom their employment relies on the continuation of this
subdivision. And subcontractors are in the same boat."
In addition to McAlister, K. Hovnanian is represented by Gregory Thatch, a land-
use attorney who has a street named after him in North Natomas. Thatch is also
the finance co-chairman for Robbie Waters' re-election campaign.
Thatch said Monday that he was out of the country for most of the last month and
that he doesn't know much about the situation. He said there was no connection
between his relationship with the Waters family and K. Hovnanian, and the
transferred permits.
"It's a fair question, but it's preposterous," he said.
Assistant City Manager John Dangberg said there was nothing to show that
Thatch had influenced the permit transfers, but "if any pattern emerges that
raises a red flag, we'll investigate further."
Dangberg said development officials are examining permits throughout Natomas
to see if this was an isolated incident.
City Manager Ray Kerridge has called for a third-party audit of the development
department, Dangberg said.
Thomas said his department already has implemented new safeguards, including
retraining for all employees and a policy that any unusual permit requests be
approved by two supervisors.
Mayor Kevin Johnson said Monday that he would also encourage an outside
exam of the development department.
"This could have been avoided," he said. "I've been a proponent of audits for
every department. We need to look at possibilities of waste, fraud and abuse."
Councilman Ray Tretheway, whose district includes Natomas, said the city "must
make sure everyone is held accountable."
"We have to prove to FEMA this is a singular incident, the city caught it, the city
corrected it and the city has put into place measures that it won't happen again,"
he said.
Call The Bee's Ryan Lillis, (916) 321-1085.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
02/15/2008 - Tired of talking liquefaction with soils engineers when you don't
speak their language? Read this report and you will have a better
understanding of liquefaction and how it relates to the Building Codes we are
charged with enforcing.
property. One major item that contributes to liquefaction on a site is high ground
water (generally within the top 50' of soil). If you have drilled a well recently and
can provide a copy of the drilling logs showing water was hit below the magic 50'
level, you have just removed one of the major threats and possibly reduced the
costs of your soils report.
yourselves and the public.
Richard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
01/08 - Compliments of Imad Naffa's Building Discussion Group - A timely
Discussion on Soils Reports & the 2007 CBC:
To help decipher the foundation and soils report requirements found in the 2006
IBC, the following article from Structural Engineer Magazine may be helpful.
http://gostructural.com/article.asp?id=2376
=============================================
Section 1802: Foundation and soils investigations
S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and Susan Dowty, S.E.
Section 1802.2 of the 2006 IBC specifies where a foundation and soils
investigation (hereinafter referred to as a soils report) is required to be
submitted to the building official. There are some specific cases set forth in the
IBC where soils reports are required, such as in the presence of questionable
soil, expansive soil, and a high groundwater table. These triggers are
irrespective of the seismic design category (SDC). What may come as a surprise
to the code user is that even when these specific situations do not exist, the IBC
requires a soils report for a structure assigned to SDC C, D, E, or F. And there is
a laundry list of issues that need to be addressed in the soils report, including
slope stability, liquefaction, and surface rupture. In SDC D and higher, the lateral
pressure on basement and retaining walls due to earthquake motions needs to
be determined. This requirement for a soils report can very much work to the
engineer's and owner's advantage, because the soil type is conclusively
determined, which may mean a more favorable SDC assigned to the structure.
What may come as even more of a surprise is that the exception for a soils
report found in Section 1802.2, which reads as follows, is not applicable to
structures assigned to SDCs D through F:
Exception: 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.
A code user may not initially recognize that the exception does not apply to
structures assigned to SDCs D through F. However, upon close reading of the
exception, one notices that it only references Sections 1802.2.1 through 1802.2.6,
and it is Section 1802.2.7 that requires a soils report for any structure assigned
to SDC D, E, or F. This mandatory requirement of the IBC for a soils report for any
structure assigned to SDC D, E, or F will result in a major change in California
practice where the UBC has not automatically required a soils report based on
seismic zone.
Answers to FAQs:
Q: My structure has been assigned to SDC D. Section 1802.2.7 mandates quite an
extensive list of requirements for the soils report. Are there any applicable
exceptions? The exception for an investigation in Section 1802.2 does not apply
to Section 1802.2.7. How does the exception at the end of Section 1802.2.7 work?
A: There are no exceptions to the requirement for a soils report for an SDC D, E,
or F structure. The exception at the end of Section 1802.2.7 applies only to the
site-specific study requirement for the purpose of determining the peak ground
acceleration. The peak ground acceleration needs to be known by the
geotechnical engineer to evaluate the potential for liquefaction and soil strength
loss. The exception allows an estimate of SDS/2.5 to be used to represent the
peak ground acceleration.
Q: Can you cite any references on the seismic design of retaining walls?
A: Following is a list of references for the seismic design analysis of "yielding"
retaining walls (walls that can move sufficiently to develop minimum active earth
pressures), such as that illustrated in Figure 1806. These references (and
others) and their application are discussed in Section 7.5 of the 2003 NEHRP
Commentary.
Nadim, F., and R.V. Whitman. 1984. "Coupled Sliding and Tilting of Gravity
Retaining Walls During Earthquakes." Proceedings of the Eighth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 477-484.
Seed, H.B., and R.V. Whitman. 1970. "Design of Earth Retaining Structures for
Dynamic Loads," Proceedings, ASCE Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in
the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures, pp. 103-147. Ithaca, New
York: Cornell University.
Siddarthan, R.S. Ara, and G. Norris. 1992. "Simple Rigid Plastic Model for Seismic
Tilting of Rigid Walls," Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, pp. 469-487.
Steedman, R.S., and X. Zeng. 1996. "Rotation of Large Gravity Retaining Walls on
Rigid Foundations Under Seismic Loading." Analysis and Design of Retaining
Walls Against Earthquakes, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication 60, edited by
S. Prakash, pp. 38-56. New York: ASCE.
Following is a reference for the seismic design analysis of "nonyielding"
retaining walls (walls that cannot move sufficiently to develop minimum active
earth pressures), such as a basement retaining wall.
Wood, J.H. 1973. Earthquake-Induced Soil Pressures on Structures, Report EERL
73-05. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology.
S.K. Ghosh Associates Inc., is a structural, seismic, and code consulting firm
located in Palatine, Ill., and Laguna Niguel, Calif. President S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and
Susan Dowty, S.E., are active in the development and interpretation of national
structural code provisions. They can be contacted at skghosh@aol.com and
dowtyskga@cox.net, respectively, or at www.skghoshassociates.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Bee Story Compliments of Imad Naffa
Visionary law's litigious legacy:
California allows uniquely generous payouts to disabled people who sue private
businesses and public agencies for violations of the federal Americans With
Disabilities Act. That has sparked a wave of lawsuits and made the state a magnet
for lawyers; By Marjie Lundstrom and Sam Stanton - Bee Staff Writers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$4.5-Million Ruling Goes Against O.C.
The planning department overcharged for building fees and then misspent the
money, a judge says.
By Jean O. Pasco, Times Staff Writer - January 6, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-20-2004 -- News from Tom Liberty -- Aloha Everyone,
I've changed jobs again. I am a Project Engineer. Soon to be Project
Manager. This time I should be set for quite a few years. I'm working for
Metzler Contracting Co., LLC. We build very upper end homes in a couple of
the resort area on the Kohala Coast just North of Kailua Kona. These houses are
taking between 14 and 18 months to complete. The workmanship is just perfect.
Amazing finish work!!!
Aloha to all!!!
My email has changed to liberty@metzlercontracting.com
Aloha,
Tom Liberty
Metzler Contracting Co., LLC
808-325-0819 808-325-9848 Fax 808-936-6596 Cell