Ordinance No. 11760
��t49jYfLY INOV'���
COMMUNITY SERVICES & WATER DEPARTMENT
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
C-14
TO: Mark C. Whitworth, City Administrator
FROM: Samuel Kevin Wilson, rector of Community Services & Water
DATE: October 26, 2010
SUBJECT: BUILDING CODES ADOPTION
The State of California recently adopted the 2010 California Building, Electrical, Mechanical,
Plumbing, Residential, Green Building Standards, Existing Building, and Energy Codes. Section 17958 of the
California Health and Safety Code requires that the latest Edition of the California Building Standards Codes
apply to local construction 180 days after they become effective at the State level Therefore, these codes are
scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2011. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5,
17958.7 and 18941.5 allow a local agency to modify or change the Model Codes provided that such
modifications or changes are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological or topographical
conditions.
In addition, the International Code Council Los Angeles Basin Chapter has been very active throughout
the years in leading the effort to create uniformity of building codes and regulations in the greater Los Angeles
region as well as addressing policy issues of interest to building officials and the construction industry.
One such effort to promote uniformity of building regulations is through the Los Angeles Regional
Uniform Code Program (LARUCP). The LARUCP program began in July 1999 with the purpose of developing
uniform interpretations and handouts to serve as guidelines for building officials, contractors, engineers and
architects in the consistent application of the codes. The mission of this program was to minimize the number of
and to develop uniformity in local technical amendments to the model codes for adoption by jurisdictions in the
greater Los Angeles region.
The FY 2010 LARUCP Recommended Technical Amendments have been widely circulated and/or
discussed over the past several months with various local jurisdictional members, structural engineering
associations or committees such as, but not limited to, Seismology, Steel, Light Frame Construction, Quality
Assurance and Building Code Committee, design professionals in the construction/engineering industry, and
other interested groups or individuals.
City staff believes it is in the interest of public health, safety and welfare that certain amendments to the
codes, in addition to those recommended by the LARUCP; be adopted because of climatic, geological and
.topographical conditions within Vernon. Specifically -
Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the City of Vernon
increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
2. Geological conditions in the City of Vernon are affected by the nearby location of earthquake
faults that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Topographical conditions of the City of Vernon coupled with the density of buildings, limited
setbacks, narrow access to buildings and narrow streets potentially create a problem for
governmental agencies to respond to emergency conditions.
City staff is recommending that additional amendments to the codes be adopted in order to provide
administrative clarification and do not modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and
17958.7 of the California Health and Safety Code. These amendments establish administrative standards for the
effective enforcement of building standards and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that
new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the California Building Standards.
Therefore, it is recommended that the 2010 Edition of the California Building, Electrical, Mechanical,
Plumbing, Residential, Green Building Standards, Existing Building, Energy Codes along with the 2006
International Code Council Electrical Code Administrative Provisions, and the 2009 International Existing
Building Code be adopted with amendments outlined in the Staff Report as the City of Vernon's Building
Codes.
The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the enclosed Staff Report and Ordinance No.
1176.
Enclosed is a revised Staff Report recommending the adoption of the 2010 Building Codes. Please
schedule Ordinance No. 1176 to be introduced at the November 1, 2010 City Council meeting. A public
hearing for the aforementioned ordinance will be set for the date of the second reading, December 6, 2010.
SKW/ca
Enclosure
s
RECEIVED
OCT 2 7 2010
STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK'S OFACE
COMMUNITY SERVICES`& WATER DEPARTMENT
DATE: _ October 26, 2010
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Samuel Kevin Wilsorf, 117rector of Community Services & Water
RE: BUILDING CODES ADOPTION
The State of California recently adopted the 2010 California Building, Electrical, Mechanical,
Plumbing, Residential, Green Building Standards, Existing Building, and Energy Codes. Section 17958 of the
California Health and Safety Code requires that the latest Edition 'of the California Building Standards Codes
apply to local construction 180 days after they become effective at the State level. Therefore, these codes are
scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2011. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958,
17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 allow a local agency to modify or change the Model Codes provided that such
modifications or changes are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological or topographical
conditions.
In addition, the International Code Council Los Angeles Basin Chapter has been very active
throughout the years in leading the effort to create uniformity of building codes and regulations in the greater
Los Angeles region as well as addressing policy issues of interest to building officials and the construction
industry.
One such effort to promote uniformity of building regulations is through the Los Angeles Regional
Uniform Code Program (LARUCP). The LARUCP program began in July 1999 with the purpose of developing
uniform interpretations and handouts to serve as guidelines for building officials, contractors, engineers and
architects in the consistent application of the codes. The mission of this program was to minimize the number
of and to develop uniformity in local technical amendments to the model codes for adoption byjurisdictions in
the greater Los Angeles region.
Through the coordination of the International Code Council Los Angeles Basin Chapter's California
Residential Code Committee, Structural Code Committee, and Green Building Standards Committee, the
following goals have been established:
1. Create uniformity of building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, energy efficiency and green codes that
can be adopted in most of the jurisdictions in the greater Los Angeles region.
2. Reduces the total number of local technical amendments to the model code in the greater Los
Angeles region.
3. Received support from most, if not all, of the 89 jurisdictions in the greater Los Angeles region.
4. Obtain active participation.from a majority of the jurisdictions in the greater Los Angeles region in
formulating and implementing this program.
5. Save the construction industry costs by having consistent codes throughout the region.
The FY 2010 LARUCP Recommended Technical Amendments have been widely circulated and/or
discussed over the past several months with various local jurisdictional members, structural engineering,
associations or committees such as, but not limited to, Seismology, Steel, Light Frame Construction, Quality
Assurance and Building Code Committee, design professionals in the construction/engineering industry, and
other interested groups or individuals.
City staff believes it is in the interest of public health, safety and welfare that certain amendments
to the codes, in addition to those recommended by the LARUCP, be adopted because of climatic,
geological and topographical conditions within Vernon. Specifically:
1. Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the City of Vernon
increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
2. Geological conditions in the City of Vernon are affected by the nearby location of earthquake
faults that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
3. Topographical conditions of the City of Vernon coupled with the density of buildings, limited
setbacks, narrow access to buildings and narrow streets potentially create a problem for
governmental agencies to respond to emergency conditions.
Lastly, City staff is recommending that additional amendments to the codes be adopted in order to
2
provide administrative clarification and do not modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958,
17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and Safety Code. These amendments establish administrative
standards for the effective enforcement of building standards and therefore need to be incorporated into the
code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions oralterations to existing buildings or structures
are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the California Building
Standards.
2010 Vernon Building Code
The Building Code establishes regulations and standards for the structural design, construction,
alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, occupancy, location, maintenance, demolition
and disable accessibility for every building or structure within Vernon, with the exception of one and two
family dwelling units not exceeding three stories. It is recommended that the 2010 California Building
Code, including Appendix J, and standards contained therein, published by the International Code Council
and the California Building Standards Commission, and attached as Exhibit "A," be adopted as the Vernon
Building Code with the proposed amendments outlined herein. The amendments in brief summary are as
follows:
1. The City requires a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for each change in use or
tenancy.
2. Requires roof coverings to be Class A or B.
3. Requires skylights to meet certain minimum requirements.
4. Eliminates provisions for construction in the public right of way.
5. Establishes reinspection fees and outlines the responsibility of the permittee.
6. Establishes various technical amendments as developed by the LARUCP to improve the
seismic and wind loading capabilities of structures within the City.
7. Establishes additional grading provisions in order to safeguard adjacent properties and
establish erosion control requirements.
2010 Vernon Electrical. Code
The Electrical Code establishes regulations and standards for the design, alteration, modification,
construction and maintenance of electrical installations, from the meter into the property, within the City of
3
Vernon. It is recommended that the 2010 California Electrical Code, excluding annexes, copyrighted by
the National Fire Protection Association and the California Building Standards Commission, including
standards contained therein and attached as Exhibit "B," be adopted with the proposed amendments
outlined herein as the Vernon Electrical Code. Additionally, it is recommended that the 2006 International
Code Council Electrical Administrative Provisions, published by the International Code Council, including
standards contained therein and as attached as Exhibit "C" be adopted with the proposed amendments
outlined herein as the Administrative provisions of the Vernon Electrical Code. The amendments in brief
summary are as follows:
1. Establishes requirements for aluminum connections.
2. Establishes specific City requirements for identifying conductors.
3. Eliminates ceiling mounted receptacles.
4. Requires service drops to be in rigid conduits.
5. Eliminates the use of flexible grounds for equipment.
6. Eliminates the use of Romex wiring in the City other than in dwellings.
7. Requires permits for low voltage installations.
8. Establishes responsibilities of the permittee.
9. Establishes a Permit Fee Schedule.
10. Amends Board of Appeals membership requirements.
2010 Vernon Mechanical Code
The Mechanical Code establishes regulations and standards for the erection, installation,
alteration, relocation, replacement, use and maintenance of heating, ventilation, cooling, refrigeration
systems and other heat producing devices within the City of Vernon. It is recommended that the 2010
California Mechanical Code, including appendices and standards contained therein, published by the
International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials and the California Building Standards
Commission, and attached as Exhibit "D," be adopted with the proposed amendments as the Vernon
Mechanical Code. The amendments in brief summary are as follows:
1. Establishes City Permit Fees.
2. Establishes the responsibilities of the permittee.
4
2010 Vernon Plumbing Code
The Plumbing Code establishes regulations and standards for installation of plumbing systems
including water supply and distribution, sanitary drainage, storm drainage and gas piping. It is
recommended that the 2010 California Plumbing Code, including appendices, and standards contained
therein, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, and attached as
Exhibit "E," be adopted with the proposed amendments as the Vernon Plumbing Code. The amendments
in brief summary are as follows:
1. Establishes City Permit Fees.
2. Establishes the responsibilities of the permittee.
3. Establishes minimum number of plumbing fixtures.
4. Establishes requirements for yard drainage.
2010 Vernon Residential Code
The Residential Code establishes regulations and standards for the structural design,
construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, occupancy, location, maintenance,
demolition and disable accessibility for one and two family dwelling units not exceeding three stories within
the City of Vernon. It is recommended that the 2010 California Residential Code, and standards
contained therein, including Appendix G, attached as Exhibit "F," published by the International Code
Council and the California Building Standards Commission, be adopted with the proposed amendments
as the Vernon Residential Code. The amendments in brief summary are as follows:
1. Establishes permittee responsibilities
2. Establishes reinspection fees.
3. Establishes of roofing materials requirements.
4. Establishes various technical amendments as developed by the LARUCP to improve the
seismic and wind loading capabilities of structures within the City.
2010 Vernon Green Building Standards Code
The Green Buildings Standards Code is new this code cycle and establishes both mandatory and
voluntary provisions through the development and planning process to protect, restore and enhance the
environmental quality of the site and respect the integrity of adjacent properties. Mandatory measures for
5
nonresidential projects include the development of a storm water pollution prevention plan, bicycle
parking, designated parking for fuel efficient vehicles, light pollution reduction measures, the requirement
of sub water meters for buildings 50,000 square feet or greater, installation of low flow plumbing fixtures,
installation of weather based irrigation controllers, requirement that 50% of construction waste and debris
be recycled, requires accessible recycling waste bins,. require the commissioning of buildings 10,000
square feet or more, requires adhesive products be low VOC and establishes limits for formaldehydes.
It is recommended that the 2010 Green Building Standards Code, and the standards contained
therein, and attached as Exhibit "G," published by the California Building Standards Commission, be
adopted with the proposed amendments as the Vernon Green Building Standards Code. The
amendments in brief summary are as follows:
1. Establishes City Permit Fees.
2. Defines low rise residential and sustainability.
3. Establishes requirements of automatic irrigation system controllers for landscaping.
2010 Vernon Existing Building Code
The Existing Building Code establishes minimum design standards for the structural seismic
strengthening of existing unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. These standards are primarily
established to reduce the risk of loss of life or injury. Compliance with these provisions will not necessarily
prevent the loss of life or injury, or prevent earthquake damage to rehabilitated buildings. It is
recommended that the 2010 California Existing Building Code consisting of Appendix Chapter Al and
referenced standards contained therein, and attached as Exhibit "H," published by the International Code
Council and the California Building Standards Commission, be adopted as the Vernon Existing Building
Code. Additionally Sections 38660 and 50022.2 of the California Government Code authorizes the City
Council to adopt by reference regulations for the abatement of unsafe structures. Older buildings of tilt up
concrete wall construction are recognized to be a hazard due to the potential for collapse in an
earthquake, especially those constructed prior to the adoption of the 1976 Uniform Building Code. These
types of structures often do not have proper ties between the wall and roofing systems. During an
earthquake the wall and roof connection have been known to fail causing the roof to collapse endangering
persons and property below. Property owners have in the past voluntarily retrofitted their tilt -up buildings
and have either used other City's standards or used no standards at all. Often lenders or insurance
0
companies require these types of buildings to be retrofitted. City staff believes that a minimum recognized
standard should be established for the retrofit of these structures. Appendix Chapter A2 of the 2009
Edition of the International Existing Building Code published by the International Code Council establishes
minimum standards for tilt -up concrete walled buildings to provide structural seismic resistance in order to
reduce the risk of life loss or injury on both the subject and adjacent properties. Chapter A2 of the 2006
International Existing Building Code was previously adopted as the retrofit standard for tilt -up concrete
walled buildings. In addition, Chapter A5 of the 2006 International Existing Building Code was previously
adopted as the seismic retrofit standards for concrete framed buildings. It is recommended that Chapters
A2 and A5 of the 2009 Edition of the International Existing Building Code be adopted as the new minimum
standard. It should be noted that these standards will not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or
prevent earthquake damage to an existing building, but will improve the seismic performance of these
structures. Lastly, this retrofit requirement for tilt -up concrete walled structures or concrete framed
buildings is a voluntary program and is not mandated by the City.
2010 Vernon Energy Code
The Energy Code establishes energy efficiencies standards for buildings constructed or enlarged
within the City. The standards include regulations on building envelopes, space conditioning, water
heating systems, and lighting systems.
It is recommended that the 2010 California Energy Code, including appendices, and standards
contained therein, and attached as Exhibit "I," published by the California Building Standards Commission,
be adopted with one proposed amendment as the Vernon Energy Code. The amendment in brief
summary is as follows:
1. Establishment of City Permit Fees.
Vernon Dangerous Building Code
The City has adopted the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings, published by the International Code Council. This Code sets forth the criteria when a building is
considered unsafe and establishes provisions for correcting the unsafe condition. No amendments are
necessary and the Code may remain as previously adopted.
7
Repair and Construction of Damaged Structures
Article XI of Chapter 24 of the City Code establishes standards and regulations for the
expeditious repair and reconstruction of structures damaged as a result of an uncontrollable event. An
uncontrollable event is defined as an act of god including a seismic event, flood, fire, tsunami or other
natural disaster beyond the control of the property owner. Staff is recommending that the 2009 Edition of
the International Existing Building Code and attached as Exhibit "J," published by the International Code
Council, be adopted as the disaster repair criteria for the City of Vernon.
Amendments
Attached herewith are the proposed amendments for the Vernon's Building, Electrical,
Mechanical, Plumbing, Residential, Green Building Standards, Existing Building, and Energy Codes.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
Ordinance
No.1176
Section No.
2010
LARUCP
No.
City of
Vernon
No.
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
3 B. a)
V-01
Add CBC Section 105.8 Responsibility of Permittee
3 B. b
V-02
Add CBC Section 110.7 Reinspection
3 B. c)
V-03
Amend CBC Section 111.1 Use and Occupancy
3 B.(d)
3 B. e)
3 B. f
16-01
16-02
V-04
Amend CBC Section 1505.1 Roof Assembly Requirements
Amend CBC Section 1613.6.1 Assumption of Flexible Diaphragm
Amend CBC Section 1613.6.7 Building Separation
3 B. )
16-03
Add CBC Section 1613.8 BRBF Period Parameter
3 B. h
16-04
Add CBC Section 1613.9 Values for Vertical Combinations
3 B. i
16-05
Add CBC Section 1613.10 Stability Coefficient
3 B.
16-06
Add CBC Section 1613.11 Subdia hra m
3 B.(k)
16-07
Add CBC Section 1613.12 Seismic Design Provisions for Hillside Buildin s
3 B. I
16-08
Add CBC Section 1613.13 Suspended Ceiling
3 B. m
17-01
Amend CBC Section 1704.4 SI for Concrete Construction
3 B.(n)
17-02
Amend CBC Section 1704.8 Driven Deep Foundations and Connection Grade
Beams
3 B.(o)
17-03
Amend CBC Section.1704.9 Cast -in -Place Deep Foundations and Connection
Grade Beams
3 B. )
17-04
Amend CBC Section 1705.3 Seismic Resistance
3 B.(q)
17-05
Amend CBC Section 1710.1 General
3 B. r)
17-06
Amend CBC Section 1710.2 Structural Observations for Seismic Resistance
3 B. s
18- 11
Amend CBC Section 1807.1.4 Permanent Wood Foundation Systems
3 B.(t)
18-02
Amend CBC Section 1807.1.6 Prescriptive Design of Concrete and Masonry
Foundation Walls
3 B. u
18-03
Amend CBC Section 1809.3 Stepped Footings
3 B.(v) & (w)
18-04
Amend CBC Section 1809.7 and Table 1809.7 Prescriptive Footings for Light -
Frame Construction
3 B. x
18-05
Amend CBC Section 1809.12 Timber Footings
3 B.
18-06
Amend CBC Section 1810.3.2.4 Timber
3 B• z)
Amend CBC Section 1908.1 General
3 B.(aa),
(bb), (cc) &
dd)
19-01
Add CBC Sections 1908.1.11 through 1908.1.14 Reinforcement
3 B.(ee)
19-02
Amend CBC Section 1908.1.2 Intermediate Structural Wall
3 B.(ff)
19-03
Amend CBC Section 1908.1.3 Wall Pier
3 B.
19-04
Amend CBC Section 1908.1.8 Minimum Reinforcement
3 B.(hh)
19-05
Amend CBC Section 1909.4 Design
3 B. ii
22-01
Add CBC Section 2204.1.1 Consumables for Welding
3 B. j
22-02
Add CBC Section 2205.4 SCBF Member Types
3 B.(kk) &
II
23-10
Amend CBC Section 2304.9.1 and Table 2304.9.1 Fastener Requirements
3 B.(mm)
23-01
Amend CBC Section 2304.11.7 Wood Used in Retaining Walls and Cribs
3 B, nn
23-02
Add CBC Section 2305.4 Quality of Nails
3 B.(oo)
23-03
Add CBC Section 2305.5 Hold -Down Connectors
3 B.(pp)
3 B. q
23-04
Amend CBC Section 2306.2.1 Wood Structural Panel Diaphra ms
Add CBC Table 2306.2.1(3
3 B• q
Add CBC Table 2306.2.1 4
3 B.(rr) &
(ss)
23-05
Amend CBC Section 2306.3 and Table 2306.3 Wood Structural Panel Shear
Walls
3 B. tt
Add CBC Table 2306.3(2)
3 B. uu
23-06
Amend CBC Section 2306.7 Shear Walls Sheathed with Other Materials
3 B.(vv)
23-07
Amend CBC Section 2308.3.4 Brace Wall Line Support
3 B.(ww)
23-08
Amend CBC Section 2308.12.2 Concrete or Masonry
3 B.(xx)
23-09
Amend CBC Section 2308.12.4 Braced Wall Line Sheathing
3 B.(yy)
Amend CBC Table 2308.12.4 Wall Bracing in Seismic Design Categories D
and E
3 B.(zz)
23-11
Amend CBC Section 2308.12.5 Attachment of Sheathing
3 B.(aaa)
V-05
Delete CBC Section 2609 Light Transmitting Plastic Roof Panels
3 B.(bbb)
V-06
Add CBC Section 2610.9 Approved Materials
3 B.(ccc)
V-07
Delete CBC Chapter 32 Construction in the Public Right of Way
3 B.(ddd)
V-08
Amend CBC Section J101 of Appendix J
10
2010 Vernon -01 Section 105.8 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
105.8 Responsibility of permittee. Building permits shall be presumed to incorporate the provision,
that the applicant, the applicant's agent, employees or contractors shall carry out the proposed
work in accordance with the approved plans and with all the requirements of the code and any
other law or regulations applicable thereto, whether specified or not. No approval shall exonerate
any person from the responsibility of complying with the provisions or intent of the code.
RATIONALE:
The permittee and/or it agents shall be held responsible to ensure its work complies with the code and with
any other regulations or laws adopted by the State and this responsibility should not be shifted in any way to
the City or its employees.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
2010 Vern�n -02 Section 110.7 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
110.7 Reinspection. A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when
such portion of the work for which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections
called for are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise
available at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure
to provide access on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from
the plans requiring the approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection
of the work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not been completed or is not performed in
conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The City should have the ability to collect
for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
12
2010 Vernon -03 , Section 111.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
111.1 Use and Occupancy. No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the
existing use or occupancy classification of a building or structure or portion thereof shall be made
until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefore as provided herein.
"Change in Use" shall include, but not be limited to any change in occupancy classification or any
change of tenancy of a building for which a new business license or certificate of occupancy is
required under the Code of the City of Vernon. When determined by the building official that a
special inspection is required to determine compliance with the Code of the Citv of Vernon nr with
this code for a certificate of occupancy, an inspection fee shall be paid as set forth by resolution of
the City Council. Issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall not be construed as an approval of a
violation of the provisions of the Code of the City of Vernon of this code, or of any
ordinances of this jurisdiction. A_ certificate of occupancy which presumes to give authority to
violate or cancel the provisions of the Code of the City of Vernon of this code or of any other
ordinance shall not be valid.
EXCEPTION: Certificates of occupancy are not required for work exempt from permits under
Section 105.2 A Certificate of occupancy shall not be required for a change in Tenancy of a Group R
Occupancy.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment permits the City to require a certificate of occupancy for a change in tenancy. Due
to the industrial nature of the City of Vernon City staff has found that it is necessary to reinspect each building
prior to any occupancy or change in tenancy, quite often when a change of tenancy occurs the previous tenant
leaves the building in an unsafe condition for occupancy and in violation of the City's building codes. In order
for the building to be safely occupied the building and fire department staffs will inspect the building and issue
correction notices of items that must be brought into conformity prior to occupancy. In addition it gives the
various departments to educate the tenants on proper storage requirements, health and sanitation
requirements and environmental requirements and regulations.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
13
2010 Vernon -04 Section 1505.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
1505.1 Roof Assembly Requirements. The roof assembly on any structure regulated by this code shall
be as specified in Table 1505.1 except that only fire retardant roof coverings meeting class A or B
roofing assemblies are permitted in the City of Vernon. Roof coverings required to be listed by
this section shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E 108 or UL 790. The roofing assembly
includes the roof deck, underlayment, interlayment, insulation and covering, which is assigned a
roof classification.
Exception: Skylights and sloped glazing that comply with Chapter 24 or Section 2610.
RATIONALE:
The City of Vernon contains numerous large industrial and warehouse facilities that closely spaced together.
In order to minimize the spread of fire during strong wind events it is appropriate to require all roofs to meet a
class A or B standards, which are more fire resistive .then class C roofs. Class C roofs are only effective
against light fire test exposure.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
14
2010 LARUCP 16-01. Section 1613.6.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is ,hereby
amended to read as follows:
1613.6.1 Assumption of flexible diaphragm. Add the following text at the end of Section 12.3.1.1 of ASCE
7.
Diaphragms constructed of wood structural panels or untopped steel decking shall also be permitted to be
idealized as flexible, provided all of the following conditions are met:
Toppings of concrete or similar materials are not placed over wood structural panel
diaphragms except for nonstructural toppings no greater than 1 % inches (38 mm) thick.
2. Each line of vertical elements of the seismic -force -resisting system complies with the
allowable story drift of Table 12.12-1.
3. Vertical elements of the seismic -force -resisting system are light -framed walls sheathed with
wood structural panels rated for shear resistance or steel sheets.
4. Portions of wood structural panel diaphragms that cantilever beyond the vertical elements of
the 'ate ra'seism ic-force-resisting system are designed in accordance with Section 4.2.5.2 of
AF&PA SDPWS.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment changes "lateral' to "seismic" to reflect consistency of the application of this
provision.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification
emphasize that the design concern is for seismic -force -resisting elements and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing
buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the
International Building Code.
15
2010 LARUCP 16-02. Equation 16-44 of Section 1613.6.7 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code
is hereby amended to read as follows:
C d 6 max
SM - � (Equation 16-44)
where:
Cd = Deflection amplification factor in Table 12.2-1 of ASCE 7.
Smax = Maximum displacement defined in Section 12.8.4.3 of ASCE 7.
T - ImpertaRGe faGtnr in aGGE)rrl nnc with SeGtinn 41 F 1 of AGE 7 i ipviza tv� v.�-�-�vv�r
RATIONALE:
The inclusion of the importance factor in this equation has the unintended consequence of reducing the
minimum seismic separation distance for important facilities such as hospital, school, police and fire station,
etc. from adjoining structures. The proposal to omit the importance factor from Equation 16-44 will ensure that
a safe seismic separation distance is provided. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment
adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
omit the importance factor in the equation ensures that a safe seismic separation distance is maintained for
important facilities from adjoining structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that
new buildings and structures and additions or, alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
16
2010 LARUCP 16-03. Section 1613.8 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.8 ASCE 7. Table 12.8-2. Modify ASCE 7 Table 12.8-2 by adding the following:
Structure Type
Ct
X
Eccentrically braced steel frames and buckling -restrained braced frames
0.03
0.0731 a
0.75
RATIONALE:
The steel Buckling Restrained Braced Frame (BRBF) system was first approved for use in the 2003 NEHRP
Provisions. The values for the approximate period perimeters Ct and x were also approved as part of that
original BSSC Proposal 6-6R (2003). It was an oversight that these parameters were not carried forward into
the 2005 Edition of the ASCE 7. Currently, these two factors can be found in Appendix R of AISC 341-05.
There, they function only as a placeholder that will be removed in the next version upon approval by ASCE 7
Task Committee on Seismic. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during
previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed amendment
provides clarification on the design parameters for BRBF members and therefore needs to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code and ASCE 7-05.
17
2010 LARUCP 16-04. Section 1613.9 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.9 ASCE 7, 12.2.3.1, Exception 3. Modify ASCE 7 Section 12.2.3.1 Exception 3 to read as follows:
3. Detached one and two family dwellings up to two stories in height of light frame construction
RATIONALE:
Observed damages to one and two family dwellings of light frame construction after the Northridge
Earthquake may have been partially attributed to vertical irregularities common to this type of occupancy and
construction. In an effort to improve quality of construction and incorporate lesson learned from studies after
the Northridge Earthquake, the proposed modification to ASCE 7-05 Section 12.2.3.1 by limiting the number of
stories and height of the structure to two stories will significantly minimize the impact of vertical irregularities
and concentration of inelastic behavior from mixed structural systems. This proposed amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
limit mixed structural system to two stories is intended to improve quality of construction by reducing potential
damages that may result from vertical irregularities of the structural system in buildings subject to high seismic
load and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
18
2010 LARUCP 16-05. Section 1613.10 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.10 ASCE 7, Section 12.8.7. Modify ASCE 7 Section 12 8 7 by amending Equation 12.8-16 as follows:
P A I
8 = x
V h C
x sx d
(12.8-16)
RATIONALE:
The importance factor, I, was dropped from equation 12.8-16 by mistake while transcribing it from NEHRP
Recommended Provisions (2003) equation 5.2-16. For buildings with importance factor, I, higher than 1.0,
stability coefficient should include the importance factor. The proposed modification is consistent with the
provisions adopted by OSPHD and DSA-SS as reflected in Section 1615.10.5 of the 2010 California Building
Code. SEAOSC Steel Committee had supported the proposed modification during the 2007 code adoption
process. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification is
intended to improve the likelihood that important and critical buildings and structures remain operational in the
event of an emergency resulting from seismic activities and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are
designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
19
2010 LARUCP 16-06. Section 1613.11 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.11 ASCE 7, Section 12.11.2.2.3. Modify ASCE 7 Section 12 12 4 to read as follows:
12.11.2.2.3 Wood Diaphragms. In wood diaphragms, the continuous ties shall be in addition to the
diaphragm sheathing. Anchorage shall not be accomplished by use of toe nails or nails subject to
withdrawal nor shall wood ledgers or framing be used in cross -grain bending or cross -grain tension. The
diaphragm sheathing shall not be considered effective as providing ties or struts required by this section.
For structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F wood diaphragms supportinq concrete or
masonry walls shall comply with the following:
1. The spacing of continuous ties shall not exceed 40 feet Added chords of diaphragms maybe used to
form subdiaphragms to transmit the anchorage forces to the main continuous crossties
2. The maximum diaphragm shear used to determine the depth of the subdiaphragm shall not exceed
75% of the maximum diaphragm shear.
RATIONALE:
A joint Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC), Los Angeles County and Los
Angeles City Task Force investigated the performance of concrete and masonry construction with flexible
wood diaphragm failures after the Northridge earthquake. It was concluded at that time that continuous ties
are needed at specified spacing to control cross grain tension in the interior of the diaphragm. Additionally,
there was a need to limit subdiaphragm allowable shear loads to control combined orthogonal stresses within
the diaphragm. Recognizing the importance and need to continue the recommendation made by the task force
while taking into consideration the improve performances and standards for diaphragm construction today, this
proposal increases the continuous tie spacing limit to 40 ft in lieu of 25 ft and to use 75% of the allowable code
diaphragm shear to determine the depth of the sub -diaphragm in lieu of the 300 plf and is deemed appropriate
and acceptable. Due to the frequency of this type of failure during the past significant earthquakes, various
jurisdictions within the Los Angeles region have taken this additional step to prevent. roof or floor diaphragms
from pulling away from concrete or masonry walls. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an
amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require special anchorage of the diaphragm to the wall and limit the allowable shear will address special needs
for concrete and masonry construction with flexible wood diaphragm and therefore need to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code.
20
2010 LARUCP 16-07. Section 1613.12 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.12 Seismic Design Provisions for Hillside Buildings.
1613.12.1 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum regulations for the design and
construction of new buildings and additions to existing buildings when constructing such buildings on or
into slopes steeper than one unit vertical in three units horizontal (33 3%) These regulations establish
minimum standards for seismic force resistance to reduce the risk of injury or loss of life in the event of
earthquakes.
1613.12.2 Scope. The provisions of this section shall apply to the design of the lateral -force -resisting
system for hillside buildings at and below the base level diaphragm The design of the lateral -force -
resisting system above the base level diaphragm shall be in accordance with the provisions for seismic
and wind design as required elsewhere in this division.
Exception: Non -habitable accessory buildings and decks not supporting or supported from the main
building are exempt from these regulations.
1613.12.3 Definitions. For the purposes of this section certain terms are defined as follows:
BASE LEVEL DIAPHRAGM is the floor at, or closest to the top of the highest level of the foundation
DIAPHRAGM ANCHORS are assemblies that connect a diaphragm to the adjacent foundation at the
uphill diaphragm edge.
DOWNHILL DIRECTION is the descending direction of the slope approximately perpendicular to the
slope contours.
FOUNDATION is concrete or masonry which supports a building including footings stem walls
retaining walls, and grade beams.
FOUNDATION EXTENDING IN THE DOWNHILL DIRECTION is a foundation running downhill and
approximately perpendicular to the uphill foundation.
HILLSIDE BUILDING is any building or portion thereof constructed on or into a slope steeper than one
unit vertical in three units horizontal (33.3%). If only a portion of the building is supported on or into the
slope, these regulations apply to the entire building
PRIMARY ANCHORS are diaphragm anchors designed for -and providing a direct connection as
described in Sections 1613.12.5 and 1613.12.7.3 between the diaphragm and the uphill foundation
SECONDARY ANCHORS are diaphragm anchors designed for and providing a redundant diaphragm
to foundation connection, as described in Sections 1613.12.6 and 1613.12.7.4.
UPHILL DIAPHRAGM EDGE is the edge of the diaphragm adjacent and closest to the highest ground
level at the perimeter of the diaphragm.
UPHILL FOUNDATION is the foundation parallel and closest to the uphill diaphragm edge
1613.12.4 Analysis and Design.
1613.12.4.1 General. Every hillside building within the scope of this section shall be analyzed
designed, and constructed in accordance with the provisions of this division When the code -
prescribed wind design produces greater effects the wind design shall govern but detailing
requirements and limitations prescribed in this and referenced sections shall be followed
1613.12.4.2 Base Level Diaphragm -Downhill Direction The following provisions shall apply to the
seismic analysis and design of the connections for the base level diaphragm in the downhill direction
21
1613.12.4.2.1 Base for Lateral Force Design Defined. For seismic forces actinq in the downhill
direction, the base of the building shall be the floor at or closest to the top of the highest level of the
foundation.
1613.12.4.2.2 Base Shear. In developing the base shear for seismic design the response
modification coefficient (R) shall not exceed 5 for bearing wall and building frame systems The total
base shear shall include the forces tributary to the base level diaphragm including forces from the
base level diaphragm.
1613.12.5 Base Shear Resistance -Primary Anchors.
1613.12.5.1 General. The base shear in the downhill direction shall be resisted through primary
anchors from diaphragm struts provided in the base level diaphragm to the foundation
1613.12.5.2 Location of Primary Anchors. A primary anchor and diaphragm strut shall be provided
in line with each foundation extending in the downhill direction. Primary anchors and diaphragm struts
shall also be provided where interior vertical lateral -force -resisting elements occur above and in
contact with the base level diaphragm The spacing of primary anchors and diaphragm struts or
collectors shall in no case exceed 30 feet (9144 mm).
1613.12.5.3 Design of Primary Anchors and Diaphragm Struts. Primary anchors and diaphragm
struts shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of Section 1613.12.8.
1613.12.5.4 Limitations. The following lateral -force -resisting elements shall not be designed to resist
seismic forces below the base level diaphragm in the downhill direction:
1. Wood structural panel wall sheathing,
2. Cement plaster and lath,
3. Gypsum wallboard, and
4. Tension only braced frames.
Braced frames designed in accordance with the requirements of Section 2205 2 2 may be used to
transfer forces from the primary anchors and diaphragm struts to the foundation provided lateral
forces do not induce flexural stresses in any member of the frame or in the diaphragm struts
Deflections of frames shall account for the variation in slope of diagonal members when the
frame is not rectangular.
1613.12.6. Base Shear Resistance -Secondary Anchors.
to
chors i
connected to diaphragm struts in the base level diaphragm
Exception: Secondary anchors are not required where foundations extending in the downhill
direction spaced at not more than 30 feet (9144 mm) on center extend up to and are directly
connected to the base level diaphragm for at least 70% of the diaphragm depth
1613.12.6.2 Secondary Anchor Capacity and Spacing Secondary anchors at the base level
diaphragm shall be designed for minimum force equal to the base shear, including forces tributary
to the base level diaphragm but not less than 600 pounds perlineal foot (8.76 kN/m) The secondary
anchors shall be uniformly distributed along the uphill diaphragm edge and shall be spaced a
maximum of four feet (1219 mm) on center.
1613.12.6.3 Design. Secondary anchors and diaphragm struts shall be designed in accordance with
Section 1613.12.8.
22
1613.12.7 Diaphragms Below the Base Level -Downhill Direction The following provisions shall applv
to the lateral analysis and design of the connections for all diaphragms below the base level diaphragm in
the downhill direction.
1.613.12.7.1 Diaphragm Defined. Every floor level below the base level diaphragm shall be designed
as a diaphragm.
1613.12.7.2 Design Force. Each diaphragm below the base level diaphragm shall be designed for all
tributary loads at that level using a minimum seismic force factor not less than the base shear
coefficient.
1613.12.7.3 Design Force Resistance -Primary Anchors. The design force described in Section
1613.12.7.2 shall be resisted through primary anchors from diaphragm struts provided in each
diaphragm to the foundation. Primary anchors shall be provided and designed in accordance with the
requirements and limitations of Section 1613.12.5.
1613.12.7.4 Design Force Resistance -Secondary Anchors.
1613.12.7.4.1 General. In addition to the primary anchors required in Section 1613 12 7 3 the design
force in the downhill direction shall be resisted through secondary anchors in the uphill foundation
connected to diaphragm struts in each diaphragm below the base level
Exception: Secondary anchors are not required where foundations extending in the downhill
direction, spaced at not more than 30 feet (9144 mm) on center, extend up to and are directiv
connected to each diaphragm below the base level for at least 70% of the diaphragm depth
1613.12.7.4.2 Secondary Anchor Capacity. Secondary anchors at each diaphragm below the base
level diaphragm shall be designed for a minimum force equal to the design force but not less than 300
pounds per lineal foot (4.38 kN/m). The secondary anchors shall be uniforms distributed along the
uphill diaphragm edge and shall be spaced a maximum of four feet (1219 mm) on center.
1613.12.7.4.3 Design. Secondary anchors and diaphragm struts shall be designed in accordance
with Section 1613.12.8.
1613.12.8 Primary and Secondary Anchorage and Diaphragm Strut Design Primary and secondary
anchors and diaphragm struts shall be designed in accordance with the following provisions:
1. Fasteners. All bolted fasteners used to develop connections to wood members shall be provided
with square plate washers at all bolt heads and nuts. Washers shall be minimum 0.229 inch by 3
inches by 3 inches (5.82 mm by 76 mm by 76 mm) in size. Nuts shall be tightened to finger tight
plus one half (1/2) wrench turn prior to covering the framing
2. Fastening. The diaphragm to foundation anchorage shall not be accomplished by the use of
toenailing, nails subject to withdrawal or wood in cross -grain bending or cross -grain tension
3. Size of Wood Members. Wood diaphragm struts collectors and otherwood members connected
to primary anchors shall not be less than three-inch (76 mm) nominal width The effects of
eccentricity on wood members shall be evaluated as required per Item 9
4. Design Primary and secondary anchorage including diaphragm struts splices and collectors
shall be designed for 125% of the tributary force.
5. Allowable Stress Increase. The one-third allowable stress increase permitted under Section
1605.3.2 shall not be taken when the working (allowable) stress design method is used
6. Steel Element of Structural Wall anchorage System. The strength design forces for steel
elements of the structural wall anchorage system with the exception of anchor bolts and
reinforcing steel, shall be increased by 1.4 times the forces otherwise required
23
7. Primary Anchors. The load path for primary anchors and diaphragm struts shall be fully
developed into the diaphragm and into the foundation. The foundation must be shown to be
adequate to resist the concentrated loads from the primary anchors
8. Secondary Anchors. The -load path for secondary anchors and diaphragm struts shall be fully
developed in the diaphragm but need not be developed beyond the connection to the foundation
9. Symmetry. All lateral force foundation anchorage and diaphragm strut connections shall be
symmetrical. Eccentric connections may be permitted when demonstrated by calculation or tests
that all components of force have been provided for in the structural analysis or tests
10. Wood Ledgers. Wood ledgers shall not be used to resist cross -grain bending or cross -grain
tension.
1613.12.9 Lateral -Force -Resisting Elements Normal to the Downhill Direction
1613.12.9.1 General. In the direction normal to the downhill direction lateral -force -resisting elements
shall be desiqned in accordance with the requirements of this section
1613.12.9.2 Base Shear. In developing the base shear for seismic design the response modification
coefficient (R) shall not exceed 5 for bearing wall and building frame systems
1613.12.9.3 Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces. For seismic forces acting normal to the
downhill direction the distribution of seismic forces over the height of the building using Section 12 8 3
of ASCE 7 shall be determined using the height measured from the top of the lowest level of the
building foundation.
1613.12.9.4 Drift Limitations. The story drift below the base level diaphragm shall not exceed 0.007
times the story height at strength design force level. The total drift from the base level diaphragm to
the top of the foundation shall not exceed 3/4 inch (19 mm) Where the story height or the heightfrom
the base level diaphragm to the top of the foundation varies because of a stepped footing or story
offset, the height shall be measured from the average height of the top of the foundation The story
drift shall not be reduced by the effect of horizontal diaphragm stiffness.
1613.12.9.5 Distribution of Lateral Forces
1613.12.9.5.1 General. The desiqn lateral force shall be distributed to lateral -force -resisting
elements of varying heights in accordance with the stiffness of each individual element
1613.12:9.5.2 Wood Structural Panel Sheathed Walls. The stiffness of a stepped wood
structural panel shear wall may be determined by dividing the wall into adjacent rectangular
elements, subiect to the same top of wall deflection. Deflections of shear walls may be estimated
by AF&PA SDPWS Section 4.3.2. Sheathing and fastening requirements for the stiffest section
shall be used for the entire wall. Each section of wall shall be anchored for shear and uplift at
each step. The minimum horizontal length of a step shall be eight feet (2438 mm) and the
maximum vertical height of a step shall be two feet eight inches (813 mm)
13.12
1613.12.9.6 Limitations. The followinq lateral force -resisting -elements shall not be designed to resist
lateral forces below the base level diaphragm in the direction normal to the downhill direction:
1. Cement plaster and lath,
2. Gypsum wallboard, and
3. Tension -only braced frames.
24
Braced frames designed in accordance with the requirements of Section 2205.2.2 of this Code
may be designed as lateral-force-resistinq elements in the direction normal to the downhill
direction, provided lateral forces do not induce flexural stresses in any member of the frame.
Deflections of frames shall account for the variation in slope of diagonal members when the
frame is not rectangular.
1613.12.10 Specific Design Provisions.
1613.12.1.0.1 Footings and Grade Beams. All footings and grade beams shall comply with the
following:
1. Grade beams shall extend at least 12 inches (305 mm) below the lowest adjacent grade and
provide a minimum 24-inch (610 mm) distance horizontally from the bottom outside face of
the grade beam to the face of the descending slope.
2. Continuous footings shall be reinforced with at least two No. 4 reinforcing bars at the top and
two No. 4 reinforcing bars at the bottom.
3. All main footing and grade beam reinforcement steel shall be bent into the intersecting
footing and fully developed around each corner and intersection.
4.. All concrete stem walls shall extend from the foundation and reinforced as required for
concrete or masonry walls.
1613.12.10.2 Protection Against Decay and Termites. All wood to earth separation shall comply
with the following:
1. Where a footing or grade beam extends across a descending slope the stem wall grade
beam, or footing shall extend up to a minimum 18 inches (457 mm) above the highest
adjacent grade.
Exception: At paved garage and doorway entrances to the building the stem wall need
only extend to the finished concrete slab, provided the wood framing is protected with a
moisture proof barrier.
2. Wood ledgers supporting a vertical load of more than 100 pounds per lineal foot (1.46 kN/m)
and located within 48 inches (1219 mm) of adjacent grade are prohibited. Galvanized steel
ledgers and anchor bolts, with or without wood nailers or treated or decay resistant sill plates
supported on a concrete or masonry seat, may be used.
1613.12.10.3 Sill Plates. All sill plates and anchorage shall comply with the following:
1. All wood framed walls, includinq nonbearinq walls, when resting on a footing foundation or
grade beam stem wall, shall be supported on wood sill plates bearing on a level surface
2. Power -driven fasteners shall not be used to anchor sill plates except at interior nonbearinq
walls not designed as shear walls.
1613.12.10.4 Column Base Plate Anchorage. The base of isolated wood posts (not framed into a
stud wall) supporting a vertical load of 4,000 pounds (17.8 kN) or more and the base plate for a steel
column shall comply with the following_
1. When the post or column is supported on a pedestal extending above the top of a footing or
grade beam, the pedestal shall be designed and reinforced as required for concrete or
masonry columns. The pedestal shall be reinforced with a minimum of four No. 4 bars
extending to the bottom of the footing or grade beam. The top of exterior pedestals shall be
sloped for positive drainage.
25
2. The base plate anchor bolts or the embedded portion of the post base and the vertical
reinforcing bars for the pedestal, shall be confined with two No 4 or three No 3 ties within
the top five inches (127 mm) of the concrete or masonry pedestal The base plate anchor
bolts shall be embedded a minimum of 20 bolt diameters into the concrete or masonry
pedestal. The base plate anchor bolts and post bases shall be galvanized and each anchor
bolt shall have at least two galvanized nuts above the base plate
1613.12.10.5 Steel Beam to Column Supports. All steel beam to column supports shall be positively
braced in each direction. Steel beams shall have stiffener plates installed on each side of the beam
web at the column. The stiffener plates shall be welded to each beam flange and the beam web Each
brace connection or structural member shall consist of at least two 5/8 inch (15.9 mm) diameter
machine bolts.
RATIONALE:
Due to the difficulty of fire suppression vehicles accessing winding and narrow hillside properties and the
probabilities for future earthquakes in the Los Angeles region, this technical amendment is required to address
the special needs for buildings constructed on hillside locations. A joint Structural Engineers Association of
Southern California (SEAOSC) and both the Los Angeles County and Los Angeles City Task Force
investigated the performance of hillside building failures after the Northridge earthquake. Numerous hillside
failures resulted in loss of life and millions of dollars in damage. These criteria were developed to minimize the
damage to these structures and have been in use by both the City and County of Los Angeles for several
years with much success. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during
previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Topographical and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but. not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Additionally, the
topography within the Los Angeles region includes significant hillsides with narrow and winding access that
makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles challenging and difficult. The proposed modification
establishes design parameters to better mitigate and limit property damage that are the results of increased
seismic forces which are imparted upon hillside buildings and structures and therefore need to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code.
0
2010 LARUCP 16-8. Section 1613.13 is hereby added to Chapter 16 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
1613.13 Suspended Ceilings. Minimum design and installation standards for suspended ceilings shall be
determined in accordance with the requirements of Section 2506.2.1 of this Code and this subsection
1613.13.1 Scope This part contains special requirements for suspended ceilings and lighting systems
Provisions of Section 13.5.6 of ASCE 7 shall apply except as modified herein
1613.13.2 General. The suspended ceilings and lighting systems shall be limited to 6 feet (1828 mm)
below the structural deck unless the lateral bracing is designed by a licensed engineer or architect
1613.13.3 Design and Installation Requirements.
1613.13.3.1 Bracing at Discontinuity. Positive bracing to the structure shall be provided at changes
in the ceiling plane elevation or at discontinuities in the ceilinq grid system
1613.13.3.2 Support for Appendages. Cable trays electrical conduits and piping shall be
independently supported and independently braced from the structure
1613.13.3.3 Sprinkler Heads. All sprinkler heads (drops) except fire -resistance -rated floor/ceiling or
roof/ceiling assemblies, shall be designed to allow for free movement of the sprinkler pipes with
oversize rings, sleeves or adaptors through the ceiling the in accordance with Section 13.5.6.2.2 (e)
of ASCE 7.
Sprinkler heads penetrating fire -resistance -rated floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assemblies shall comply
with Section 713 of this Code.
1613.13.3.4 Perimeter Members. A minimum wall angle size of at least a two-inch (51 mm)
horizontal leg shall be used at perimeter walls and interior full height partitions The first ceiling tile
shall maintain 3/4 inch (19 mm) clear from the finish wall surface An equivalent alternative detail that
will provide sufficient movement due to anticipated lateral building displacement may be used in lieu
of the long leg angle subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Building
1613.13.4 Special Requirements for Means of Egress. Suspended ceiling assemblies located alonq
means of egress servinq an occupant load of 30 or more shall comply with the following provisions
1613.13.4.1 General. Ceiling suspension systems shall be connected and braced with vertical
hangers attached directly to the structural deck along the means of egress serving an occupant load
of 30 or more and at lobbies accessory to Group A Occupancies Spacing of vertical hangers shall not
exceed 2 feet (610 mm) on center along the entire length of the suspended ceiling assembly located
along the means of egress or at the lobby.
1613.13.4.2 Assembly Device. All lay -in panels shall be secured to the suspension ceiling assembly
with two hold-down clips minimum for each tile within a 4-foot (1219 mm) radius of the exit lights and
exit signs.
1613.13.4.3 Emergency Systems Independent supports and braces shall be provided for light
fixtures required for exit illumination. Power supply for exit illumination shall comply with the
requirements of Section 1006.3 of this Code.
1613.13.4.4 Supports for Appendage. Separate support from the structural deck shall be provided
for all appendages such as light fixtures air diffusers exit signs and similar elements
RATIONALE:
The California Building Code has little to no information regarding the safe design and construction
requirements for ceiling suspension systems subject to seismic loads. It is through the experience of prior
earthquakes, such as the Northridge Earthquake, that this amendment is proposed so as to minimize the
amount of bodily and building damage within the spaces in which this type of ceiling will be installed. This
proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
27
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles/Long Beach region is a densely populated area having
buildings constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major earthquakes,
including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification requiring safe
design and construction requirements for ceiling suspension systems to resist seismic loads is intended to
minimize the amount of damage within a building and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
28
2010 LARUCP 17-01. Section 1704A of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1704.4 Concrete Construction. The special inspections and verifications for concrete construction shall be
as required by this section and Table 1704.4.
Exceptions: Special inspections shall not be required for:
1. Isolated spread concrete footings of buildings three stories or less above grade plane that are fully
supported on earth or rock, where the structural design of the footing is based on a specified
compressive strength, f'c, no greater than 2,500 pounds per square inch (psi) (17.2 Mpa).
2. Continuous concrete footings supporting walls of buildings three stories or less above grade plane
that are fully supported on earth or rock where:
2.1. The footings support walls of light -frame construction;
2.2. The footings are designed in accordance with Table 1809.7; or
2.3. The structural design of the footing is based on a specified compressive strength, f'c, no
greater than 2,500 pounds per square inch (psi) (17.2 Mpa), regardless of the
compressive strength specified in the construction documents or used in the footing
construction.
3. Nonstructural concrete slabs supported directly on the ground, including prestressed slabs on grade,
where the effective prestress in the concrete is less than 150 psi (1.03 Mpa).
54. Concrete patios, driveways and sidewalks, on grade.
RATIONALE:
Results from studies after the 1994 North ridge.Earthquake indicated that a lot of the damages were
attributed to lack of quality control during construction resulting in poor performance of the building or
structure. Therefore, the proposed amendment requires special inspection for concrete with a
compressive strength greater than 2,500 pounds per square inch. This proposed amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require special inspection for concrete with a compressive strength greater than 2,500 psi to improve quality of
control during construction and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings
and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
29
2010 LARUCP 17-02. Section 1704.8 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1704.8 Driven deep foundations and connection grade beams. Special inspections shall be performed
during installation and testing of driven deep foundation elements as required by Table 1704.8. Special
inspections shall be performed for connection grade beams in accordance with Section 1704.4 for structures
assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F. The approved geotechnical report, and the construction
documents prepared by the registered design professionals, shall be used to determine compliance.
RATIONALE:
Studies after the Northridge Earthquake revealed that great confusion exist in the field over what is required by
the code in the way of special inspection beyond just piles and caissons. Connecting grade beams used in
driven deep foundations will generally act like concrete beams and should not be treated like typical footings.
Section 1704.4 requires concrete beams to have special inspection, but exempts the footings of buildings
three stories or less in height. This amendment clarifies that the grade beams that connect driven deep
foundations are not exempt from special inspection even if they are used as part of the foundation system.
They are an essential part of the driven deep foundation system and should receive the same level of
inspection, particularly since this type of system must resist the higher seismic demand loads in this region.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require special inspection of connecting grade beams to ensure adequate performance of the foundation
system and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
2010 LARUCP 17-03. Section 1704.9 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1704.9 Cast -in -place deep foundations and connection grade beams. Special inspections shall be
performed during installation and testing of cast -in -place deep foundation elements as required by Table
1704.9. Special inspections shall be performed for connection grade beams in accordance with Section
1704.4 for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F. The approved geotechnical report, and
the construction documents prepared by the registered design professionals, shall be used to determine
compliance.
RATIONALE:
Studies after the Northridge Earthquake revealed that great confusion exist in the field over what is required by
the code in the way of special inspection beyond just piles and caissons. Connecting grade beams used in
cast -in -place deep foundations will generally act like concrete beams and should not be treated like typical
footings. Section 1704.4 requires concrete beams to have special inspection, but exempts the footings of
buildings three stories or less in height. This amendment clarifies that the grade beams that connect cast -in -
place deep foundations are not exempt from special inspection even if they are used as part of the foundation
system. They are an essential part of the cast -in -place deep foundation system and should receive the same
level of inspection, particularly since this type of system must resist the higher seismic demand loads in this
region.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems .capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require special inspection of connecting grade beams to ensure adequate performance of the foundation
system and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
31
2010 LARUCP 17-04. Section 1705.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1705.3 Seismic resistance. The statement of special inspections shall include seismic requirements for
cases covered in Sections 1705.3.1 through 1705.3.5.
Exception: Seismic requirements are permitted to be excluded from the statement of special inspections
for structures designed and constructed in accordance with the following:
1. The structure consists of light -frame construction; the design spectral response acceleration at short
periods, SpS, as determined in Section 1613.5.4, does not exceed 0.5g; and the height of the structure
does not exceed 35 feet (10 668 mm) above grade plane; or
2. The structure is constructed using a reinforced masonry structural system or reinforced concrete
structural system; the design spectral response acceleration at short periods, SpS, as determined in
Section 1613.5.4, does not exceed 0.5g, and the height of the structure does not exceed 25 feet
(7620 mm) above grade plane; or
3. Detached one- or two-family dwellings not exceeding two stories above grade plane, provided the
structure is not assigned to Seismic Desiqn Category D E or F and does not have any of the following
plan or vertical irregularities in accordance with Section 12.3.2 of ASCE 7:
3.1 Torsional irregularity.
3.2 Nonparallel systems.
3.3 Stiffness irregularity —extreme soft story and soft story.
3.4 Discontinuity in capacity —weak story.
RATIONALE:
In southern California, veryfew detached one- or two-family dwellings not exceeding two stories above grade
plane are built as "box -type" structures, specially for those in hillside areas and near the oceanfront. Many
steel moment frames or braced frames and/or cantilevered columns within buildings can still be shown as
"regular" structures by calculations. With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this
region, the language in Sections 1705.3 Item 3 of the California Building Code would permit many detached
one- or two-family dwellings not exceeding two stories above grade plane with complex structural elements to
be constructed without the benefit of special inspections. By requiring special inspections, the quality of major
structural elements and connections that affect the vertical and lateral load resisting systems of the structure
will greatly be increased. The exception should only be allowed for detached one- or two-family dwellings not
exceeding two stories above grade plane assigned to Seismic Design category A, B and C.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require special inspections for detached one- or two-family dwellings not exceeding two stories above grade
plane assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E and F will help ensure that acceptable standards of
workmanship and quality of construction are provided and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are
designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
32
2010 LARUCP 17-05. Section 1710.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1710.1 General. Where required by the provisions of Section 1710.2 or 1710.3, the owner shall employ a
registered deSinn professional
y,.....,.,� ....�,y,. ,.,.,,.,.,�,�„uTstructural observer to perform structural observations as defined in Section
1702. The structural observer shall be one of the following individuals:
1. The registered desiqn professional responsible for the structural design or
2 A registered design professional designated by the registered desiqn professional responsible for the
structural design.
Prior to the commencement of observations, the structural observer shall submit to the building official a
written statement identifying the frequency and extent of structural observations.
At the r--onGlusffien of the work inGluded in the perMit, the StFLIGtUral observer shall submit to the building
GffiGial a writte-m state-Ment that the sate v0s;ft hRvtn hizen made and identify any repGrted deftienGies thatto
the pest of the-strastaral ebserver's 14newledg�, have n„+-., hoon ro�„�od'
The owner or owner's representative shall coordinate and call a preconstruction meetinq between the
structural observer, contractors, affected subcontractors and special inspectors. The structural observer shall
preside over the meeting. The purpose of the meeting shall be to identify the major structural elements and
connections that affect the vertical and lateral load resisting systems of the structure and to review scheduling
of the required observations. A record of the meeting shall be included in the report submitted to the building
official.
Observed deficiencies shall be reported in writing to the owner or owner's representative special
inspector, contractor and the building official. Upon the form prescribed by the building official the structural
observer shall submit to the building official a written statement at each significant construction stage stating
that the site visits have been made and identifying any reported deficiencies which to the best of the structural
observer's knowledge, have not been resolved. A final report by the structural observer which states that all
observed deficiencies have been resolved is required before acceptance of the work by the building official
RATIONALE:
The language in Section 1710.1 of the California Building Code permits the owner to employ any registered
design professional to perform structural observations with minimum guideline. However, it is important to
recognize that the registered design professional responsible for the structural design has thorough knowledge
of the building he/she designed. By requiring the registered design professional responsible for the structural
design or their designee who were involved with the design to observe the construction, the quality of the
observation for major structural elements and connections that affect the vertical and lateral load resisting
systems of the structure will greatly be increased. Additional requirements are provided to help clarify the role
and duties of the structural observer and the method of reporting and correcting observed deficiencies to the
building official. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require the registered design professional in responsible charge for the structural design to observe the
construction will help ensure acceptable standards of workmanship is provided and to improve the quality of
the observation and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
33
2010 LARUCP 17-06.. Section 1710.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1710.2 Structural observations for seismic resistance. Structural observations shall be provided for those
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F, as determined in Section 1613, where one or more
of the following conditions exist:
1. The structure is classified as Occupancy Category III or IV in accordance with Table 1604.5.
2. The height of the structure is greater than 75 feet (22860 mm) above the base.
3. The structure is to Seismic De609^ Category ETis classified as Occupancy Category I or II in
accordance with Table 1604.5, and is than } me steries one steries above grade r.i-..,o a lateral
desiqn is required for the structure or portion thereof.
Exception: One-story wood framed Group R-3 and Group U Occupancies less than 2,000 square
feet in area, provided the adiacent grade is not steeper than 1 unit vertical in 10 units horizontal (10%
sloped), assigned to Seismic Design Category D.
4. When so designated by the registered design professional responsible for the structural design.
5. When such observation is specifically required by the building official.
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, the language in Section
1710.2 Item 3 of the California Building Code would permit many low-rise buildings and structures with
complex structural elements to be constructed without the benefit of a structural observation. By requiring a
registered design professional to observe the construction, the quality of the observation for major structural
elements and connections that affect the vertical and lateral load resisting systems of the structure will greatly
be increased. An exception is provided to permit simple structures and buildings to be excluded. This
proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge. Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require the registered design professional in responsible charge for the structural design to observe the
construction will help ensure acceptable standards of workmanship is provided and to improve the quality of
the observation and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
34
2010 LARUCP 18-01. Section 1807.1.4 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1807.1.4 Permanent wood foundation systems. Permanent wood foundation systems shall be designed
and installed in accordance with AF&PA PWF. Lumber and plywood shall be treated in accordance with
AWPA U1 (Commodity Specification A, Use Category 4B and Section 5.2) and shall be identified in
accordance with Section 2303.1.8.1. Permanent wood foundation systems shall not be used for structures
assigned to Seismic Design Category D,. E or F.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to showthatwood foundation is effective in supporting buildings and
structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the combined detrimental
effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Wood foundation systems, when they
are not properly treated and protected against deterioration, have performed very poorly and have led to slope
failures. Most contractors are typically accustomed to construction in dry and temperate weather in the
Southern California region and are not generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of
wood that makes it suitable for both seismic event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the
precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result in using wood foundation
systems that experience relatively rapid decay due to the fact that the region does not experience
temperatures cold enough to destroy or retard the growth and proliferation of wood -destroying organisms. This
proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS: -
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of wood foundation systems as well as limit prescriptive design
provisions in an effort to mitigate potential problems or deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying
organisms and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures
and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
35
2010 LARUCP 18-02. Section 1807.1.6 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1807.1.6 Prescriptive design of concrete and masonry foundation walls. Concrete and masonry
foundation walls that are laterally supported at the top and bottom shall be permitted to be designed and
constructed in accordance with this section. Prescriptive design of foundation walls shall not be used for
structures assigned to Seismic Desian Cateaory D. E or F.
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, it is deemed necessary to
take precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result by following prescriptive
design provisions that does not take into consideration the surrounding environment. Plain concrete performs
poorly in withstanding the cyclic forces resulting from seismic events. In addition, no substantiating data has
been provided to show that under -reinforced foundation walls are effective in resisting seismic loads and may
potentially lead to a higher risk of failure. It is important that the benefit and expertise of a registered design
professional be obtained to properly analyze the structure and take these issues into consideration. This
proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
prohibit prescriptive design provisions for foundation walls as plain concrete have performed poorly in
withstanding the cyclic forces resulting from seismic events and to require the walls to be designed by a
registered design professional to ensure that the proper analysis of the structure takes into account the
surrounding condition and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
KI:1111111
2010 LARUCP 18-03. Section 1809.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1809.3 Stepped footings. The top surface of footings shall be level. The bottom surface of footings shall be
permitted to have a slope not exceeding one unit vertical in 10 units horizontal (10-percent slope). Footings
shall be stepped where it is necessary to change the elevation of the top surface of the footing or where the
surface of the ground slopes more than one unit vertical in 10 units horizontal (10-percent slope).
For structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E orF, the stepping requirement shall also apply
to the top surface of grade beams supporting. walls. Footings shall be reinforced with four 1/2-inch diameter
(12.7 mm) deformed reinforcing bars. Two bars shall be place at the top and bottom of the footings as shown
in Figure 1809.3.
Afil+�.2-94 REBAR (TOP 4 KTM
Emu,
t
��1p1 119�
FIGURE 1809.3
STEPPED FOOTING
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, precautionary steps.are
proposed to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result for under reinforced footings located on
sloped surfaces. Requiring minimum reinforcement for stepped footings is intended to address the problem of
poor performance of plain or under -reinforced footings during a seismic event. This proposed -amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
,require minimum reinforcement in stepped footings is intended to improve performance of buildings and
structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the.
scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
37
2010 LARUCP 18-04. Section 1809.7 and Table 1809.7 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code are
hereby amended to read as follows:
1809.7 Prescriptive footings for light -frame construction. Where a specific design is not provided,
concrete or masonry -unit footings supporting walls of light -frame construction shall be permitted to be
designed in accordance with Table 1809.7. Prescriptive footings in Table 1809.7 shall not exceed one story
above grade plane for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F.
TABLE 1809.7
PRESCRIPTIVE FOOTINGS SUPPORTING WALLS OF
LIGHT -FRAME CONSTRUCTION a, b, c, d, e
NUMBER OF
.FLOORS
WIDTH OF
SUPPORTED BY
FOOTING
THICKNESS OF
THE FOOTING'
inches
FOOTING (inches)
1
12
6
2
15
6
3
18
89
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm
a. Depth of footings shall be in accordance with Section 1809.4.
b. The ground under the floor shall be permitted to be excavated to the elevation of the top of the
footing.
C.
feet on ^ ;ter Not Adopted. -
d. See Section 1908 for additional requirements for concrete footings of structures assigned to Seismic
Design Category C, D, E or F.
e. For thickness of foundation walls, see Section 1807.1.6.
f. Footings shall be permitted to support a roof addition to the stipulated number of floors. Footings
supporting roof only shall be as required for supporting one floor.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that under -reinforced footings are effective in resisting
seismic loads and may potentially lead to a higher risk of failure. Therefore, this proposed amendment
requires minimum reinforcement in continuous footings to address the problem of poor performance of plain
or under -reinforced footings during a seismic event. With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and
structures in this region, precautionary steps are proposed to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may
result by following prescriptive design provisions for footing that does not take into consideration the
surrounding environment. It was important that the benefit and expertise of a registered design professional be
obtained to properly analysis the structure and takes these issues into consideration. This amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los
Angeles City Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge Earthquake.
This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
limit the use of the prescriptive design provisions and under -reinforced or plain concrete is to ensure that the
proper analysis of the structure takes into account the surrounding condition and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing
buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the
International Building Code.
38
2010 LARUCP 18-05. Section 1809.12 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1809.12 Timber footings. Timber footings shall be permitted for buildings of Type V construction and as
otherwise approved by the building official. Such footings shall be treated in accordance with AWPA U1
(Commodity Specification A, Use Category 4B). Treated timbers are not required where placed entirely below
permanent water level, or where used as capping for wood piles that project above the water level over
submerged or marsh lands. The compressive stresses perpendicular to grain in untreated timber footing
supported upon treated piles shall not exceed 70 percent of the allowable stresses for the species and grade
of timber as specified in the AF&PA NDS. Timber footings shall not be used in structures assigned to Seismic
Desian Cateaory D. E or F.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that timber footings is effective in supporting buildings and
structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the combined detrimental
effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Timber footings, when they are not
properly treated and protected against deterioration, have performed very poorly. Most contractors are typically
accustomed to construction in dry and temperate weather in ,the Southern California region and are not
generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of wood that makes it suitable for both seismic
event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate
potential problems that may result by using timber footings that experience relatively rapid decay due to the
face that the region does not experience temperatures cold enough to destroy or retard the growth and
proliferation of wood -destroying organisms. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment
adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of timber footings in an effort to mitigate potential problems or
deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying organisms and therefore need to be incorporated into
the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code.
K9
2010 LARUCP 18-06. Section 1810.3.2.4 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
1810.3.2.4 Timber. Timber deep foundation elements shall be designed as piles or poles in accordance with
AF&PA NDS. Round timber elements shall conform to ASTM D 25. Sawn timber elements shall conform to
DOC PS-20. Timber shall not be used in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that timber deep foundation is effective in supporting
buildings and structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the combined
detrimental effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Timber deep foundation,
when they are not properly treated and protected against deterioration, has performed very poorly. Most
contractors are typically accustomed to construction in dry and temperate weather in the Southern California
region and are not generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of wood that makes it
suitable for both seismic event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the precautionary steps
to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result by using timber deep foundation that experience
relatively rapid decay due to the face that the region does not experience temperatures cold enough to destroy
or retard the growth and proliferation of wood -destroying or This proposed amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking. insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of timber deep foundation in an effort to mitigate potential problems
or deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying organisms and therefore need to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code.
40
2010 LARUCP 19-01. Section 1908.1 is hereby amended to read as follows and Sections 1908.1.11 through
1908.1.14 are hereby added to Chapter 19 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code to read as
follows:
1908.1 General. The text of ACI 318 shall be modified as indicated in Sections 1908.1.1 through
81908.1.14.
1908.1.11 ACI 318, Section 21.6.4.1. Modify ACI 318 Section 21.6.4.1, to read as follows:
Where the calculated point of contraflexure is not within the middle half of the member clear height
provide transverse reinforcement as specified in ACI 318 Sections 21 6 4 1 Items (a) through (c) over the
full heiqht of the member.
1908.1.12 ACI 318, Section 21.6.4. Modify ACI 318 Section 21 6 4 by adding Section 21.6.4.8 to read as
follows:
21.6.4.8 — At any section where the design strength (PPn, of the column is less than the sum of the shears
Ye computed in accordance with ACI 318 Sections21.5.4.1 and 21.6.5.1 for all the beams framing into the
column above the level under consideration transverse reinforcement as specified in ACI 318 Sections
21.6.4.1 through 21.6.4.3 shall be provided For beams framing into opposite sides of the column the
moment components may be assumed to be of opposite sign For the determination of the design
strength, (DPI, of the column, these moments may be assumed to result from the deformation of the frame
in any one principal axis.
1908.1.13 ACI 318, Section 21.9.4. Modify ACI 318 Section 21.9.4, by adding Section 21.9.4.6 to read as
follows:
21.9.4.6 — Walls and portions of walls with P„ > 0.35Po shall not be considered to contribute to the
calculated strength of the structure for resisting earthquake -induced forces Such walls shall conform to
the requirements of ACI 318 Section 21.13.
1908.1.14 ACI 318, Section 21.11.6. Modify ACI 318 Section 21.11.6, by adding the following:
Collector and boundary elements in topping slabs placed over precast floor and roof elements shall not be
less than 3 inches (76 mm) or 6 db thick, where db is the diameter of the largest reinforcement in the
topping slab.
RATIONALE:
This amendment is intended to carry over critical provisions for the design of concrete columns in moment
frames from the UBC. Increased confinement is critical to the integrity of such columns and these
modifications ensure that it is provided when certain thresholds are exceeded.
In addition, this amendment carries over from the UBC a critical provision for the design of concrete shear
walls. It essentially limits the use of very highly gravity -loaded walls in being included in the seismic load
resisting system, since their failure could have catastrophic effect on the building.
Furthermore, this amendment was incorporated in the code based on observations from the 1994 Northridge
Earthquake. Rebar placed in very thin concrete topping slabs have been observed in some instances to have
popped out of the slab due to insufficient concrete coverage. This modification ensures that critical boundary
and collector rebars are placed in sufficiently thick slab to prevent buckling of such reinforcements.
This proposed amendment is a continuation of amendment 19-02 (2007) adopted during previous code
adoption cycle with editorial revisions of ACI section numbering.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
increase confinement in critical columns, limiting the use of highly gravity loaded walls, and increase concrete
41
coverage in thin slabs will have to prevent failure of the structure and therefore need to be incorporated into
the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Building Code.
42
2010 LARUCP 19-02. Section 1908.1.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
1908.1.2 ACI 318, Section 21.1.1. Modify ACI 318, Sections 21.1.1.3 and 21.1.1.7 as follows:
21.1.1.3 — Structures assigned to Seismic Design Category A shall satisfy requirements of Chapters 1 to 19
and 22; Chapter 21 does not apply. Structures assigned to Seismic Design Category B, C, D, E or F also shall
satisfy 21.1.1.4 through 21.1.1.8, as applicable. Except for structural elements of plain concrete complying
with Section 1908.1.8 of the California Building Code, structural elements of plain concrete are prohibited in
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F.
21.1.1.7 — Structural systems designated as part of the seismic -force -resisting system shall be restricted to
those permitted by ASCE 7. Except for Seismic Design Category A, for which Chapter 21 does not apply, the
following provisions shall be satisfied for each structural system designated as part of the seismic -force -
resisting system, regardless of the Seismic Design Category:
(a) Ordinary moment frames shall satisfy 21.2.
(b) Ordinary reinforced concrete structural walls and ordinary precast structural walls need not satisfy any
provisions in Chapter 21.
(c) Intermediate moment frames shall satisfy 21.3.
(d) Intermediate precast structural walls shall satisfy 21.4.
(e) Special moment frames shall satisfy 21.5 through 21.8.
(f) Special structural walls shall satisfy 21.9.
(g) Special structural walls constructed using precast concrete shall satisfy 21.10.
(h) [BSC] In Seismic Design Category D, E or F, concrete tile -up wall panels which exceed the limitations
of intermediate precast structural wall systems shall satisfy 21.9 in addition to 21.4.2 and 21.4.3.
All special moment frames and special structural walls shall also satisfy 21.1.3 through 21.1.7. Concrete tilt -up
wall panels classified as intermediate precast structural wall system shall satisfy 21.9 in addition to 21 4 2 and
21.4.3 for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F.
RATIONALE:
By virtue of ACI 318 Section 21.1.1.7(d), intermediate precast structural walls designed under Section 21.4,
material requirements intended under provisions 21.1.4, 21.1.5, 21.1.6, and 21.1.7 would be excluded for
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F. Clarification of ACI 318 Chapter 21 is needed to
ensure that structural walls designed under ASCE 7 Table 12.2-1 using the intermediate wall panel category
would conform to ductility requirements comparable to special structural wall; and conformance to the long
standing practice of ACI 318 to impose special requirements for high seismic design regions. This amendment
gives explicit requirement under which design and detailing need to conform to special structural wall system
provision in ACI-318 Section 21.9, which covers both cast -in -place as well as precast. This amendment further
gives building officials the tools to enforce minimum life safety building performance under earthquake forces
in Seismic Design Category D, E or F.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
intermediate structural wall system is intended to assure that ductility requirements for high seismic region is
provided and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Building Code and ACI 318.
43
2010 LARUCP 19-03. Section 1908.1.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1908.1.3 ACI 318, Section 21.4. Modify ACI 318, Section 21.4, by renumbering Section 21.4.3 to become
21.4.4 and adding new Sections 21.4.3, 21.4.5, 21.4.6 and 21.4.7 to read as follows:
21.4.3 - Connections that are designed to yield shall be capable of maintaining 80 percent of their design
strength at the deformation induced by the design displacement or shall use Type 2 mechanical splices.
21.4.4 - Elements of the connection that are not designed to yield shall develop at least 1.5 Sy
21.4.5 - IBSCI Wall piers in Seismic Design Category D E or F shall comply with Section 1908 1 4 of this
code.
21.4.521.4.6 - Wall piers not designed as part of a moment frame in buildings assigned to Seismic Design
Category C shall have transverse reinforcement designed to resist the shear forces determined from 21.3.3.
Spacing of transverse reinforcement shall not exceed 8 inches (203 mm). Transverse reinforcement shall be
extended beyond the pier clear height for at least 12 inches (305 mm).
Exceptions:
1. Wall piers that satisfy 21.13.
2. Wall piers along a wall line within a story where other shear wall segments provide lateral support to
the wall piers and such segments have a total stiffness of at least six times the sum of the stiffnesses
of all the wall piers.
24-4-621.4.7 - Wall segments with a horizontal length -to -thickness ratio less than 2.5 shall be designed as
columns.
RATIONALE:
The design provision for wall pier detailing was originally introduced by SEAOC in 1987 to legacy Uniform
Building Code (UBC) and was included in the 1988 UBC through the 1997 UBC (2002 CBC). The wall pier
detailing provision prescribed under Section 1908.1.4 was intended for high seismic zones equivalent to
current Seismic Design Category D, E or F. Section 1908.1.3 was added as a complement of wall pier
detailing in Seismic Design Category C (formerly seismic zones 2A and 213 under the legacy model code). ACI
318 Commentary R 21.1.1 emphasized "it is essential that structures. assigned to higher Seismic Design
Categories possess a higher degree of toughness", and further encourages practitioners to use special
structural wall system in regions of high seismic risk. ASCE 7 Table 12.2-1 permits intermediate precast
structural wall system in Seismic Design Category D, E or F. Current Section 1908.1.3 does not limit to just
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C. The required shear strength under 21.3.3, referenced in
current Section 21.4.5, is based on V„ under either nominal, moment strength or two times the code prescribed
earthquake force. The required shear strength in 21.6.5.1, referenced in Section 21.9.10.2 (IBC 1908.1.4), is
based on the probable shear strength Ve under the probable moment strength, Mpg. In addition, the spacing of
required shear reinforcement is 8 inches on center under current Section 21.4.5 instead of 6 inches on center
with seismic hooks at both ends under Section 21.9.10.2. Requirement of wall pier under Section 21.9.10.2
would enhance better ductility.
Current practice in commercial buildings constructed using precast panels wall system have large window and
door openings and/or narrow wall piers. Wall panels varying up to three stories high with openings resembles
wall frame which is not currently recognized under any of the defined seismic -force resisting systems other
than consideration of structural wall system. Conformance to special structural wall system design and
detailing of wall piers ensures minimum life safety performance in resisting earthquake forces for structures in
Seismic Design Category D, E or F. Proposed modification separates wall piers designed for structures
assigned to Seismic Design Category C from those assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F.
This modification is consistent with the amendment adopted by DSA-SS as reflected in Section 1916.4.4 of the
2010 Edition,of the California Building Code; and reflects code change proposal approved for2012 IBC during
the 2009/2010 code development hearing.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles. region is a densely populated area having buildings
44
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
wall pier detailing is intended to assure that ductility requirements for high seismic region is provided and
therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or
alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and
objectives of the International Building Code and ACI 318.
45
2010 LARUCP 19-04. Section 1908.1.8 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended'to read as follows:
1908.1.8 ACI 318, Section 22.10. Delete ACI 318, Section 22.10, and replace with the following:
22.10 Plain concrete in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F
22.10.1 - Structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F shall not have elements of
structural plain concrete, except as follows:
(a) StFUGtUral plain ronnrPtp haserrient, foundation or other walls below the base aFe permitted-iR
walls. in dwellings assigned to SeismiG Design Category D or detarGhed- elme and two family dwellings thFee steries or less On height Gonstrurted with stud bearing the height ef the wall shall
eXGeed 8 feet (24 38 mm), the thiGkRess shall not be less than 7
retain no m9re than 4 feet (1219 rnm) of unbalaRGed fill. Walls shall have FeinforGement-in
aGGGrdanGe with 22.6.6.5. Concrete used for fill with a minimum cement content of two (2) sacks of
Portland cement per cubic yard.
(b) Isolated footings of plain concrete supporting pedestals or columns are permitted, provided the
projection of the footing beyond the face of the supported member does not exceed the footing
thickness.
(c) Plain concrete footings supporting walls are permitted provided the footings have at least two
continuous longitudinal reinforcing bars. Bars shall not be smaller than No. 4 and shall have a total
area of not less than 0.002 times the gross cross -sectional area of the footing. Fer footings that
eXGee l 9 innhes (203 mm) in thickness aA minimum of one bar shall be provided at the top and
bottom of the footing. Continuity of reinforcement shall be provided at corners and intersections.
:
EXGeptions-
T
I In detached one- and two-family dwellings three stories or less in height and constructed with
stud -bearing walls, plain concrete footings without longitudinal reinfa Moment supporting all re
peicrn+tted with at least two continuous longitudinal reinforcing bars not smaller than No 4 are
permitted to have a total area of less than 0.002 times the gross cross -sectional area of the
footing..
monimurn of one bar shall be provided at the tep of the stemwall and at the beftrn of the footing.
3. Where a slab Gn ground 66 Gast rnenGlithiGally with the footing, one Ne. 5 bar *6 permitte
be 106ated at either the trip of the slab or bottom of the footing.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment requires minimum reinforcement in continuous footings to address the problem of
poor performance of plain or under -reinforced footings during a seismic event. This amendment reflects the
recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los
Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require minimum reinforcement to address the problem of poor performance of plain or under -reinforced
footings during a seismic event and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
M
2010 LARUCP 19-05. Section 1909.4 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
1909.4 Design. Structural plain concrete walls, footings and pedestals shall be designed for adequate
strength in accordance with ACI 318, Section 22.4 through 22:8.
Exception: For Group R-3 occupancies and buildings or other occupancies less than two stories above
grade plane of light -frame construction, the required edge thickness ofACI 318 is permitted to be reduced
to 6 inches (152 mm), provided that the footing does not extend more than 4 inches (102 mm) on either
side of the supported wall. This exception shall not apply to structural elements designed to resist seismic
lateral forces for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F.
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, the proposed
amendment takes the precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result
permitting a reduced edge thickness of the footing that support walls without taking into consideration the
surrounding environment. In addition, no substantiating data has been provided to show that the reduced
edge thickness is effective in resisting seismic loads and may potentially lead to a higher risk of failure. It
is important that the benefit and expertise of a registered design professional be obtained to properly
analyze the structure and take these issues into consideration.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
prohibit the reduced edge thickness of footings supporting walls is intended to ensure that the proper analysis
of the structure takes into account the surrounding condition and therefore need to be incorporated into the
code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures
are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
47
2010 LARUCP 22-01. Section 2204.1.1 is hereby added to Chapter 22 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
2204.1.1 Consumables for welding.
2264.1.1.1 Seismic Force Resisting System (SFRS) welds. All welds used in members and
connections in the SFRS shall be made with filler metals meeting the requirements specified in AWS D1.8
Clause 6.3. AWS D1.8 Clauses 6.3.5, 6.3.6 6.3.7 and 6.3.8 shall apply only to demand critical welds
2204.1.1.2 Demand critical welds. Where welds are designated as demand critical they shall be made
with filler metals meeting the requirements specified in AWS D1.8 Clause 6.3
RATIONALE:
A number of significant technical modifications have been made since the adoption of'AISC 341-05.One such ;
change incorporates AWS D1.8/D1.8M by reference forwelding related issues. This change will be included in
AISC 341-10 that is to be incorporated by reference into the 2012 Edition of the International Building Code.
This proposed amendment is consistent with actions taken by both DSA-SS and OSHPD to incorporate such
language in the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code.
AWS D1.8/D1.8M requires that all seismic force resisting system welds be made with filler metals classified
using AWS A5 standards that achieve the following mechanical properties:
Filler Metid Olassificagon Prope dies for
Seismic Force F sisfirm % tern Welds
classification
Property
70 ksi (480,
Bl) ksi (550
Mpa)
IWIPa
Field Strenglh,
ksi (MPa)
58 (4GO) min.. ,
68 (4701 min.
Tensile
Strength,
70 (480) min_
80 (550) min..
ksi` MPa
Elonglafion,
22 ruin_
1 J amain.
GVN
Toughness,
20 (27) min. 0 °F Q-1 ti 'G) a
ft-lam J
Filler metals classified as meeting 211 ft-lbf (27 J) min. at a
ternperah,re lower than 0 aF (-18 "C) also meet this
requirement
In addition to the above requirements, AWS D1.8/D1.8M requires, unless otherwise exempted from testing,
that all demand critical welds are to be made with filler metals receiving Heat Input Envelope Testing that
achieve the following mechanical properties in the weld metal:
48
MechanicalPm erties fnr Demand Critical Welds
QasItlCatlori
Property
70 ksi (480
80 ksi
Mpa
Mpa)
ksi ( IgltPaSfrength,
ksi ,
5$ (41110) min-
68 (4 0) min_ .
Tensile
Strength,
70 (480) min-
00 (550) min-
ksi I! Pa
Elongation
22 min-
19 friiin.
Toughness.4tl
(54) min_ C 70'F (20'G) �
fi-Ibf J
'For LAST of +50 °F (+18 `°` )_ For LAST less than + 50 OF (+10
C). see A S Cif _801-8 Clause 6.3-6_
Tests conducted in accordance to AWS 131-t1Ci1-$CU Annex A,
meeting 40 ft Ibf (54 d) min- at a temperature lever drain +70 OF
28 °G also meet this requirement -
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions —The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposedamendment is
consistent with requirements in AISC 341-10 for improving quality of critical welds and therefore needs. to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to .existing
buildings or structures are designedandconstructed ,in accordance with the scope and objectives of the
International Building Code and ASCE 7-05.
49
2010 LARUCP 22-02. Section 2205.4 is hereby added to Chapter 22 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
2205.4 AISC 341, Part I, Section 13.2 Members. Add Section 13.2f to read as follows:
13.2f. Member Types
The use of rectangular HSS are not permitted for bracing members, unless filled solid with cement
grout having a minimum compressive strength of 3,000 psi (20.7 MPa) at 28 days. The effects of
composite action in the filled composite brace shall be considered in the sectional properties of the
system where it results in the more severe loading condition or detailing.
RATIONALE:
Past test results on braces used in steel concentrically braced frames (SCBF) indicated that many commonly
used sections and brace configurations do not meet seismic performance expectations. Specific parameters
that were shown to affect the ductility of braces included net -section, section type, width -thickness ratio of the
cross section and member slenderness. Square and rectangular cross-section HSS were shown to be
particularly susceptible to fracture due to local buckling behavior of the cross section and, therefore, are not
recommended by SEAOSC Seismology and Steel Committee for special concentric braced frame
applications. Grout -filled HSS members exhibit more favorable local buckling characteristics, significantly
altering the post -yield behavior of these sections. Both SEAOSC Seismology and Steel Committee
recommended this modification during the 2007 code amendment process. This recommendation is a
continuation of the proposal adopted in 2007. Furthermore, OSPHD has taken the same position and is
continuing this recommendation as reflected in Section 2205A.4.1.5.1 to Chapter 22 of the 2010 Edition of the
California Building Code. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during
previous code adoption cycles.
References:
1. AISC. 2005. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, American Institute of Steel Construction Inc.,
Chicago, IL.
2. Fell,B., Kanvinde,A. Deierlein, G., Myers,A., Fu, X. 2006. "Buckling and fracture of concentric braces under
inelastic cyclic loading" Structural Steel Education Council, Steel Tips No.94.
3. Liu, Z., and Goel, S. C. 1988. "Cyclic Load Behavior of Concrete -Filled Tubular Braces." Journal of
Structural Engineering 114 (7), 1488-1506.
4. Shaback, B., and Brown, T. 2003. "Behavior of square hollow structural steel braces with end connections
under reversed cyclic axial loading." Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
30, 745-753.
5. Tremblay, R., Archambault, M-H., and Filiatrault, A. 2003. "Seismic Response of Concentrically Brace Steel
Frames Made with Rectangular Hollow Bracing Members." Journal of Structural Engineering 129 (12), 1626-
1636.
6. Uriz, P., and Mahin, S.A. 2004. "Seismic Performance Assessment of Concentrically Braced Steel Frames."
Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed amendment is
intended to reduce and minimize fracture of rectangular and square brace frame members due to local
buckling behavior of the cross section and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code and ASCE 7-05.
6111
2010 LARUCP 23-01. Section 2304.11.7 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
2304.11.7 Wood used in retaining walls and cribs. Wood installed in retaining or crib walls shall be
preservative treated in accordance with AWPA U 1 (Commodity Specifications A or F) for soil and fresh water
use. Wood shall not be used in retaininq or crib walls for structures assigned to Seismic Desiqn Category D E
or F.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that wood used in retaining or crib walls are effective in
supporting buildings and structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the
combined detrimental effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Wood used in
retaining or crib walls, when they are not properly treated and protected against deterioration, have performed
very poorly. Most contractors are typically accustomed to construction in dry and temperate weather in the
Southern California region and are not generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of
wood that makes it suitable for both seismic event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the
precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result by using wood in retaining or crib
walls that experience relatively rapid decay due to the face that the region does not experience temperatures
cold enough to destroy or retard the growth and proliferation of wood -destroying organisms. This proposed
amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
Major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of wood in retaining or crib walls in an effort to mitigate potential
problems or deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying organisms and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing
buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the
International Building Code.
51
2010 LARUCP 23-02. Section 2305.4 is hereby added to Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
2305.4 Quality of Nails. In Seismic Desiqn Category D E or F. mechanically driven nails used in wood
structural panel shear walls shall meet the same dimensions as that required for hand -driven nails including
diameter, minimum length and minimum head diameter. Clipped head or box nails are not permitted in new
construction. The allowable design value for clipped head nails in existing construction may be taken at no
more than the nail -head -area ratio of that of the same size hand -driven nails.
RATIONALE:
The overdriving of nails into the structural wood panel still remains a concern when pneumatic nail guns are
used for wood structural panel shear wall nailing. Box nails were observed to cause massive and multiple
failures of the typical 3/8-inch thick plywood during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The use of clipped head
nails continues to be restricted from being used in wood structural panel shear walls where the minimum nail
head size must be maintained in order to minimize nails from pulling through sheathing materials. Clipped or
mechanically driven nails used in wood structural panel shear wall construction were found to perform much
less in previous wood structural panel shear wall testing done at the University of California Irvine. The existing
test results indicated that, under cyclic loading, the wood structural panel shear walls were less energy
absorbent and less ductile. The panels reached ultimate load capacity and failed at substantially less lateral
deflection than those using same size hand -driven nails. This amendment reflects the recommendations by
the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge Earthquake. This proposed
amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require mechanically driven nails to have the same dimensions as hand -driven nail will result in improved
quality of construction and performance of wood structural panel shear walls and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing
buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the
International Building Code.
52
2010 LARUCP 23-03. Section 2305.5 is hereby added to Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code to read as follows:
2305.5 Hold-down connectors. In Seismic Design Category D E or F hold-down connectors shall be
designed to resist shear wall overturning moments using approved cyclic load values or 75 percent of the
allowable seismic load values that do not consider cyclic loading of the product Connector bolts into wood
framing shall require steel plate washers on the post on the opposite side of the anchorage device Plate size
shall be a minimum of 0.229 inch by 3 inches by 3 inches (5.82 mm by 76 mm by76 mm) in size Hold-down
connectors shall be tightened to finger tight plus one half (1/2) wrench turn Oust prior to covering the wall
framing.
RATIONALE:
Many of the hold-down connectors currently in use do not have any acceptance report based on dynamic
testing protocol. This proposed amendment continues to limit the allowable capacity to 75% of the acceptance
report value to provide an additional factor of safety for statically tested anchorage devices. Cyclic forces
imparted on buildings and structures by seismic activity cause more damage than equivalent forces that are
applied in a static manner. Steel plate washers will reduce the additional damage that can result when hold-
down connectors are fastened to wood framing members. This amendment reflects the recommendations by
the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge Earthquake. This proposed
amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
establish minimum performance requirements for hold-down connectors will reduce failure of wood structural
panel shear walls due to excessive deflection and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure
that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed
and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
53
2010 LARUCP 23-04. Tables 2306.2.1(3) and 2306.2.1(4) are hereby added to Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition
of the California Building Code to read as follows and Section 2306.2.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
2306.2.1 Wood structural panel diaphragms. Wood structural panel diaphragms shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with AF&PA SDPWS. Wood structural panel diaphragms are permitted to resist
horizontal forces using the allowable shear capacities set forth in Table 2306.2.1(1) or 2306.2.1(2). For
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F the allowable shear capacities shall be set forth in
Table 2306.2.1(3) or 2306.2.1(4). The allowable shear capacities in Table 2306.2.1(1) or-2306.2.1(2) are
permitted to be increased 40 percent for wind design.
Wood structural panel diaphragms fastened with staples shall not used to resist seismic forces in
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F.
Exception: Staples may be used forwood structural panel diaphragms when the allowable shearvalues
are substantiated by cyclic testing and approved by the building official.
Wood structural panel diaphragms used to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design
Category D, E or F shall be applied directly to the framing members.
Exception: Wood structural panel diaphragm is permitted to be fastened over solid lumber planking or
laminated decking provided the panel ioints and lumber planking or laminated decking joints do not
coincide.
54
TABLE 2306.2.1(3)
_ALLOWABLE SHEAR (POUNDS PER FOOT) FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL DIAPHRAGMS
WITH
FRAMING OF DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH OR SOUTHERN PINEa FOR SEISMIC LOADING'
FOR STRUCTURES ASSIGNED TO SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY D, E OR F
PANEL
GRADE
COMMON
NAIL SIZE
MINIMUM
FASTENER
PENETRATION .
MINIMUM
NOMINAL
PANEL
THICKNES
jjLnchj
MINIMUM
NOMINAL
WIDTH OF
FRAMING
MEMBERS AT
ADJOINING
PANEL
EDGES AND
BOUNDARIESO
BLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS
Fastener spacing (inches) at diaphragm boundaries
(all cases) at continuous panel edges parallel to
load
Cases 3 4 and at all anel ed es Cases 5 6 b
6
4 2'/2 `
I 2`
Fastener spacing (inches) at other panel edges
Cases 1 2 3 and 4 b
IN FRAMING
inches
6
6
4
3
Lnchesl
Structural)
8d (21/2" x
1 3/8
3/8
—
2
270
360
530
600
0131 ")
3
300
400
600
675
Grades
10dd Y x
0.148„)
1 1/2
15/32
2
320
425
640
730
3
360.
480
720
820
Sheathing,
6de (2" X
1 1/4
3/8
2
185
250
375
420
0.113"1
3
210
280
420
475
8d 2 1/" x
1 3/8
2
240
320
480
545
0.131 ")
3
270
360
540
610
single floor
8d 2 %" x
0.131 ")
1 3/8
7/16
2
255
340
505
575
and other
3
—
285
—
380
—
570
—
645
—
grades
covered in
8d (2 1/" x
1 3/8
15/32
2
270
360
530
600
DOC PS1
0.131„)
3
300
400
600
675
and PS2
10dd (W x
1 1/2
2
290
385
575
655
2.148„1
3
324
430
650
735
10dd (3" x
1 1/2
19/32
2
320
425
640
730.
0.148")
3
360
480
720
820
55
l
ALLOWABLE SHEAR
PANEL DIAPHRAGI
OR SOUT
FOR STRUCTURES ASSI
2306.2.1(3)—continued
NDS PER. FOOT) FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL
IITH FRAMING OF DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH
4 PINE FOR SEISMIC LOADING
D TO SEISMIC DESIGN CATERGORY D_ E OR F
IF IJISW
LOA CASE i CASE 2 GAGE 3 CASE 4
_T
v
DIAPHRAOM #301IN13/e9tY 0INTINUOUS PANrLJOINT$
BLOCKING MAMING
I CASE f IF USED CASE 6
GONTINL OUS PA N51- JOINTS CONTINUOUS PAN H- , JOIN°rs
For SL 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 pound per foot = 14.5939 N/m.
a. For framing of other species: (1) Find specific gravity for species of lumber in AF&PA NDS. (2) For nails
find shear value from table above for nail size for actual grade and multiply value by the following
adjustment factor: Specific Gravity Adjustment Factor=11-(0.5-SG)l, where SG = Specific Gravity of the
framing lumber. This adjustment factor shall not be greater than 1.
b. Space fasteners maximum 12 inches o.c. along intermediate framing members (6 inches D.C. where
supports are spaced 48 inches D.C.).
c. Framing at adjoining panel edges shall be 3 inches nominal or thicker, and nails: at all panel edges shall
be staggered where panel edge nailing is specified at 2 1/ inches D.C. or less.
d. Framing at adjoining panel edges shall be 3 inches nominal or thicker, and nails at all panel edqes shall
be staggered where both of the following conditions are met: (1) 10d nails having penetration into framing
of more than 1 '/ inches and (2) panel edge nailing is specified at 3 inches D.C. or less.
e. The minimum nominal width of framing members not located at boundaries or adjoining panel edges shall
be 2 inches.
f. For shear loads of normal or permanent load duration as defined by the AF&PA NDS, the values in the
table above shall be multiplied by 0.63 or 0.56, respectively.
56
TABLE 2306.2.1(4)
ALLOWABLE SHEAR (POUNDS PER FOOT) FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BLOCKED
DIAPHRAGMS UTILIZING MULTIPLE ROWS OF FASTENERS (HIGH LOAD DIAPHRAGMS) WITH
FRAMING OF DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH OR SOUTHERN PINEa FOR SEISMIC LOADING "g
FOR STRUCTURES ASSIGNED TO SEISMIC DESIGN CATERGORY D. E OR F
PANEL
GRADE°
COMMON
NAIL SIZE
MINIMUM
FASTENER
PENETRATION
MINIMUM
NOMINAL
PANEL
THICKNESS
MINIMUM
NOMINAL
WIDTH OF
FRAMING
MEMBERS AT
ADJOINING
PANEL EDGES
LINES OF
FASTENERS
BLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS
Cases 1 and 2d
Fastener Spacing Per Line at
Boundaries (inches) -
4
2 1/2.11
AND
BOUNDARIESe
Fastener Spacing Per Line at Other
IN FRAMING
inches
Panel
Ed es inches
Iinch
fi_nchesl
6
4
3
Structural)
10d
common
nails
11/2
15/32
3
2
605
815
-4,
875
1,150
4
2
700.
915
1,005
1,290
4
3
875
1,220
1,285
1.395 .
19/32
3
2
670
880
965
1,255°
grades
4
2
780
990
4,110
1,440
4
3
965"
1,320
1,405.
1.050
1,790
1.365
23/32
3
2
730
955
4
2
855
1,070
1,210
1,525
1,565
1,800
4
3
1,050
1,430
Sheathing,
10d
common
nails
1 1/2
15/32
3
2
525
725
765
1,010
4
2
605
815 _
875
1,105
4
3
765
1,085
1,130
935
1, 995
1,225
single floor
19/32
3
2
650
860
and other
grades
covered in
4
2
755
965
1,080 .
1,370
4
3
935
1,290
1,365
1,020
`1,485
1,335
DOC PS1
and PS2
23/32
3
2
710
935
4
2
825
1,050
1,175
1.480 1
1,445
.585
4
3
1, 220
1,400
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 pound per foot = 14.5939 N/m,
a. For framing of other species: (1) Find specific gravity for species of lumber inAF&PA NDS (2) For
nails find shear value from table above for nail size for actual grade and multiply value by the following
adiustment factor: Specific Gravity Adjustment Factor = [I 40.5-SGA where SG = Specific Gravity of
the framing lumber. This adjustment factor shall not be greater than 1.
b. Fastening along intermediate framing members: Space fasteners a maximum of 12 inches on center,
except 6 inches on center for spans greater.than 32 inches.
C. Panels conforming to PS1 or PS 2.
d. This table gives shear values for Cases 1 and 2 as shown in Table 2306.2.1(3). The values shown
are applicable to Cases 3, 4, 5 and 6 as shown in Table 2306.2.1(3) providing fasteners at all
continuous panels edges are spaced in accordance with the boundary fastener spacing
e. The minimum nominal depth of framing members shall be 3 inches nominal. The minimum nominal
width of framing members not located at boundaries or adjoining panel edges shall be 2 inches
f.High load diaphragms -shall be subiect to special inspection in accordance with Section 1704.6. 1
g. For shear loads of normal or permanent load duration as defined by the AF&PA NDS the values in
the table above shall be multi lied b 0 63 0 56 p t'
v
or respec
ive v.
57
TABLE 2306.2.1(4)—continued
ALLOWABLE SHEAR (POUNDS PER FOOT) FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BLOCKED
DIAPHRAGMS UTILIZING MULTIPLE ROWS OF FASTENERS (HIGH LOAD DIAPHRAGMS) WITH
FRAMING OF DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH OR SOUTHERN PINE FOR SEISMIC LOADING ''9.
FOR STRUCTURES ASSIGNED TO SEISMIC DESIGN CATERGORY D E OR F
,PANRE joiN'C-
I1 I/4 lf2 i 3/4 } ,. r r PAN L JOINT,.
2 �/ `}� a1
11/4• I12' r r �` s i3Ii
I «,,
srACll� o
SPACING
3`NOMINAL•. TWO.LI VS
4• NOMINAL -.THREE LINES
-PANEL EDGE
�f
"frPANELJOINI
a
i 3/4' 3/4" n - n • - .
TAFLE..,.. j SPACING
TYPICAL $OUNDARY FASTENING
4* NOMINAL.. --TWO LINES ;Shown is'twu lirtos uira$oured.j
NOTE: SPACE PANEL END AND EDGE JOINT 1/8-INCH. REDUCE SPACING BETWEEN LINES OF
NAILS AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM 3/8-INCH FASTENER EDGE MARGINS MINIMUM
SPACING BETWEEN LINES IS 3/8-INCH
RATIONALE:
The Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the damages to buildings and structures during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake
recommended reducing allowable shear values in wood structural panel shear walls or diaphragms that were
not substantiated by cyclic testing. That recommendation was consistent with a report to the Governor from
the Seismic Safety Commission of the State of California recommending that code requirements be "more
thoroughly substantiated with testing." The allowable shear values for wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms fastened with staples are based on monotonic testing and does not take into. consideration that
earthquake forces load shear wall or diaphragm in a repeating and fully reversible manner.
In September 2007, limited cyclic testing was conducted by,a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with staples would exhibit the same behavior as the woodstructural panels
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with staples
appeared to be much lower in strength and stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
It was recommended that the use of staples as fasteners for wood structural panel shearwalls or diaphragms
not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E and F unless
it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
.Furthermore, the cities and county within the Los Angeles region has taken extra measures to maintain the
structural integrity of the framing of shear walls and diaphragms designed for high levels of seismic forces by
58
requiring wood sheathing be applied directly over the framing members and prohibiting the use of panels
placed over gypsum sheathing. This proposed amendment is intended to prevent the undesirable
performance of nails when gypsum board softens due to cyclic earthquake displacements and the nail
ultimately does not have any engagement in a solid material within the thickness of the gypsum board.
This proposed amendment continues the previous amendment adopted during the 2007 code adoption cycle.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
place design and construction limits on staples as fasteners used in wood structural panel or diaphragms not
substantiated with cyclic testing will help to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance
standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
59
2010 LARUCP 23-05. Table 2306.3(2) is hereby added to Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building. Code to read as follows and Section 2306.3 and Table 2306.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Building Code are hereby amended to read as follows:
2306.3 Wood structural panel shear walls. Wood structural panel,shear walls shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with AF&PA SDPWS. Wood structural panel shear walls are permitted to resist
horizontal forces using the allowable shear capacities set forth in Table 2306.3M._For structures assigned to
Seismic Design Category D, E or F, the allowable shear capacities shall be set forth in Table 2306 3(2) The
allowable shear capacities in Table 2306.3LD are permitted to be increased 40 percent for wind design.
Wood structural panel shearwalls used to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design
Category D, E or F shall not be less than 4 feet by 8 feet (1219 mm by 2438 mm) except at boundaries and at
changes in framing. Wood structural panel thickness for shear walls shall not be less than 3/8 inch thick and
studs shall not be spaced at more than 16 inches on center.
The maximum allowable shear value for three-ply plywood resisting seismic forces in structures assigned
to Seismic Design Category D, E or F is 200 pounds per foot (2.92 kn/m). Nails shall be placed not less than
1/2 inch (12.7 mm) in from the panel edges and not less than 3/8 inch (9 5mm) from the edge of the
connecting members for shear Greater than 350 pounds per foot (5.11 kN/m). Nails shall be placed not less
than 3/8 inch (9.5 mm) from panel edges and not less than 1/4 inch (6.4 mm) from the edge of the connecting
members for shears of 350 pounds per foot (5.11 kN/m) or less.
Wood structural panel shear walls fastened with staples shall not used to resist seismic forces in
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F.
Exception: Staples may be used for wood structural panel shear walls when the allowable shear values
are substantiated by cyclic testing and approved by the building official..
Wood structural panel shear walls used to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design
Category D, E or F shall be applied directly to the framing members.
TABLE 2306.30)
ALLOWABLE SHEAR (POUNDS PER FOOT) FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL SHEAR WALLS
WITH FRAMING OF DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH OR SOUTHERN PINE FOR WIND OR SEISMIC
LOADINGb, h, 1, j, 1, n, n
.el
z
wQ
�0
J
z
aU)
W
�0
LL
HR
W
�a
N CO z
MaIr
W'
N
J0fq
`a LL
r d O
m1
CO ZW
NI
�I
(01
�1
00l
NI
�
r
M�
NI
LI
LO
�I
CD
N
LL
N
MI
4) 'a
d
NI
11-I
NI
J
0 H 0
`iN
-
MILL
N
N
MILIw
p
>w
Ill
Q
W
O
O
O
p
,J
wd
N
E
E
E
E
U) Q
J
U
U
U
E
O
M
�-
W
J
Q
U
c-
J
Ca W
Z
-
M
r
M
i-
C)
CO..
C)
X
Q z
z
r-
O a
0
C7
6
0
p
N
J
JQ
0
\
N
\
N
\
N
ih
CO
U
�
�
�
z
O
p Z
N00
CO
QZ
MI
MI
MI
\I
Cl)
z (�
�Qz
LL
LL
LU
az
J N
�zz
u
COO
I
Cl)M LO
Z�<lu)
0C
i
—1
M
z a 2
H
rn
C
W
Cn U
c
-O a)
C
W
p
Cu
a)
00 cn
LO
O
—
0
0
J
W
3
..c +,
N
Z
a
i
a)
cn
U
i�i(ioi���con -C
0
to
L
-
W
O
a)
,�
0N
Cn
U
0
5
CO
0L6
N
E°
C
"O
�
N
O
rn
N
�
O
O
M—
N
M
a)
O
Cj
1
`
U
T)
.0
O
O
a)
O
U
Cn_
CO
LLL
CO
.2
C
—C
N
L
N
O
Cn
EL
=
a).
a)
>
to
`N
a
N
a)
a)
3
m
.0
—
U
Ca
OCu
CN
(Ltf
O
NN
U
L
CO
c
N
CO
N
m
a
C
a)
U
Cn
N
(6
N
+-
O
�
O
"0
a)
N
N
�jCn
N
a)
—
Ca
m—
m
O
`
��
c
U
=(n
(O
Cn
0
a)
E
Ens
Cn
�
i.
>
in
o
���
O
L
C
a)
a)
L�
<
U
Cn
a)
E
a).c
c-
3
�
N
C
co
a)
a��
L
a)
°
U
Cn
0
c
Cn
LL
Q
a)
°
Cn a)
a)
N
a-
O
C
Cn CO
N>
>
0
0
(iS
U
a)
C
-
0
-a
Can
Cn
0)
C
a)
C
Ca
C
�
`-
—
C
a) 7
O
O
(�
(6
N
-C
_C
Cn
CU
in
C
mCn
C
0
>
a)
C
N
Z
U
C
N
(6
N
+�
O
O
cn
0
O N
-a
a)
j
O
U
O
.0
U
—
O
N
Q
a
:f-
U`
L O
.L
N
C
.�
C
C
E
Cn
N
L
L)
N—
—
f6
UCY
C
CO
Cn
a)
.0
0
rn
L
�O
-a
—
N fn
•N
Cn
C-6
LL
O
0
N O
N 0
C
O
L
L
�C
U
r
C
O Cn
C
N
0)
0
L
0
"a
Ca
O
C
O
O
Z
a)
i
N a)
C
C
N
C _�n
F
N(0
Cu
Cn
O Q
O
—$
L
°
ca
`�
_
i
_
c
c
Cu C
E
CO
_
U 06
c
'Q fn
L
C
O�-
fn
m
co
—
..0
'Y
0
C
i
o
.°
C LL
Q
fn
C C
— M
c
;
W
Cl)
L
U
U)
o
C L
0
L
Y
N
0
O
Cn
a)
+c.
N
4
E
C
NCy
Cn
Z O
in
—
I
C
C
cn
a)
Y
3
L
a)
U
U
E
C
'r
-
o
Cu
O
E
a) -
CO
CA Cn
M
O
a
in
L N
-
N
O
L
U
C
Cn
Cn
_
3 �
C--
L
�
O
M
C
+
C6
N
•N O
Cn a)
to
U
a)
Cu
O C
C) —
C—
N
U
C
+�
L
N°
p
C
ram+
Cn
N
C
_
U
O
S
C
_
E
1'
a) _C
a)
O
C
(6
i
C
co
CU
>
— Ca
c
O
C-
L
°
c
7
L
n_
M a)
°
O
°
O
c E•T.
E-
�
0
m E
E�
2
0
�—
rnL
U
�
c
a•�
m
°
0
E N
0\O
ro°
ro-0
N 0
C
O
O
C
'T
L
.0
0
L C
—
CO
a)
E
a)
O
Crj Cn
N>
++
L
a) L
�•.
O 1
L
O
Cn
(p
L
0
c
Cn a)
C
},
N
c
a)
O
O
(n @
s?
0 U
a)
N
C
a)
=
O
U
�
N
N
IO
7
L�a��
1
a)
0Cn(n
-a
(C6
a)
M
M
a)
c
°
O
E
0 E co
L_
>
L c
O
a)�.So
oc
LnQEQ
L
c
O
f`n
�
r_
—
a) —
-a E
E
U—_
ca
3
a
Cn
0 M
. c
Cu
'
F—
a)
E
coE
°
a° a)
06 -a C
a)
E LL
—2
E 0
a) CO
Cn
.�
a
C)
N
a)
E
•-
LL a) m
�rrE=�Ecn�coa)°�
Cn
U
O�o�L
O
Xc�o�°
>
N
N
•Tm
N
4
cLO
a)
CN
O
a)
U
—O
a)
NECM°L
.
O
II U
O
Ca
a)
'
0
Cu
1
U
O
Cn
a)
O
a)
C
a)
C
c
L
a)
0.0
a)
a)
c
a)(0�
C4 � ca
rn
a)
O Cn
cO
_
)�
N
+C
c
O
Cl)
U N
0�
��E
>
c
a)�
EO
L
T
a O
'�
a)
V
LO
'� C
C
'—
E
C
A
N�
O
Cu
E
N°
Y
U
N-
L
LL
(6
>
W C
C
X
O w:
°
O
E o
>�
Cn
—�
a)
C
N
O"a
�
cvo
N
E
a)
C
N
L�
C 0
cU
E
L
M
a)
o
Cn
N-0
rn
E `�°
N
c
2
aa)
CU
�M-0
E
NE
a)
U-0
m
C
L
E
r
�'
a) Cn
c
N (0
O x
(0
,N
CO
- _O
U a)
L
--0.c'c
0
U
0
(6
' C
cXo.
_C
�-
0
°
a)
L
C
m
a) a)
L�CY
CO
C
C C a)
0 °�
N N
Eu CD
O C C Cp �-•� O E m m a) — C L in U— L a)
a) O X— L Cn L (Cf (�0 Cn N a) N O
ALL c(0a U UM a)Q cul 1 E>�� Cn �-0 LLoI—
L
0
LL N - U -O a) L�: 6 L - Y —
RATIONALE:
The Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the damages to buildings and structures during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake
recommended reducing allowable shear values in wood structural panel shear walls or diaphragms that were
not substantiated by cyclic testing. That recommendation was consistent with a report to the Governor from
the Seismic Safety Commission of the State of California recommending that code requirements be "more
thoroughly substantiated with testing." The allowable shear values for wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms fastened with stapled nails are based on monotonic testing and does not take into consideration
that earthquake forces load shear wall or diaphragm in a repeating and fully reversible manner.
In September 2007, limited cyclic testing was conducted by a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with stapled nails would exhibit the same behavior as the wood structural panels
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with stapled nails
appeared to be much lower in strength and stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
It was recommended that the use of stapled nail as fasteners for wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E
and F unless it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
Furthermore, the cities and county within the Los Angeles region has taken extra measures to maintain the
structural integrity of the framing of shear walls and diaphragms designed for high levels of seismic forces by
requiring wood sheathing be applied directly over the framing members and prohibiting the use of panels
placed over gypsum sheathing. This proposed amendment is intended to prevent the undesirable
performance of nails when gypsum board softens due to cyclic earthquake displacements and the nail
ultimately does not have any engagement in a solid material within the thickness of the gypsum board.
This proposed amendment continues the previous amendment adopted during the 2007 code adoption cycle.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
place design and construction limits on stapled nail fasteners used in wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms not substantiated with cyclic testing will help to maintain minimum quality of construction and
performance standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
62
2010 LARUCP 23-06. Section 2306.7 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
2306.7 Shear walls sheathed with other materials. Shear walls sheathed with portland cement plaster,
gypsum lath, gypsum sheathing or gypsum board shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
AF&PA SDPWS. Shear walls sheathed with these materials are permitted to resist horizontal forces using the
allowable shear capacities set forth in Table 2306.7. Shear walls sheathed with portland cement plaster,
gypsum lath, gypsum sheathing or gypsum board shall not be used to resist seismic forces in structures
assigned to Seismic Design Category E or F.
Shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or -gypsum board shall not be used below the top level in a multi-
level building for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D.
RATIONALE:
Due to the high geologic activities in the Southern California area and the expected higher level of
performance on buildings and structures, this proposed local amendment limits the location where shearwalls
sheathed with lath, plaster or gypsum board are used in multi -level buildings. The poor performance of such
shear walls sheathed with other materials in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake was investigated by the
Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Task Force and
formed the basis for this proposed amendment. Considering that shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or
gypsum board are less ductile than steel moment frames or wood structural panel shear walls, the cities and
county of the Los Angeles region has taken the necessary measures to limit the potential structural damage
that may be caused by the use of such walls at the lower level of multi -level building that are subject to higher
levels of seismic loads. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during
previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed. modification to
limit the location where shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or gypsum board are used will help to ensure
that multi -level building will reach it's performance objective in resisting higher levels of seismic loads and
therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or
alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and
objectives of the International Building Code.
63
2010 LARUCP 23-07. Section 2308.3.4 of Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
2308.3.4 Braced wall line support. Braced wall lines shall be supported by continuous foundations.
Exception: For structures with a maximum plan dimension not over 50 feet (15240 mm), continuous
foundations are required at exterior walls only for structures not assigned to Seismic Design Category D
E or F.
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, interior walls can easily be
called upon to resist over half of the seismic loading imposed on simple buildings or structures. Without a
continuous foundation to support the braced wall line, seismic loads would be transferred through other
elements such as non-structural concrete slab floors, wood floors, etc. The proposed change is to limit the use
of the exception to structures assigned to Seismic Design Category A, B or C where lower seismic demands
are expected. Requiring interior braced walls be supported by continuous foundations is intended to reduce or
eliminate the poor performance of buildings or structures. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an
amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Conventional framing does
not address the need for a continuous load path, critical shear transfer mechanisms, connection -ties, irregular
and flexible portions of complex shaped structures. The proposed modification to require continuous footings
under braced wall lines will improve performance of buildings or structure during a seismic event and therefore
need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are
designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
I-SM
2010 LARUCP 23-08. Section 2308.12.2 of Chapter 23 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
2308.12.2 Concrete or masonry. Concrete or masonry walls and stone or masonry veneer shall not extend
above the basement.
Exception: Stone and masonry veneer is permitted to be used in the first story above grade plane in
Seismic Design Category D, provided the following criteria are met:
1. Type of brace in accordance with Section 2308.9.3 shall be Method 3 and the allowable shear
capacity in accordance with Table 2606.3(2) shall be a minimum of 350 plf (5108 N/m).
2. The bracing of the first story shall be located at each end and at least every 25 feet (7620 mm)
o.c. but not less than 45 percent of the braced wall line.
3. Hold-down connectors shall be provided at the ends of braced walls for the first floor to
foundation with an allowable design of 2,100 pounds (9341 N).
4. Cripple walls shall not be permitted.
5. Anchored masonry and stone wall veneer shall not exceed 5 inches (127 mm) in thickness shall
conform to the requirements of Chapter 14 and shall not extend more than 5 feet (1524 mm)
above the first story finished floor.
RATIONALE:
Additional weight attributed to the use of heavy veneer substantially increases loads to conventionally braced
walls in an earthquake. Moreover, normal to wall loads that occur in an earthquake can seriously overstress
wood bearing walls in combined seismic/gravity load combinations. Numerous conventionally framed veneer
covered structures sustained serious damages in the Northridge Earthquake as a.result of the heavyweight of
the veneer. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Conventional framing does
not address the need for a continuous load path, critical shear transfer mechanisms, connection ties, irregular
and flexible portions of complex shaped structures. Unless designed by a registered design professional, such
buildings built by conventional framing requirements will be prone to serious damage in future large
earthquakes. The proposed modification need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings
and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives
of the International Building Code.
65
2010 LARUCP 23-09. Section 2308.12.4 and Table 2308.12.4 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building
Code are hereby amended to read as follows: ,
2308.12.4 Braced wall line sheathing. Braced wall lines shall be braced by one of the types of sheathing
prescribed by Table 2308.12.4 as shown in Figure 2308.9.3. The sum of lengths of braced wall panels at each
braced wall line shall conform to Table 2308.12.4. Braced wall panels shall be distributed along the length of
the braced wall line and start at not more than 8 feet (2438 mm) from each end of the braced wall line. Panel
sheathing joints shall occur over studs or blocking. Sheathing shall be fastened to studs, top and bottom
plates and at panel edges occurring over blocking. Wall framing to which sheathing used for bracing is applied
shall be nominal 2 inch wide [actual 11/2 inch (38 mm)] or larger members and spaced a maximum of 16
inches on center.
Exception: Braced wall panels required by Section 2308.12.4 may be eliminated when all of the following
requirements are met:
1. One story detached Group U occupancies not more than 25 feet in depth or length.
2. The roof and three enclosing walls are solid sheathed with 15/32 inch nominal thickness wood
structural panels with 8d common nails placed 3/8 inches from panel edges and spaced not more
than 6 inches on center along all panel edges and 12 inches on center along intermediate framing
members. Wall openings for doors or windows are permitted provided a minimum 4 foot wide wood
structural braced panel with minimum height to length ratio of 2 to 1 is provided at each end of the
wall line and that the wall line be sheathed for 50% of its length.
Wood structural panel sheathing shall be a minimum of 15/32 inch thick nailed with 8d common placed
3/8 inches from panel edges and spaced not more than 6 inches on center and 12 inches on center along
intermediate framing members.
Braced wall panel construction types shall not be mixed within a braced wall line.
TABLE 2308.12.4
WALL BRACING IN SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES D AND E
(Minimum Length of Wall Bracing per each 25 Linear Feet of Braced Wall Line a1
SHEATHING
CONDITION
TYPE
SoS < 0.50
0.50 SSps < 0.75
0.75 <_ Sp S <_ 1.00
SOS > 1.00
One Story
G-Pc
10 feet 8 inches
14 feet 8 inches
18 feet 8 inches.
25 feet 0 inches
S-Wd
5 feet 4 inches
8 feet 0 inches
9 feet 4 inches
12 feet 0 inches
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm.
a. Minimum length of panel bracing of one face of the wall for S-W sheathing shall be at least 4'-0" long or
both faces of the wall for G-P sheathing shall be at least 8'-0" long; h/w ratio shall not exceed 2: 1. For S-
W panel bracing of the same material on two faces of the wall, the minimum length is permitted to be one-
half the tabulated value but the h/w ratio shall not exceed 2:1 and design for uplift is required.
b. G-P = gypsum board, fiberboard, paFtiGlebeard, lath and portland cement plaster or gypsum sheathing
boards; S-W = wood structural panels and diagonal weed sheathing.
c. Nailing as specified below shall occur at all panel edges at studs, at top and bottom plates and, where
occurring, at blocking:
For 1/2-inch gypsum board, 5d (0.113 inch diameter) cooler nails at 7 inches on center;
For 5/8-inch gypsum board, No 11 gage (0.120 inch diameter) cooler nails at 7 inches on center;
For gypsum sheathing board, 1-3/4 inches long by 7/16-inch head, diamond point galvanized nails at 4
inches on center;
For gypsum lath, No. 13 gage (0.092 inch) by 1-1/8 inches long, 19/64-inch head, plasterboard at 5 inches
on center;
For Portland cement plaster, No. 11 gage (0.120 inch) by 11/2 inches long ,'/16- inch head at 6 inches on
center;
_'/2 inn4e6-, _ innh homer! n�linni�cr7
nails at inn Ghhes On Genter.
rrocriici .
d. S-W sheathing shall be a minimum of 15/32" thick nailed with 8d common placed 3/8 inches from panel
edges and spaced not more than 6 inches on center and 12 inches on center along intermediate framing
members.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness and nail size and spacing so as to provide
a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow. This is intended to improve the
performance level of buildings and structures that are subject to the higher seismic demands placed on
buildings or structure in this region. This proposed amendment reflects the recommendations by the Structural
Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that
investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Conventional framing does
not address the need for a continuous load path, critical shear transfer mechanisms, connection -ties, irregular
and flexible portions of complex shaped structures. The proposed modification to provide specific detailing
requirements will improve the performance of buildings and structures and therefore needs to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
M.
2010 LARUCP 23-10. Section 2304.9.1 and Table 2304.9.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code
are hereby amended to read as follows:
2304.9.1 Fastener requirements. Connections for wood members shall be designed in accordance with the
appropriate methodology in Section 2301.2. The number and size of fasteners connecting wood members
shall not be less than that set forth in Table 2304.9.1. Staple fasteners in Table 2304.9.1 shall not be used to
resist or transfer seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D E or F.
Exception: Staples may be used to resist or transfer seismic forces when the allowable shear values are
substantiated by cyclic testing and approved by the building official.
Add new footnote q. to Table 2304.9.1.
q. Staples shall not be used to resist or transfer seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design
Cateaory D. E or F.
RATIONALE:
Due to the high geologic activities in the Southern California area and the expected higher level of
performance on buildings and structures, this proposed local amendment limit the use of staple fasteners in
resisting or transferring seismic forces. In September 2007, limited cyclic testing data was provided to the ICC
Los Angeles Chapter Structural Code Committee showing that stapled wood structural shear panels do not
exhibit the same behavior as the nailed wood structural shear panels. The test results of the stapled wood
structural shear panels appeared much lower in strength and drift than the nailed wood structural shear panel
test results. Therefore, the use of staples as fasteners to resist or transfer seismic forces shall not be
permitted without being substantiated by cyclic testing. This proposed amendment is a continuation of a
similar amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
limit the use of staple fasteners to resist or transfer seismic load improve the performance of buildings and
structures during a seismic event and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
2010 LARUCP 23-11. Section 2308.12.5 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
2308.12.5 Attachment of sheathing. Fastening of braced wall panel sheathing shall not be less than that
prescribed in Table 2308.12.4 or 2304.9.1. Wall sheathing shall not be attached to framing members by
adhesives. Staple fasteners in Table 2304.9.1 shall not be used to resist or transfer seismic forces in
structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E or F.
Exception: Staples may be used to resist or transfer seismic forces when the allowable shear values are
substantiated by cyclic testing and approved by the building official.
All braced wall panels shall extend to the roof sheathing and shall be attached to parallel roof rafters or
blocking above with framing clips (18 gauge minimum) spaced at maximum 24 inches (6096 mm) on center
with four 8d nails per leg (total eight 8d nails per clip). Braced wall panels shall be laterally braced at each top
corner and at maximum 24 inches (6096 mm) intervals along the top plate of discontinuous vertical framing.
RATIONALE:
Due to the high geologic activities in the Southern California area and the expected higher level of
performance on buildings and structures, this proposed local amendment limit the use of staple fasteners in
resisting or transferring seismic forces. In September 2007, limited cyclic testing data was provided to the [CC
Los Angeles Chapter Structural Code Committee showing that stapled wood structural shear panels do not
exhibit the same behavior as the nailed wood structural shear panels. The test results of the stapled wood
structural shear panels appeared much lower in strength and drift than the nailed wood structural shear panel
test results. Therefore, the use of staples as fasteners to resist or transfer seismic forces shall not be
permitted without being substantiated by cyclic testing. This proposed amendment is a continuation of a
similar amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
limit the use of staple fasteners to resist or transfer seismic load improve the performance of buildings and
structures during a seismic event and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Building Code.
At
2010 Vernon -05 Section 2609 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby
deleted.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment eliminates the use of Light -Transmitting Plastic Roof Panels on buildings within
Vernon. Most buildings constructed in the City of Vernon are large industrial or warehouse facilities with flat
roofs. During a fire event fire fighters must access the roof to vent smoke from the structure. This low lying
smoke could obscure the vision of a fire fighter causing him to potentially walk across a plastic roof panel if
one were to be installed. During a fire this panel could be weekend and when the load of a person is applied
the fire fighter could fall through the roof. Based on these factors staff is of the opinion that this type of roof
not be permitted.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Topographical conditions- The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
70
2010 Vernon -06 Section 2610.9 is hereby added to Chapter 26 of the 2010 Edition of the
California Building Code to read as follows:
2610.9 Approved materials. Regardless of the provisions in Chapter 26, no skylight shall be installed
unless the materials, the construction standards, and the location have been approved by the ,
building official, all in accordance with the provisions of this code.
1. Skylights which are flat or corrugated at the roof level shall be provided with an
approved supporting barrier immediately above or below the skylight.
2. Each skylight shall not exceed a maximum area of 32 square feet.
3. The aggregate area of all skylights shall not exceed 25 percent of the floor area
of the room or space sheltered by the roof in which they are installed.
4. All existing skylights which are not in conformance with this code are deemed to
be hazardous and shall be removed or protected in accordance with this section.
RATIONALE:
Most buildings constructed in the City of Vernon are large industrial or warehouse facilities with flat roofs.
Skylights are often used as smoke and heat vents and also provide natural lighting to the interior of structures
and therefore cannot be eliminated. However they do pose a significant hazard to afire fighter who maybe
fighting a fire within the structure. Quite often a fire fighter will have to access a roof to vent the smoke and
heat from a burning building. This low lying smoke from a fire could obscure the vision of a fire fighter causing
him to potentially walk over a skylight. During a fire the skylight could be weekend and when the load of a
person is applied the fire fighter could fall through the roof. Based on these factors staff is of the opinion that
added protection should be provided including prohibiting flat or corrugated roof level skylights unless it is
provided with a supporting barrier above or below the skylight, limiting the size of the skylight to 32 square feet
and a maximum of 25 percent of the floor area of the room below.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
71
2010 Vernon -07 Chapter 32 of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is hereby deleted.
RATIONALE:
Chapter 32 of the California building code provides requirements for construction within the public right of way.
Chapter 22 of the City code, Streets and Sidewalks, currently establishes regulations for construction within
the public right of way. The requirements within the building code would conflict with the City's requirements
contained in chapter 22. Therefore it is recommended that chapter 32 of the California Code be deleted.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards.
72
2010 Vernon -08 Section J101 of Appendix J of the 2010 Edition of the California Building Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION J101
GENERAL
J101.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to grading, excavation and earthwork construction,
including fills. and embankments and the control of grading site runoff, including erosion sediments and
construction -related pollutants. Where conflicts occur between the technical requirements of this chapter
and the geotechnical report, the geeteGhniGal report more restrictive requirement shall govern.
J101.2 Flood hazard areas. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to grading, excavation and
earthwork construction, including fills and embankments, in floodways within flood hazard areas
established in Section 1612.3 or in flood hazard areas where design flood elevations are specified but
floodways have not been designated, unless it has been demonstrated through hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practice that the proposed work will not
result in any increase in the level of the base flood.
J101.3 Hazards. Whenever the building official determines that any land or any existing excavation
or fill has, from any cause, become a menace to life or limb, or endangers public or private property, or
adversely affects the safety, use or stability of public or private property, the owner or other person in legal
control of the property concerned shall, upon receipt of a written notice thereof from the building official,
correct such condition in accordance with the provisions of this appendix and the requirements. and
conditions set forth in the notice so as to eliminate such condition. The owner or other person in legal
control of the property shall immediately comply with the provisions set forth in the notice and shall
complete the work within 180 days from the date of the notice unless a shorter period of time for
completion has been specified in the notice in which case the owner shall comply with the shorter period
of time. Upon written application and good cause shown, the building official may approve the request for
an extension of time to complete the work required by the notice.
J101.4 Safety precautions.
1. If at any stage of work on an excavation or fill, the building official determines that the work has
become or is likely to become dangerous to any person, or is likely to endanger any property,
public or private, the building official shall be authorized to require safety precautions to be
immediately taken by the property owner as a condition to continuing such permitted work or to
require cessation thereof forthwith unless and until it is made safe and to amend the plans for
such work.
2. Safety precautions may include, but shall not be limited to, specifying a flatter exposed slope or
construction of additional drainage facilities, berms, terracing, compaction, cribbing, retaining
walls or buttress fills, slough walls, desilting basins, check dams, benching, wire mesh and
guniting, rock fences, revetments or diversion walls.
3. Upon the determination of the building official that such safety precautions during grading are
necessary, the building official shall provide a notice and order to the permittee to implement same.
After receiving such notice, oral or written, it is unlawful for the permittee or any person to proceed
with such work contrary to such order.
J101.5 Protection of utilities. The owner and permittee of any property on which grading has been
performed and that requires a grading permit under Section J103 shall be responsible for the prevention
of damage to any public utilities or services.
J101.6 Protection of adjacent property. The owner and permittee of anv property on which
grading has been performed and that requires a grading permit under Section J103 is responsible for the
prevention of damage to adjacent property and no person shall excavate on land sufficiently close to the
Property line to endanger any adjoining public street, sidewalk, alley, or other public or private property
without supporting and protecting such property from settling, cracking or other damage that might result.
Special precautions approved by the building official shall be made to prevent imported or exported
materials from being deposited on the adjacent public way and/or drainage courses.
73
J101.7 Storm water control measures. The owner and permittee of any property on which
grading has been performed and that requires a grading permit under Section J103 shall put into effect
and maintain all precautionary measures necessary to protect adiacent watercourses and public or
private property from damage by erosion, flooding and deposition of mud debris and construction -related
Pollutants originating from the site during and after, grading and related construction activities
Furthermore, the owner and permittee shall be responsible for putting into effect and maintaining
appropriate measures necessary to prevent any change in cross -lot surface drainage that may adversely
affect any adjoining property as a result of grading and/or construction -related activities Such measures
shown on approved grading plans or not.
J101.8 Conditions of approval. In granting any permit under this code the building official may
include such conditions as may be reasonably necessary to prevent creation of a nuisance or hazard to
public or private property. Such conditions may include but shall not be limited to:
1. Improvement of any existing grading to comply with the standards of this code
2. Requirements for fencing of excavations or fills which would otherwise be
hazardous.
3. Establishment of haul routes.
J101.9 Rules and regulations.
J101.9.1 Rules. The permissive provisions of this chapter shall not be presumed to waive any
regulations imposed by other statutes or other ordinances of the State of California or the City.
J101.9.2 Regulations. If two or more pertinent regulations are not identical those regulations
shall prevail which are more restrictive or which afford greater safety to life limb health property
or welfare. For the purposes of these regulations grading permits shall be considered as building
permits and shall be subiect to the administrative provisions of this code unless otherwise
specifically provided for in this chapter.
J101.10 NPDES General All grading plans and permits shall comply with the provisions of this
section. for NPDES compliance including the owner of any property on which gradinq has been performed
and which requires a grading permit under Appendix J Section J103 Sites which have been graded and
which require a grading permit under Appendix J Section J103 are subiect to penalties and fines All best
management practices shall be installed before grading begins or as instructed in writing bythe building
official. As grading progresses, all best management practices shall be updated as necessary to prevent
erosion and control construction related pollutants from discharging from the site All best management
practices shall be maintained in good working order to the satisfaction of the building official unless final
grading approval has been granted by the building official and all permanent drainage and erosion control
systems, if required, are in place.
J101.10.1 Storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) When requested by the building
official, no grading permit shall be issued unless the plans for such work include a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan with details of best management practices including desilting basins or
other temporary drainage or control measures or both as may be necessary to control
construction -related pollutants which originate from the site as a result of construction related
activities.
J101.10.2 Wet weather erosion control plans (WWECP). In addition to the SWPPP required in
Appendix J Section J101 10 1 where a grading permit is issued and it appears that the grading
will not be completed prior to November 1, then on or before October 1 the owner of the site on
which the grading is being performed shall file or cause to be filed with the building official a
WWECP which includes specific best management practices to minimize the transport of
sediment and protect.public and private property from the effects of erosion flooding or the
deposition of mud, debris or construction related pollutants The best management practices
shown on the WWECP shall be installed on or before October 15 The plans shall be revised
annually or as required by the building official to reflect the current site conditions
J101.10.3 Storm water pollution prevention plan effect of noncompliance Should the
owner fail to install the best management practices required by Appendix J Sections J101 101 or
J101.10'.2 or submit the wet weather erosion control plans required by Appendix J Section
74
_ i
J101.10.2 by the dates specified therein, the owner shall be subject to penalties established in the
City Code. In addition the building official may enter the property for the purpose of installing by
city forces or by other means, the drainage erosion control and other devices shown on the
approved plans or if there are no approved plans as the building official may deem necessary to
protect adioining property from the effects of erosion flooding or the deposition of mud debris or
construction related pollutants. The owner shall be responsible for all costs associated with said
work. The building official may also cause the owner to be prosecuted as a violator of this code
Payment of penalty shall not relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of this
code in the execution of the work.
RATIONALE:
Appendix J sets forth regulations for the grading of private properties. City staff believes in order to protect the
public and adjoining property owners the scope of the Appendix, should be expanded to set forth provisions
for erosion control, establish when a hazard exists, safety precautions that must be undertaken, provisions to
protect adjacent properties, and the establishment of storm water control measures.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city.
75
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
Ordinance
No.1176
Section No.
2010
LARUCP
No.
City of
Vernon
No.
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
4 B. a
V-09
Amend CEC Article 110.14 A Electrical Connections
4 B. b
V-10
Amend CEC Article 200.6 Means of Identifying Grounded Conductors
4 B.(c)
V-11
Amend CEC Article 210.7(B) Branch Circuit Requirements for Device
Connections and Locations
4 B. d
V-12
Amend CEC Article 230.22 Insulation or Covering
4 B.(e)
V-13
Delete CEC Articles 250.118(5), (6), (7), (8) and (9) Types of Equipment
Grounding Conductors
4 B. f
V-14
Delete CEC Articles 334.10(3) and (4) Uses Permitted
76
2010 Vernon -09 Article 110.14(A) of the 2010 Edition of the California Electrical Code is hereby
amended to add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph:
All stranded aluminum conductors must be terminated with an approved by -press termination.
RATIONALE: .
The City is requiring a by -press termination due to the fact that thermal cycles cause a temperature change
creep in aluminum conductors potentially reducing the contact area. A by -press termination does not have
those thermal cycling characteristics and has been proven to be a much more reliable termination resulting in
a safer environment.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon, increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
77
2010 Vernon -10 Article 200.6 of the 2010 Edition of the California Electrical Code is hereby
amended to add the following sentences after the title line:
Color Coding. Grounded conductors of different voltage shall be identified by white and natural gray;
grounded conductors of the 277/480 volt system shall be gray; grounded conductors of the lower voltage
systems shall be white.
RATIONALE:
The code allows for white or gray colored grounded conductors. To aid electrical workers in determining if the
system is a 120 or 277 volt system the City has required that a 120 volt system have white grounded
conductors and that 277 volt systems have gray grounded conductors.
91z101k►Ln*3
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
78
2010 Vernon -11 Article 210.7(B) of the 2010 Edition of the California Electrical Code is hereby
amended to add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph:
Upon change of occupancy, use or tenancy all 120 volt ceiling mounted receptacles shall be removed.
RATIONALE:
The City has founded that ceiling mounted receptacles can be a fire hazard due to the number of extension
cords that are plugged into these type of receptacles as a convenience outlet.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
79
2010 Vernon -12 Article 230.22 of the 2010 Edition of the California Electrical Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
230.22 Insulation or Covering. Individual conductors shall be insulated or covered. Service entrance
conductors from overhead service drops shall be installed in rigid metal raceways.
Exception: The grounded conductor of a multiconductor cable shall be permitted to be bare.
RATIONALE:
Service entrance raceway conductors do not have a protection device ahead of the raceway conductor, City
staff therefore of the opinion that the conductor needs a more substantial physical protection than what is
required by the code.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
we
2010 Vernon -13 Articles 250.118(5), (6), (7), (8) and (9) of the 2010 Edition of the California
Electrical Code are hereby deleted.
RATIONALE:
The City is requiring that flexible conduit be provided with a ground. Vernon is an industrial city and therefore
the electrical equipment is subject to more physical rigors and is in an abusive environment. The requirement
to have a ground protects an individual in the event that a flexible conduit were to come apart, the separate
ground will ensure that the protected device will continue to operate safely.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
81
2010 Vernon -14 Articles 334.10(3) and (4) of the 2010 Edition of the California Electrical Code are
hereby deleted.
RATIONALE:
Due to Vernon's industrial nature, the electrical wiring is exposed to more physical rigors than would be found
in a dwelling unit. Therefore city staff is of the opinion that a more substantial wiring method other than non.
metallic sheathed cable shall be required.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
82
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2006 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL ELECTRICAL CODE ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Ordinance
No.1176
Section No.
2010
LARUCP
No.
City of
Vernon
No.
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
4 B. a
V-15
Amend ICCECSP Section 303.1 Use and Occupancy
4 B. b
V-16
Amend ICCECAP Section 401.3(5) Work Exempt from Permits
4 B.(c)
V-17
Add ICCECAP Section 402.6 Responsibility of Permittees
4 B.(d)
V-18
Amend ICCECAP Section 404.2 Electrical Permit Fees .
4 B. a
V-19
Delete ICCECAP Section 1102 Board of Appeals Membership
83
2010 Vernon -15 Section 303.1 of the 2006 Edition of the International Code Council Electrical
Code Administrative provisions is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec 303.1 Use and Occupancy. No building or structure shall be used or occupied until a certificate of
occupancy has been provided in accordance with the California Building Code.
RATIONALE:
The original provision referenced the International Building Code. This is being amended to replace the words
"International Building Code" with the words "California Building Code".
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
84
2010 Vernon -16 Section 401.3(5) of the 2006 Edition of the International Code Council Electrical
Code Administrative provisions is hereby deleted:
RATIONALE:
This Section outlines the work that is exempted from permits. City staff is of the opinion that the electrical
wiring, devices, appliances, apparatus or equipment operating at less than 25 volts and not capable of
supplying more than 50 watts of energy could still be an electrical hazard if improperly install. Therefore staff
believes that a permit should be required for these installations
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Geological conditions - The City of Vernon is affected by the nearby location of earthquake faults
that can create tremendous loss of life and structures in the city;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
85
2010 Vernon -17 Section 402.6 is hereby added to the 2006 Edition of the International Code
Council Electrical Code Administrative provisions to read as follows:.
Sec. 402.6 Responsibility of permittee. Building permits shall be presumed to incorporate the
provision, that the applicant, the applicant's agent, employees or contractors shall carry out the
proposed work in accordance with the approved plans and with all the. requirements of the code
and any other law or regulations applicable thereto, whether specified or not. No approval shall
exonerate any person from the responsibility of complying with the provisions or intent of the code.
RATIONALE:
The permittee and or it agents shall be responsible for its work complies with the code and with any other
regulations or laws adopted by the State and this responsibility should not be shifted in any way to the City or
its employees.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
2010 Vernon -18 Section 404.2 of the 2006 Edition of the International Code Council Electrical
Code Administrative provisions is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 404.2 Electrical Permit Fees. Electrical permit fees shall be set forth in a fee schedule
adopted by resolution of the City Council.
A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of the work for
which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
The City Council shall set for the permit and plan review fees by resolution in order ensure sufficient funds are
collected for the services provided. From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not
been completed or is not performed in conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The
City should have the ability to collect for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards.
87
2010 Vernon -19 Section 1102 of the 2006 Edition of the International Code Council Electrical
Code Administrative provisions is hereby deleted.
RATIONALE:
This provision would eliminate the membership provisions of the Board of Appeals. The City Council shall
establish the membership requirements and qualifications of the board of appeals.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
Ordinance
2010
City of
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
No.1176
LARUCP
Vernon
Section No.
No.
No.
5 B.(a)
V-20
Add CMC Section 114.6 Responsibility of the Permittee
5 B.(b)
V-21
Amend CMC Table 1-1 Mechanical Permit Fees
1.1']
2010 Vernon -20 Section 114:6 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Mechanical Code to read as follows:
114.6 Responsibility of permittee. Building permits shall be presumed to incorporate the provision,
that the applicant, the applicant's agent, employees or contractors shall carry out the proposed
work in accordance with the approved plans and with all the requirements of the code and any
other law or regulations applicable thereto, whether specified or not. No approval shall exonerate
any person from the responsibility of complying with the provisions or intent of the code.
RATIONALE:
The permittee and or it agents shall be held responsible for its work complies with the code and with any other
regulations or laws adopted by the State and this responsibility should not be shifted in any way to the City or
its employees.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
.Y
2010 Vernon -21 Table 1-1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Mechanical Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Table 1-1. Mechanical Permit Fees:
Mechanical permit fees shall be set forth in a fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council.
A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of the work for
which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
The City Council shall set for the permit and plan review fees by resolution in order ensure sufficient funds are
collected for the services provided. From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not
been completed or is not performed in conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The
City should have the ability to collect for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
Ordinance
No.1176
Section No.
2010
LARUCP
No.
City of
Vernon
No.
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
6 B.(a)
V-22
Add CPC Section 103.9 Responsibility of the Permittee
6 B.(b)
V-23
Amend CPC Table 1-1 Plumbing Permit Fees
6 B.(c)
V-24
Amend CPC Table 4-1 Plumbing Fixtures
6 B. d
V-25
Amend CPC Section 1101.1 Where Required
ISM
2010 Vernon -22 Section 103.9 is hereby added to the 2010 Edition of the California Plumbing
Code to read as follows:
103.9 Responsibility of permittee. Building permits shall be presumed to incorporate the provision,
that the applicant, the applicant's agent, employees or contractors shall carry out the proposed
work in accordance with the approved plans and with all the requirements of the code and any
other law or regulations applicable thereto, whether specified or not. No approval shall exonerate
any person from the responsibility of complying with the provisions or intent of the code.
RATIONALE:
The permittee and or it agents shall be held responsible to ensure its work complies with the code and with
any other regulations or laws adopted by the State and this responsibility should not be shifted in any way to
the City or its employees.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding - This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
93
2010 Vernon -23 Table 1-1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Plumbing Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Table 1-1. Plumbing Permit Fees:
Plumbing permit fees shall be set forth in a fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council.
A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of the work for
which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made.
Reinspection fees.may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
The City Council shall set for the permit and plan review fees by resolution in order ensure sufficient funds are
collected for the services provided. From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not
been completed or is not performed in conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The
City should have the ability to collect for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards
94
2010 Vernon -24 Table 4-1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Plumbing Code is hereby amended to
add the following sentence after the third paragraph:
If the actual number of expected occupants at the facility exceed the number occupants of provided in
table 4-1, the number of plumbing facilities shall be determined based on the actual occupant load.
RATIONALE:
Plumbing fixtures should be based on the maximum occupant loading of a building.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
95
2010 Vernon -25 Section 1101.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Plumbing Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
1101:1 Where required. Yard drainage piping and onsite storm drain systems that connect to a public
storm drainage systems shall be installed in accordance with this chapter and approved public works
standards. Prior to construction of any storm drain system, complete plans and hydraulic calculations
shall be approved by the agency whose storm drainage system is to be impacted by the proposed system.
Storm water shall flow away from buildings and adjoining properties. All drainage shall be treated in
accordance with NPDES requirements.
RATIONALE:
The provisions are clarified to ensure that prior to connecting into the public storm drainage system
calculations are provided to show that the existing system can handle the proposed flow and that minimum
NPDES standards are met.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of.the California Health and
Safety Code.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
Ordinance
No.1176
Section No.
2010
LARUCP
No.
City of
Vernon
No.
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
9 C.(a)
V-26
Amend CRC Section R105.8 Responsibility of Permittee
9 C. b
V-27
Add CRC Section R108.7 Reinspection
9 C. c
R3-01
Amend CRC Section R301.1.3.2 Woodframe Structures
9 C. d
R3-02
Add CRC Section R301.1.4 Slopes Steeper Than 33%
9 C. e)
R3-03
Amend CRC Section R301.2.2.2.5 Irregular Buildings
9 C.(f)
R3-04
Add CRC Section R301.2.2.3.5.1 Modify AISI S230 Section B1
9 CA)
R3-05
Amend CRC Section R322.1.4.1 Determination of Design Flood
Elevations
9 C.(h)
R4-01
Amend CRC Section R401.1 Application
9 C.(i)
R4-02
Amend CRC Section R403.1.2 Continuous Footing in Seismic
Design Categories Do, DI, D2
9 C. 0
Amend CRC Section R403.1.3 Seismic Reinforcing
9 C.(k)
Amend CRC Section R403.1.5 Slope
9 C.(I)
R4-03
Amend CRC Section R404.2 Wood Foundation Walls
9 C.(m)
R5-01
Amend CRC Section R501.1 Application
9 C. n
R5-02
Amend CRC Section R503.2.4 O enin s' In Horizontal Diaphragms
9 C.(o)
R6-01
Amend CRC Table R602.3(1) Fastener Schedule
9 C.)
R6-02
Amend CRC Table R602.3 2 Alternate Attachment
9 C.(q)
R6-03
Amend CRC Table R602.10.1.2(2) Bracing Requirements Based on .
Seismic Design Category
9 C.(r)
R6-04
Amend CRC Table R602.10.2 Intermittent Bracing Methods
9 C. s
R6-05
Amend CRC Figure R602.10.3.2 Alternate Braced Wall Panel
9 C. t
R6-06
Amend CRC Figure R602.10.3.3 Portal Frame
9 C.(u)
R6-07
Amend CRC Section R602.10.3.3 Method PFH
9 C. v
R6-08
Amend CRC Table R602.10.4.1 Continuous Sheathing Methods
9 C. w
R6-09
Amend CRC Figure R602.10.4.1.1 Method CS-PF
9 C. x
R6-10
Delete CRC Section R602.10.7.1 Braced Wall Panel
9 C.
R6-11
Amend CRC Section R606.2.4 Parapet Walls
9 C.(z)
R6-12
Amend CRC Section R606.12.2.2.3 Reinforcement of Requirements
for Masonry Elements ,
9 C. (aa)
R6-13
Amend CRC Section R602.3.2 Single Top Plate
9 C. bb
R8-01
Amend CRC Table R802.5.1(9) Joist Heel Joint Connection
9 C. (cc)
R8-02
Amend CRC Section R802.8 Lateral Support
9 C. dd
R8-03
Amend CRC Section R802.10.2 Design
9 C.(ee)
R8-04
Add CRC Section R803.2.4 Openings in Horizontal Diaphragms
9 C. ff
V-28
Amend CRC Section R902.1 Roof Covering Materials
9 C.)
R10-01
Amend CRC Section R1001.3.1 Vertical Reinforcing
M
2010 Vernon -26 Section R105.8 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R105.8 Responsibility of permittee. Building permits shall be presumed to incorporate the provision,
that the applicant, the applicant's agent, employees or contractors shall carryout the proposed work in
accordance with the approved plans and with all the requirements of the code and any other law or
regulations applicable thereto, whether specified or not. No approval shall exonerate any person from the
responsibility of complying with the provisions or intent of the code.
RATIONALE:
The permittee and or it agents shall be held responsible to ensure its work complies with the code and with
any other regulations or laws adopted by the State and this responsibility should not be shifted in any way to
the City or its employees.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification. and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
X-1
2010 Vernon -27 Section R108.7 is hereby added to Chapter 1 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code to read as follows:
R108.7 Reinspection. A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when
such portion of the work for which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for
are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not been completed or is not performed in
conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The City should have the ability to collect
for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
99
2010 LARUCP R3-01. Section R301.1.3.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R301.1.3.2 Woodframe structures greater than •o .,tones. The building official shall require construction
documents to be approved and stamped by a California licensed architect or engineer for all dwellings of
woodframe construction more than two stories and basement in height located in Seismic Design Category A
B or C. Notwithstanding other sections the law, the law establishing these provisions is found in Business and
Professions Code Section 5537 and 6737.1.
The building official shall require construction documents to be approved and stamped by a California licensed
architect or engineer for all dwellings of woodframe construction more than one story in height or with a
basement located in Seismic Design Category Do DAD or E.
RATIONALE:
After the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, the Wood Frame Construction Joint Task Force recommended that the
quality of wood frame construction need to be greatly improved. One such recommendation identified by the
Task Force is to improve the quality and organization of structural plans prepared by the engineer or architect
so that plan examiners, building inspectors, contractors and special inspectors may logically follow and
construct the presentation of the seismic force -resisting systems in the construction documents. For buildings
or structures located in Seismic Design Category Do, D1, DZ or E that are subject to a greater level of seismic
forces, the requirement to have a California licensed architect or engineer prepare the construction documents
is intended to minimize or reduce structural deficiencies that may cause excessive damage or injuries in wood
frame buildings. Structural deficiencies such as plan and vertical irregularities, improper shear transfer of the
seismic force -resisting system, missed details or connections important to the structural system, and the
improper application of the prescriptive requirements of the California Residential Code can be readily
addressed by a registered design professional.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require construction documents for wood frame construction greater than one story in height or with a
basement to be approved and stamped by a California licensed architect or engineer is intended to assure that
the both the structural design and prescriptive requirement of the code are properly utilized and presented and
therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or
alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and
objectives of the International Residential Code.
100
2010 LARUCP R3-02. Section R301.1.4 is hereby added to Chapter 3 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code to read as follows:
R301.1.4 Seismic design provisions for buildings constructed on or into slopes steeper than one unit
vertical in three units horizontal (33.3 percent slope). The design and construction of new buildings and
additions to existing buildings when constructed on or into slopes steeper than one unit vertical in three units
horizontal (33.3 percent slope) shall comply with Section 1613.12 of the California Building Code.
RATIONALE:
Due to the difficulty of fire suppression vehicles accessing winding and narrow hillside properties and the
probabilities for future earthquakes in the Los Angeles region, this technical amendment is required to address
the special needs for buildings constructed on hillside locations. A joint Structural Engineers Association of
Southern California (SEAOSC) and both the Los Angeles County and Los Angeles City Task Force
investigated the performance of hillside building failures after the Northridge earthquake. Numerous hillside
failures resulted in loss of life and millions of dollars in damage. These criteria were developed to minimize the
damage to these structures and have been in use by both the City and County of Los Angeles for several
years with much success. This proposed amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during
previous code adoption cycles.
FINDINGS:
Local Topographical and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Additionally, the
topography within the Los Angeles region includes significant hillsides with narrow and winding access that
makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles challenging and difficult. The proposed modification
establishes design parameters to better mitigate and limit property damage that are the results of increased
seismic forces which are imparted upon hillside buildings and structures and therefore need to be incorporated
into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Residential Code.
101
2010 LARUCP R3-03. Section R301.2.2.2.5 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R301.2.2.2.5 Irregular buildings. Prescriptive construction as regulated by this code shall not be used
for irregular structures located in Seismic Design Categories C, Do, D, and D2. Irregular portions of
structures shall be designed in accordance with accepted engineering practice to the extent the irregular
features affect the performance of the remaining structural system. When the forces associated with the
irregularity are resisted by a structural system designed in accordance with accepted engineering practice,
design of the remainder of,the building shall be permitted using the provisions of this code. A building or
portion of a building shall be considered to be irregular when one or more of the following conditions
occur:
1. When exterior shear wall lines or braced wall panels are not in one plane vertically from the foundation
to the uppermost story in which they are required.
When a section of floor or roof is not laterally supported by shear walls or braced wall lines on all
edges.
Exception: Portions of floors that do not support shear walls or braced wall panels above, or roofs, shall
be permitted to extend no more than 6 feet (1829 mm) beyond a shear wall or braced wall line.
3. When the end of a braced wall panel occurs over an opening in the wall below and ends at .,
.hrPnt. .......a rlic+anno nrcafor than 1 fnn} (2(1F mm) Frnm the edge of the nnonin Th+ ic nrnvicinn is +nnlin hlc
to shear walls and braGed wall panels offset in plane and to braGed wall pane's eut. of plane as -
permitted by the ovncn}inn to I}om 1 above
4. When an opening in a floor or roof exceeds the lesser of 12 feet (3658 mm) or 50 percent of the least
floor or roof dimension.
5. When portions of a floor level are vertically offset.
102
When shear walls and braced wall lines do not occur in two perpendicular directions.
When stories above -grade partially or completely braced by wood wall framing in accordance with
Section R602 or steel wall framing in accordance with Section R603 include masonry or concrete
construction.
Exception: Fireplaces, chimneys and masonry veneer as permitted by this code. When this
irregularity applies, the entire story shall be designed in accordance with accepted engineering
practice.
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, precautionary steps are
proposed to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result by limiting the type of irregular conditions
specified in the International Residential Code. Such limitations are intended to reduce the potential structural
damage expected in the event of an earthquake. The cities and county of the Los Angeles region has taken
extra measures to maintain the structural integrity of the framing of the shear walls and all associated
elements when designed for high levels of seismic loads.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed amendment
limits the type of irregular conditions within buildings that may lead to higher structural damage during a
seismic event and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code and consistent with the
requirements in the ASCE 7-05.
103
2010 LARUCP R3-04. Section R301.2.2.3.5.1 is hereby added to Section R301.2.2.3.5 of the 2010 Edition of
the California Residential Code to read as follows:
R301.2.2.3.5.1 AISI S230, Section 131. Modify AISI S230, Section 131 to read as follows:
Where No. 8 screws are specified, the required number of screws in a steel -to -steel connection shall be
permitted to be reduced in accordance with the reduction factors in Table 131-1 when larger screws are used
or when one Gf the sheets of steel being connected is thicker than 33 mils (0.84mm). When applying the
reduction factor, the resulting number of screws shall be rounded up.
RATIONALE:
The term 'one" conflicts with Table 131-1, whereas in the table it states the "thinnest connected steel sheet'.
The term 'one" in the code language can misleadingly be interpreted as though one of the sheets can be 33
mils and the other sheet thicker, but that one would still qualify for a reduction factor; this is not the intent of
the tables. For example, in a steel -to -steel connection consisting of a 33 mils and 44 mils, and if in any part of
the code it is required to provide (4) No. 8 screws; according to Table 131-1 the factor 1.0 would apply to the
required number of screws and thus a reduction of screws would not be allowed.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
clarify that the thinnest connected steel sheets need to be thicker than 33 mils to qualify for the reduction
factors and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
IItz,I
2010 LARUCP 113-05. Section R322.1.4.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R322.1.4.1 Determination of design flood elevations. If design flood elevations are not specified, the
building official is authorized to require the applicant to:
Obtain and reasonably use data available from a federal, state or other source; or
Determine the design flood elevation in accordance with accepted hydrologic and hydraulic
engineering practices use to define special flood hazard areas. Determinations shall be undertaken
by a registered design pr^fess_ �civil engineerwho shall document that the technical methods used
reflect currently accepted engineering practice. Studies, analyses and computations shall be
submitted in sufficient detail to allow thorough review and approval.
RATIONALE:
This amendment is intended to clarify the appropriate design professional who should perform studies and
analysis for design flood elevations. Registered civil engineers are highly trained and equipped to perform
such design and analysis.
FINDINGS:
Local Topographical and Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is affected by both natural
and man-made topographic conditions, such as, steep hillsides conditions where dry brush may cause brush
fires and are fanned by strong concentrated winds caused by steep ravines and valley areas of the hillsides, or
when it rains, mudflow or landslides caused by steep bare (no vegetation) slopes. Man-made topography may
include very densely populated areas or areas of many high-rise buildings, including but not limited to, Century
City, Wilshire Corridor, Westwood or Downtown Los Angeles, where street access for local fire department
may be challenging and difficult to navigate or impeded during times of high traffic activity. The proposed
modification to require a registered civil engineer to perform design and analysis ensures that a more reliable
and better performance is achieved and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new
buildings and structures and additions or alternations to existing buildings or structures are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
105
2010 LARUCP R4-01. Section R401.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R401.1 Application. The provisions of this chapter shall control the design and construction of the foundation
and foundation spaces for all buildings. In addition to the provisions of this chapter, the design and
construction of foundations in areas prone to flooding as established by Table R301.2(1) shall meet the
provisions of Section R322. Wood foundations shall be designed and installed in accordance.with AF&PA
PWF.
Exception: The provisions of this chapter shall be permitted to be used for wood foundations only in the
following situations:
1. In buildings that have no more than two floors and a roof.
2. When interior basement and foundation walls are constructed at intervals not exceeding 50 feet
(15 240 mm).
Wood foundations in Seismic Design Category Do, D, or DZ shall be designed with aGGepted'
en^ineerinn pfaG Ge not be permitted.
Exception: In non -occupied, single -story, detached storage sheds and similar uses other than carport or
garage, provided the gross floor area does not exceed 200 square feet, the plate height does not exceed
12 feet in height above the grade plane at any point, and the maximum roof projection does not exceed 24
inches.
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that wood foundation is effective in supporting buildings and
structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the combined detrimental
effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Wood foundation, when they are not
properly treated and protected against deterioration, have performed very poorly and have led to slope
failures. Most contractors are typically accustomed to construction ,in dry and temperate weather in the
Southern California region and are not generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of
wood that makes it suitable for both seismic event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the
precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result in using wood foundation that
experience relatively rapid decay due to the fact that the region does not experience temperatures cold
enough to destroy or retard the growth and proliferation of wood -destroying organisms. However, an exception
is made for non -occupied, single -story storage structures that pose significantly less risk to human safety and
may utilize the wood foundation guidelines specified in this Chapter. This proposed amendment is a
continuation of an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of wood foundation systems as well as limit prescriptive design
provisions in an effort to mitigate potential problems or deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying
organisms and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures
and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
106
2010 LARUCP R4-02. Sections R403.1.2, R403.1.3, and R403.1.5 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code are hereby amended to read as follows:
R403.1.2 Continuous footing in Seismic Design Categories. Do, D, and D2. The braced wall panels at
exterior walls of buildings located in Seismic Design Categories Do, D, and D2 shall be supported by
continuous footings. All required interior braced wall panels in buildings with plan diMen8iGR8 greater than 50
foe+ �� Ginn m�shall also -be supported by continuous footings:
R403.1.3 Seismic reinforcing. Concrete footings located in Seismic Design Categories Do, D, and Der as
established in Table R301.2(1), shall have minimum reinforcement. Bottom reinforcement shall be located a
minimum of 3 inches (76 mm) clear from the bottom of the footing.
In Seismic Design Categories Dp,' D, and D2 where construction joint is created between a Concrete
footing and a stem wall, a minimum of one No. 4 bar shall be installed at not more than 4 feet (1219
mm) on center. The vertical bar shall extend to 3 inches (76 mm) clear of the bottom of the footing,
have a standard hook and extend a minimum of 14 inches (357 mm) into the stem wall,
In Seismic Design Categories Do, D, and D2 where a grouted masonry stem wall is supported on a
concrete footing and stem wall, a minimum of one No. 4 bar shall be installed at not more than 4feet
(1219 mm) on center. The vertical bar shall extend to 3 inches (76 mm) clear of the bottom of the ;
footing and have a standard hook.
In Seismic Design Categories Do, D, and D2 masonry stem walls without solid grout and vertical
reinforcing are not permitted.
Exception: In detached one- and two-family dwellings located in Seismic Design Cate,
onr A; B or C
which are three stories or less in height and constructed with stud bearing walls, plain concrete
footings without longitudinal reinforcement supporting' walls and isolated plain concrete footings
supporting columns or pedestals are permitted.
R403.1.5 Slope. The top surface of footings shall be level. The bottom surface of footings not have a slope
exceeding one unit vertical in ten units horizontal (10-percent slope). Footings shall be stepped where it is
necessary to change the elevation of the top surface of the footing or where the slope of the bottom surface of
the footing will exceed one unit vertical in ten units horizontal (10-percent slope).
For structures located in Seismic Design Categories Do D1 or D2, stepped footings shall be reinforced with
four 1/2-inch diameter (12.7 mm) deformed reinforcing bars: Two bars shall be place at the top and
bottom of the footings as shown in Figure R403.1.5.
�---NRN, 244 REHR ffOP I
. OTP01PL TE Ql' T4
i
.
Off
�lil 'III
SI° 1 O POW A 'ICIINS
FIGURE R403.1.5
STEPPED FOOTING
107
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, precautionary steps are
proposed to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result for under -reinforced footings located on
sloped surfaces. Requiring minimum reinforcement for stepped footings is intended to address the problem of
poor performance of plain or under -reinforced footings during a seismic event. Furthermore, interiorwalls can
easily be called upon to resist over half of the seismic loading imposed on simple buildings or structures.
Without a continuous foundation to support the braced wall line, seismic loads would be transferred through
other elements such as non-structural concrete slab floors, wood floors, etc. The proposed change is to limit
the use of the exception to structures assigned to Seismic Design Category A, B or C where lower seismic
demands are expected. Requiring interior braced walls be supported by continuous foundations is intended to
reduce or eliminate the poor performance of buildings or structures. This proposed amendment is consistent
with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require continuous footings under braced wall lines, require reinforcement in one- and two-family dwelling, and
minimum reinforcement in stepped footings will improve performance of buildings or structure during a seismic
event and minimize potential problems or deficiencies and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
108
2010 LARUCP R4-03. Section R404.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R404.2 Wood foundation walls. Wood foundation walls shall be constructed in accordance with the
provisions of Sections R404.2.1 through R404.2.6 and with the details shown in Figures R403.1(2) and
R403.2(3). Wood foundation walls shall not be used for structures located in Seismic Design Category Do D1
Or D2_ - -
RATIONALE:
No substantiating data has been provided to show that wood foundation wall is effective in supporting
buildings and structures during a seismic event while being subject to deterioration caused by the combined
detrimental effect of constant moisture in the soil and wood -destroying organisms. Wood foundation walls,
when they are not properly treated and protected against deterioration, have performed very poorly and have
led to slope failures. Most contractors are typically accustomed to construction in dry and temperate weather in
the Southern California region and are not generally familiar with the necessary precautions and treatment of
wood that makes it suitable for both seismic event and wet applications. The proposed amendment takes the
precautionary steps to reduce or eliminate potential problems that may result in using wood foundation walls
that experience relatively rapid decay due to the fact that the region does not experience temperatures cold
enough to destroy or retard the growth and proliferation of wood -destroying organisms. This proposed
amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption cycles for the California
Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic and Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area
having buildings and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing
major earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In addition, the region
is within a climate system capable of producing major winds, fire and rain related disasters, including but not
limited to those caused by the Santa Ana winds and El Nino (or La Nina) subtropical -like weather. This region
is especially susceptible to more active termite and wood attacking insects and microorganisms. The
proposed modification to prohibit the use of wood foundation wall in an effort to mitigate potential problems or
deficiencies due to the proliferation of wood -destroying organisms and therefore need to be incorporated into
the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or
structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International
Residential Code.
109
2010 LARUCP R5-01. Section R501.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R501.1 Application. The provision of this chapter shall control the design and construction of the floors for all
buildings including the floors of attic spaces used to house mechanical or plumbing fixtures and equipment
weighinq less than 400 Ibs and maximum height of 4 feet above the floor or attic level.
RATIONALE:
There is no limitation for weight of mechanical and plumbing fixtures and equipments in the International
Residential Code. Requirements from ASCE 7-05 and the International Building Code would permit equipment
weighing up to 400 Ibs when mounted at 4 feet or less above the floor or attic level without engineering design.
Where equipment exceeds this requirement, it is the intent of this proposed amendment that a registered
design professional be required to analyze if the floor support is adequate and structurally sound.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
limit the equipment weight is intended to reduce injuries, save lives, and minimize structural damages and
therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or
alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and
objectives of the International Residential Code.
110
2010 LARUCP R5-02. Section R503.2.4 is hereby added to Chapter 5 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code to read as follows:
R503.2.4 Openings in horizontal diaphragms. Openings in horizontal diaphragms with a dimension
perpendicular to the moist that is greater than 4 feet (1.2 m) shall be constructed in accordance with Figure
R503.2.4.
PLYWOOD SHEATHING
DIAPHRAGM OPENING
. y41
r JJ r r} J Jr J
.rJJ1. rr JiJJ Jrf riJ} r rr}ri Jl r. }�Jr JIs^J}}Jf �J
rJJr � JJj! f}r i _. rJJ J }JfJ r1 rlj/ � -
>Y
- Y� f' rI�JIJJ}�� rs. ;fit. j J/JJ rfrf'}rf''f' J yJJr� f} f}r�r
-Jt ij r f r -
.f':�
f r%-.,YJr "tif Jr ;J%J J,r rJJ' it
J
METAL TIE 160A. x 1 1fr x 4'-V MIN., {4` OTAL} fJi •� i�r rk —,��' f'Y
WI16.16d COMMON NAILS AS SHOWN J r• yJ' rJ'J
r
{7R=
METAL TIES 16GA, x 1 ln" x {OPENING WIDTH t 414) MIN„
(2 TOTAL) W/ 24-16dCOMMON NAILS
For S]: I Inch r 25.4 mm, ] fool- 304.9 mm,
a, Blockings shall be provided beyond headers.
b. Metal ties not less than 0.058 inch f1.47 mm (16,galvanized gaoe)l by 1.5 inches (38 mm) wide with
eight 16d common nails on each side of the header -moist intersection. The metal ties shall have a
minimum yield of 33,000 psi (227 MPa).
C. Openings in diaphragms shall be further limited in accordance with Section R301.2.2.2.5.
FIGURE R503.2.4
OPENINGS IN HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGMS
RATIONALE:
Section R502.10 of the Code does not provide any prescriptive criteria to limit the maximum floor opening
size nor does Section R503 provide any details to address the issue of shear transfer near larger floor
openings. With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, it is important
to ensure that a complete load path is provided to reduce or eliminate potential damages caused by -
seismic forces. Requiring blocking with metal ties around larger floor openings and limiting opening size is
consistent with the requirements of Section R301.2.2.2.5.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require specific detailing at large floor openings is intended to address the poor performance of floor
diaphragms with openings and limit or reduce property damages during a seismic event and therefore needs
to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to
existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of
the International Residential Code.
111
2010 LARUCP R6-01. Items 34 through 37 of Table R602.3(1) of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential
Code are hereby amended to read as follows:
ether wall sheathingh
galvanized roofing nail
RATIONALE:
The Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the damages to buildings and structures during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake
recommended reducing allowable shear values in wood structural panel shear walls or diaphragms that were
not substantiated by cyclic testing. That recommendation was consistent with a report, to the Governor from
the Seismic Safety Commission of the State of California recommending that code requirements be "more,
thoroughly substantiated with testing." The allowable shear values for wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms fastened with staples are based on monotonic testing and does not take into consideration that
earthquake forces load shear wall or diaphragm in a repeating and fully reversible manner.
In September 2007, limited cyclic was conducted by a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with staples would exhibit the same behavior as the wood structural panels
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with staples,
appeared to be much lower in strength and stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
It was recommended that the use of staples as fasteners for wood structural panel shear walls or diaphragms
not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category Do, D, and D2
unless it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption
cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions— The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
place design and construction limits on staples as fasteners used in wood structural panel or diaphragms not
substantiated with cyclic testing will help to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance
standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new.buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
112
2010 LARUCP 116-02. The portions of Table R602.3(2) of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code
relating to plywood are hereby amended to read as follows:
wood structural panels subfloor, roof and wall sheathing to framing and particle I)oard wall sheathing to framingt
15
- -
- ga q
$
0.097 - 0.099 Nail 2114
3
6
up to 112
3
4. _
—3
0.113 Nail 2
3
8
4—
$
191 and sl
32 8
0.097 - 0.099 Nail 21/
a
4
-. 1, 3 -
231 and 3/
4
..Staple ,.
432
:
-
0.097 - 0.099 Nail 21/
4
4
8
-
4-
$
211 -
$
0.113 Nail 21/
1
q
3
li
Staple ac���� r
Floor underlayment; plywoo[I-hardboard-particlelaoar((
Plywood
1114ring or screw shank nail -minimum
11 and sl
12�1 ga. (0.099") shank diameter
3
6
16
7, 3
B' 16
—2-
sr.
. 31 �s/
11111
1�/ ring or screw shank nail -minimum
4
,and
32' 6 32 2
12112 ga. (0.099") shank diameter
8
1112 ring or screw shank nail -minimum
191 sl 23/ and 3/
1211 ga. (0.099 shank diameter
6
8
- 32 8 32 4
-
2Staple
- -
16
ga. 2—
RATIONALE:
The Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task
Force that investigated the damages to buildings and structures during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake
.recommended reducing allowable shear values in wood structural panel shear walls or diaphragms that were
not substantiated by cyclic testing. That recommendation was consistent with a report to the Governor from
the Seismic Safety Commission of the State of California recommending that code requirements be "more
thoroughly substantiated with testing." The allowable shear values for wood structural panel shear walls or
diaphragms fastened with staples are based on monotonic testing and does not take into consideration that
earthquake forces load shear wall or diaphragm in a repeating and fully reversible manner:
In September 2007, limited cyclic testing was conducted by a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with staples would exhibit the same behavior as the wood structural panels
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with staples
appeared to be much lower in strength and stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
It was recommended that the use of staples as fasteners for wood structural panel shearwalls or diaphragms
not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category Do, Dt and D2
unless it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
113
This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption
cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions- The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
place design and construction limits on staples as fasteners used in wood structural panel or diaphragms not
substantiated with cyclic testing will help to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance_
standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
114
BRACING
wan
z NIA 41
7,5
._
30
..-..-... ...._ i,
40, NP, 14
4#<4�- 115. 10.6
10. NP. _ CP
105mfi 4.7
LQ
30 NP au,1P
d16.E 10
�
N{ j
50
NP .ems ' 2575 23A
to N.P NP
fe]F NP
NP 1VP Nir
A) NP N�.
- iwl: Nei ter: NP
NP NP - NP
�I NP NP NP Fnri� start } m IWlvndMAQUmvrvi_ 19PL.
NP
. � Milo WtKm to ��r<hewe ous u�rlwq€ilvr 't7 Rne€rjk.�a eei+�ihr in l€n ltfl ia�an�I ; [a€ Ssp E;u€dw�thTh€ a i�x�€r�gncxa xti 16 :
P€9k5hN6 +fit +�`lk€n a �t -s sif+; v�t+tg c lan WAS kk� 1,51 � o a]�t;'rda��rarrn a��r!'r,�rr� 4--�h
�+ tnsfr4 cn y �il?st 9s W t P nt WIlh S xi�sn:l: ':IdR4,
Ts;ieWn ins Ec si;;s.�.'d ty.lLi. , lti 72,I_[l, sqd33fsii7.lU-. .,
d. Methods GB and PCP braced wall i2anel h/w ratio shall not exceed 1:1 in SDc Do D, or Q. . Methods DWB SFB PBS and HPS are not
permitted in SDC D D, or D,
RATIONALE:
Due to the high geologic activities in the Southern California area and the expected higher level of
performance on buildings and structures, this proposed local amendment increase the length and limits the
location where shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or gypsum board are used in multi -level buildings. In
addition, shear walls sheathed with other materials are prohibited in Seismic Design Category Do, D1 and DZ to
be consistent with the design limitation for similar shear walls found in the California.Building Code. The poor
performance of such shear walls in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake was investigated by the Structural
Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the Los Angeles City Task Force and formed the
basis for this proposed amendment. Considering that shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or gypsum board
are less ductile than steel moment frames or wood structural panel shear walls, the cities and county of the
Los Angeles region has taken the necessary measures to limit the potential structural damage that may be
caused by the use of such walls at the lower level of multi -level building that are subject to higher levels of
seismic loads. This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
increase the length and limit the location where shear walls sheathed with lath, plaster or gypsum board are
used will help to ensure that multi -level building will reach it's performance objective in resisting higher levels
of seismic loads and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
116
2010 LARUCP R6-04. The portions of Table R602.10.2 relating to WSP, SFB, GB, PBS and PCP methods of
the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code are hereby amended to read as follows:
TABLE R602.10.2
INTERMITTENT BRACING METHODSa
8d common (2'/z" x 0.131) nails
at 6" spacing (panel edge) at 12"
spacing (intermediate supports),
3/8" edge distance to panel edge
WSP
Wood structural panel
(see Section R604)
g 15r32"T
te __ r==-__m
aa_ T o-i_ nr 30)
11/2'. galvanized roofing nails or
SFB
Structural
�/ " or 25/ " for maximum 161,
2 32
1 ,
8d common (2 / ' x 0.131) nails
fiberboard sheathing
stud spacing
�.
'
2
at 3" spacing (panel edges) at 6"
spacing (intermediate supports)
Nails or screws at 7" spacing at
_
panel edges including top and
bottom plates; for all braced wall
GB
Gypsum board
t/ "
panel locations for exterior
2
sheathing nail or screw size, see
Table R602.3(1); for interior
gypsum board nail or screw size,
see Table R702.3.5
1t/2'' galvanized roofing nails or
PBS
Particleboard sheathing
(see Section R605)
3/ " or tl " for maximum 16"
a 2
t
8d common (2 / " x 0.131) nails
f
stud spacing
}
2
at 3" spacing (panel edges) at 6
spacing (intermediate supports)
11/2, 11 gage, 7/76.. head nails at
PCP
Portland cement
See.Section R703.6
6" spacingar-
plaster
For maximum 16" stud spacing
1Ml
$ teasesta ples ate"
a. Methods GB and PCP braced wall panel h/w ratio shall not exceed 1:1 in SDC Do D1, and Dz_
Methods LIB, DWB, SFB, PBS, HIPS, and PFG are not permitted in SDC Do D1, and DZ_
RATIONALE:
3/8" thick 3 ply -plywood shear walls experienced many failures during the Northridge Earthquake. Box
nails were observed to cause massive and multiple failures of the typical 3/8" thick 3-ply plywood during
the Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness, nail size
and spacing so as to provide a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow. This
is intended to improve the performance level of buildings and structures that are subject to the higher
seismic demands and reduce and limit potential damages to property. This proposed amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the
Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake.
In September 2007, limited cyclic testing was conducted by a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with staples would exhibit the same behavior as the wood structural panels
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with staples
appeared to be much lower in strength and stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
It was recommended that the use of staples as fasteners for wood structural panel shearwalls or diaphragms
not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category Do, D, and D2
unless it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
This proposedamendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption`
cycles for the California Building Code.
117
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed; modification to
place design and construction limits on stapled nail fasteners used in wood structural panel shear walls not
substantiated with cyclic testing and requiring minimum sheathing thickness and nailing type and size will help
to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance standards of structures and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
118
2010 LARUCP R6-05. Figure R602.10.3.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows`
TOP PLATES SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OVER A BRACED WALL PANEL
FOR PANEL SPLICE (IF NEEDED)
x ' ADJOINING PANELEOG ES SMALL
MEET OVER AND BE FASTENED TO
COMMON FRAMING
Min.1522"
M9_W� LTHICK WOOD STRUCTURAL � 8O COMM ON � ,t
PANEL HF SHEATHING ON ONE FACE W T_ ' - NAILS @ Ir 0�0.ATPANEL WGE'S.
O MINIM LIM 2x 4 FOR SINGLE STORY AND AT 4' O7 C.
FRAMING MINIEAUFA •--- PANEL EDGES FOR THE FIRST OF 2
DOUBLE STUDS " -. STORIES.
aa RFOUIRED
�1 _ ._. -- 90 COMMON 9R Y 09)E
STUDS UNDER HEAOERAs NAILS 42'' O.C, AT
REQUIRED
' '""" � IhlTERlORSUPPORTS
HOLD-DOWN OR STRAP -TYPE
ANCHOR PER TABLE - f(2);5 DIAMETER ANCHOR BOLTS
-
Rf+PMTY) S2. RAP- SHOWN FOR .�_ PER FIGURE R401,1,1, LDGATED
CLARITY,) S HALL BE
y -` 6ETVAOFN SAND 12 INCHES OF
ANCHORS SHALL 4E PERMITTI=D EACH END OF THE SEGMENT
TO BE ATTACHED OVER THE
WQOD STRUCTURAL PANEL
MINIMUM REINFORCING OF
FOUNDATION, ONE 04 OAR TOP AND
BOTTOM OF FOOTING REINFORCING
SHALL BE LAPPEO95-INCHE3
.: 24
- MINIMUM FOOTINO SIZE UNULK
f1PENINO ES 12'x12'.
S REINFORCING SHALE
BE AS SHOWN ABOVE,
FIGURE R502.10.3.2
ALTERNATE BRACED WALL PANEL
RATIONALE:
3/8" thick 3 ply -plywood shear walls experienced many failures during the Northridge Earthquake. Box
nails were observed to cause massive and multiple failures of the typical 3/8" thick 3-ply plywood during
the Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness, nail size
and spacing so as to provide a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow: This
is intended to improve the performance level of buildings and structures that are subject to the higher
seismic demands and reduce and limit potential damages to property. This proposed amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the
Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake. This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited tothe recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification
requiring minimum sheathing thickness and nailing type and size will help to' maintain minimum. quality of
construction and performance standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
2010 LARUCP R6-06. Figure R602.10.3.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows`
EXTENT OF HEADER
DOUBLE PORTAL FRAME (TWOBRACED WALL PANELS)
�r � i MIN 7 x T1i Z5 N ET HEADER .
! FASTEN TOP PLATE TO HEADER WITH TWO TYP:ICALPOI2TAL ;
ROWS OF i DSiNKERNAILSAT3 [3.C. TYP. DL#3 FRAME F CONSTRUCTION ! !
S RA
10DO LS STRAP O PPOS TrE SHEATHING
FORAPANELSPUCE
FASTEN SHEATHING TO HEADERWITH 8D COMMON ER (IF NEEDED), PANEL
MAX EDGES SHALL BE
t cl#Add E9 B83C NAILS IN 3' GRID PATTERN AS SHOWN AND BLOCKED, AND OCC1R
HEIGHT Y O.C. INALLFRAMING {STUDS, 8LOCKUN4A AND SILLS)TYP-. WITHIN 249 OF MID
10' 24 HE46HT ONE ROW Oi
TYR SHEATHING -TO
MIN.WIDTH = FOR ONE STORY STRUCTURE FRAMING NAILING IS i
gnu avmru ws r - n a!e r!.! rr REQUIRED:
IF 2xA BLOCKING IS
USED, THE 2z4'S MUST
'--MIN. 2x4 FRAMING BE NAILED TOGETHER
1522" M' WITH 3 1SD SINKERS
MIN. THICKNESS WOOD DOU E
ST
STRUCTURAL PANELSHEATHING 2YA
M'IN. 4200 LS TIE -DOWN DEVICE (EMBEDDED INTO
CONCRETE AND NAILED INTO FRAM ING) M .1000 LB
TIE OwN
SEESECTION R602.10.3.3 DE CE
Ial,lii
L�! ry s L !
FIGURE R602.10.3.3
METHOD PFH: PORTAL FRAME WITH AT DETACHED GARAGE DOOR OPENINGS
RATIONALE:
3/8" thick 3 ply -plywood shear walls experienced many failures during the Northridge Earthquake. Box
nails were observed to cause massive and multiple failures of the typical 3/8" thick 3-ply plywood during
the Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness; nail size
and spacing so as to provide a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow. This
is intended to improve the performance level of buildings and structures that are subject to the higher
seismic demands and reduce and limit potential damages to property. This proposed amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern. California (SEAOSC) and the
Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake. This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and. structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification
requiring minimum sheathing thickness and nailing type and size will help to maintain minimum quality of
construction and performance standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
120
2010 LARUCP R6-07. Item 1 of Section R602.10.3.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
1. Each panel shall be fabricated in accordance with Figure R602.10.3.3. The wood structural panel
sheathing shall extend up over the solid sawn or glued -laminated header and shall be nailed in
accordance with Figure R602.10.3.3. A spacer, if used with a built-up header, shall be placed on the
side of the built-up `beam opposite the wood structural panel sheathing. The header shall extend
between the inside faces of the first full-length outer studs of each panel. One anchor bolt not less
than 5/8-inch-diameter (16 mm) and installed in accordance with Section R403.1.6 shall be provided
in the center of each sill plate. The hold-down devices shall be an embedded -strap type, installed in
accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. The panels shall be supported directly on a
foundation that is continuous across the entire length of the braced wall line. The foundation shall be
reinforced as shown on Figure R602.10.3.2. This reinforcement shall be lapped not less than 4-524
inches (384 610 mm) with the reinforcement required in the continuous foundation located directly
under the braced wall line.
RATIONALE:
The proposal change to the minimum lap splice requirement ensures design and construction consistency with
Section 12.16.1 of ACl 318-05.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
increase the lap splice requirementwill improve performance of buildings and structures and is consistent with
ACI 318 and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the International Residential Code and ACl 318. -
121
2010 LARUCP R6-08. Table R602.10.4.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows`
TABLE R602.10.4.1
CONTINUOUS SHEATHING METHODS
METHOD
MATERIAL
MINIMUM THICKNESS
FIGURE
CONNECTION CRITERIA
8d
frcFcommon.(2" x 0.113") nails
15132"
at 6" spacing (panel edges) and
at 12" spacing (intermediate
K
CS-WSP
Wood structural panel
e
supports) ^; 16 9a YI 3� staples -
4
at
-
Wood structural panel adjacent
15/32
CS-G
to garage openings and.
See Method CS-WSP
supporting roof load onlya'b
a
f'
F,I
CS-PF
Continuous portal frame
See Section
""'
See Section
R602.10.4.1.1
r
R602.10.4.1.1
a. Applies to one wall of garage only.
b. Roof covering dead loads shall be 3 psf or less.
RATIONALE:
3/8" thick 3 ply -plywood shear walls experienced many failures during the Northridge Earthquake. Box
nails were observed to cause massive and multiple failures of the typical 3/8" thick 3-ply plywood during
the Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness, nail size
and spacing so as to provide a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow. This
is intended to improve the performance level of buildings and structuresthat are subject to the higher
seismic demands and reduce and limit potential damages to property. This proposed amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the
Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake.
In September 2007, limited cyclic testing was conducted by a private engineering firm to determine if wood
structural panels fastened with staples would exhibit the same behavior as the wood structural panels .
fastened with common nails. The test result revealed that wood structural panel fastened with staples
appeared to be much lower in strength and. stiffness than wood structural panels fastened with common nails.
.It was recommended that the use of staples as fasteners for wood structural panel shearwalls or diaphragms
not be permitted to resist seismic forces in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category Do, D, and D2
unless it can be substantiated by cyclic testing.
This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code adoption
cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions - The greater Los.Angeles.region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a .vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake` The proposed modification to
place design and construction limits on stapled nail fasteners used in wood structural panel shear walls not
substantiated with cyclic testing and requiring minimum sheathing thickness and nailing type and size will help
to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance standards of structures and therefore need to be
incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
122
2010 LARUCP 116-09. The "Over Concrete or Masonry Block Foundation" drawing of Figure R602.10.4.1.1 of
the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
I ; �
MIN, 1000 LB
WALE TENSION STRAP'
HEIGHT'I. BRACED WALL SEGMENT PER R602.1 GA � € STRAP SHALL BE
ENTERED AT
-- — -- ----- ! _ BOTTOM OF
. s MIN. 3"X 11-IM" NET HEADER. ----- — I € li .. , , ± ` HEADER..
_ `� • - \SHEATHING FILLER
;�" ' ZI.A2 TO IS' FINISHED WIDTH ... , 6
1 ) �I IF NEEDED
s " FASTEN SHEATHING TO HEADER WITH BD COMMON 3 € \1
12` li" NAILS IN 3• GRID PATTERN AS SHOWN AND 3" O,C, IN I € a 1 b0 SINKER
MAX. ALL FRAMING {STUDS AND SILLS) TYP, r„
TOTAL " NAILS IN 2 ROWS
)s, HEADER SHALL BE FASTENED TO THE KING STUD WITH €@ 31 q•C,
HE BHT' " 6.160 SINKER NAILS ( !" "„ WOOD STRUCTURAL
Ion r �-' MINIMUM 1000 LB STRAP SHALL BE CENTERED AT t 1" rn -
9 ,. ! PANEL MUST BE
BOTTOM OF HEADER AND INSTALLED ON BACKSIDE rr
11a r°1 T `s CONTINUOUS FROM
10 11 A5 SHOWN ON SIDE ELEVATION "° rm
TOP OF WALL TO
HEICSH7(qr�S FOR A PANEL SPLICE (IF NEEDED), PANEL EDGES SHALL n _ BOTTOM OF WALL
�I OCCUR OVER ANb BC NAILED TO COMMON BLOCKING AND "r OR PROM TOP OF
Id, OCCUR WITHIN MIDDLE 24.OF WALL HEIGHT. ONE ROWOF WALL TO PERMITTED
Iq r� 3' O.C. NAILING IS REQUIRED IN EACH PANEL EDGE. SPLICE AREA
1522"
I WC7OD STRUCTURAL PANEL STRENGTH AXIS " r
MIN. NUMBER OF STUDS SHOWN" I g: rr THICKNESSWOOD
E STRUCTURAL PANEL
S9 e \`. rr SHEATHING. .
ek PP"' W LENGTH BASED.ON b 1 HEIGHT -TO. LENGTH RATIO24 MIN 4TH-
t ... q�
r�
ANCHOR BOLT PER R40.1.5 TYP. - -
2 ANCHOR BOLTS PER R403.1,6 REQUIRED. NO. OF JACK STUDS
MIN, 2w2'%3P&' PLATE WASHER
PER TABLE R.502.S(1$2)
PER TABLE R602.10.4.6 3"X X0.229 nvFR CCSNrRFTF nR MBSnNRY RInCK Fn1lNbdilnN
RATIONALE:
3/8" thick 3 ply -plywood shear walls experienced many failures during.the Northridge Earthquake. Box
nails were observed to cause massive and multiple failures of the typical 3/8" thick 3-ply plywood during
the Northridge Earthquake. This proposed amendment specifies minimum sheathing thickness, nail size
and spacing so as to provide a uniform standard of construction for designers and buildings to follow. This
is intended to improve the performance level of buildings and structures that are subject to the higher
seismic demands and reduce and limit potential damages to property. This proposed amendment reflects
the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) and the
Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance observed in 1994 Northridge
Earthquake. This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings °
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification
requiring minimum sheathing thickness and nailing type and size will help to maintain minimum quality of
construction and performance standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and additions to existing buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
123
2010 LARUCP 116-10. Section R602.10.7.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
deleted .
MM
- -
�- -
_
RATIONALE:
With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, interior walls can easily be
called upon to resist over half of the seismic loading imposed on simple buildings or structures. Without a
continuous foundation to support the braced wall line, seismic loads would be transferred through other
elements such as non-structural concrete slab floors, wood floors, etc. Requiring interior braced walls be
supported by continuous foundations is intended to reduce or eliminate the poor performance of buildings or
structures. This proposed amendment is consistent with an amendment adopted during previous code
adoption cycles for the California Building Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require all exterior walls and interior braced wall panels in buildings be supported on continuous footings for a
complete load path will improve performance of buildings or structure during a seismic event and therefore,
need to be incorporated, into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations
to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives
of the International Residential Code.
124
2010 LARUCP R6-11. Section R606.2.4 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R606.2.4 Parapet walls. Unreinforced solid masonry parapet walls shall not be less than 8 inches (203 mm)
thick and their height shall not exceed four times their thickness. Unreinforced hollow unit masonry parapet
walls shall be not less than 8 inches (203 mm) thick, and their height shall not exceed three times their
thickness. Masonry parapet walls in areas subject to wind loads of 30 pounds per square foot (1.44 kPa) or
located in Seismic Design Category Do, D, or D2, or on townhouses in Seismic Design Category C shall be
reinforced in accordance with Section R606.12.
RATIONALE:
The addition of the word "or" will prevent the use of unreinforced parapets in Seismic Design Category Do, D,
or D2, or on townhouses in Seismic Design Category C.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
not allow the use of unreinforced masonry is intended to prevent non -ductile failures and sudden structural
collapses and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures
and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
125
2010 LARUCP 116-12. Section R606.12.2.2.3 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R606.12.2.2.3 Reinforcement of requirements for masonry elements. Masonry elements listed in Section
R606.12.2.2.2 shall be reinforced in either the horizontal or vertical direction as shown in Figure
R602)R606.11(3) and in accordance with the following:
Horizontal reinforcement. Horizontal joint reinforcement shall consist of
eXGeed;ng n ;nGhes (102 mm) in width, ..r at least one No. 4 bar spaced not more than 48 inches
(1219 mm). Where two IongitudiRal wires of joint reiffc)FGement are used, the spaGe behyeen these
wires shall be the widest that the mortar ,eiRt will aGGOMmodate. Horizontal reinforcement shall be
provided within 16 inches (406 mm) of the top and bottom of these masonry elements.
2. Vertical reinforcement. Vertical reinforcement shall consist of at least one No. 4 bar spaced not more
than 48 inches (1219 mm). Vertical reinforcement shall be within 4-6-8 inches (406mm) of the ends of
masonry walls.
RATIONALE:
Reinforcement using longitudinal wires for buildings and structures located in high seismic areas are deficient
and not as ductile as deformed rebar. Having vertical reinforcement closer to the ends of masonry walls helps
to improve the seismic performance of masonry buildings and structures.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
increase reinforcements will ensure that the ductility requirements for buildings in high seismic region meet the
intent of the code and limit potential property damages and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are
designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
126
2010 LARUCP 116-13. Exception of Section R602.3.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Exception: In other than Seismic Design Category Do D, or D2.a-A single top plate may be installed in stud
walls, provided the plate is adequately tied atjoints, corners and interesting walls by a minimum 3-inch-by-6-
inch by a 0.036-inch-thick (76 mm by 152 mm by 0.914 mm) galvanized steel plate that is nailed to each wall
or segment of wall by six 8d nails on each side, provided the rafters orjoists are centered over the studs with a
tolerance of no more than 1 inch (25 mm). The top plate may be omitted over lintels that are adequately tied to
adjacent wall sections with steel plates or equivalent as previously described.
RATIONALE:
The cities and county of the Los Angeles region have taken extra measures to maintain the structural integrity
of the framing of the shear wall system for buildings and structures subject to high seismic loads by eliminating
single top plate construction. The performance of modern day braced wall panel construction is directly related
to an adequate load path extending from the roof diaphragm to the foundation system. A single top plate is
likely to be over nailed due to the nailing requirements at a rafter, stud, top plate splice, and braced wall panel
edge in a single location. In addition, notching on a single top plate for plumbing, ventilation and electrical
wiring may reduce the load transfer capacity of the plate without proper detailing. Majority of buildings and
structures designed and built per the California Residential Code with a single top plate may not need
structural observation and special inspections. The potential construction mistakes mentioned above could not
be caught and corrected by knowledgeable engineers and inspectors, and could jeopardize structural
performance of buildings and structures located in high seismic areas.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
eliminate the usage of a single top plate will help to maintain minimum quality of construction and performance
standards of structures and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
127
2010 LARUCP R8-01. Footnote "i" is hereby added to Table R802.5.1(9) of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code to read as follows:
i. Edge distances, end distances and spacings for nails shall be sufficient to prevent splitting of the
wood.
RATIONALE:
The number of nails required for the heel joint connection per Table R802.5.1(9) can be excessive depending
on the rafter slope, spacing, and roof span. This footnote is intended to help prevent the splitting of connecting
wood members when large numbers of nail are required as stated in the National Design Specification for
Wood Construction (NDS).
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require connecting members to be of sufficient size will help to prevent splitting of connecting wood members
and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions
or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope
and objectives of the International Residential Code.
128
2010 LARUCP R8-02. Section R802.8 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R802.8 Lateral support. Roof framing members and ceiling joists having a depth -to -thickness ratio exceeding
52 to 1 based on nominal dimensions shall be provided with lateral support at points of bearing to prevent
rotation. For roof rafters with ceiling joists attached per Table R602.3(1), the depth -thickness ratio for the total
assembly shall be determined using the combined thickness of the rafter plus the attached ceiling joist.
RATIONALE:
This proposed amendment provides provisions to ensure that the ends of wood members and the points of
bearing have adequate lateral support to 'prevent rotation and to help stabilized the members during
construction. This proposed amendment is consistent with and similar to requirements contained in the
National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS).
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
provide lateral bracing at the ends of members will prevent rotation and stabilize the members during
construction and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures
and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
129
2010 LARUCP R8-03. Section R802.10.2 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R802.10.2 Design. Wood trusses shall be designed in accordance with accepted engineering practice. The
design and manufacture of metal -plate -connected wood trusses shall comply with ANSI/TPI 1. The truss
design drawings shall be prepared by a registered professional where required by the statutes of the of
RATIONALE:
Wood trusses are engineered structural elements that require engineered design and calculations. This
amendment provides clarifications that all wood truss design drawings are to be prepared by a registered
professional.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require a registered design professional will help ensure the proper design of wood trusses and therefore need
to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to
existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of
the International Residential Code.
130
2010 LARUCP R8-04. Section R803.2.4 is hereby added to Chapter 8 of the 2010 Edition of the California
Residential Code to read as follows:
R803.2.4 Openings in horizontal diaphragms. Openings in horizontal diaphragms shall conform with
Section R503.2.4.
RATIONALE:
Section R802 of the Code does not provide any prescriptive criteria to limit the maximum roof opening size
nor does Section R803 provide any details to address the issue of shear transfer near larger roof
openings. With the higher seismic demand placed on buildings and structures in this region, it is important
to ensure that a complete load path is provided to reduce or eliminate potential damages caused by
seismic forces Requiring blocking with metal ties around larger roof openings and limiting opening size is
consistentwith the requirements of Section R301.2.2.2.5.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
require specific detailing at large roof openings is intended to address the poor performance of roof
diaphragms with openings and limit or reduce property damages during a seismic event and therefore needs
to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and additions or alterations to
existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of
the International Residential Code.
131
2010 Vernon -28 Section R902.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R902.1 Roof Covering Materials The roof assembly on any structure regulated by this code shall be as
set forth in Sections R904 and R905, except that only fire retardant roof coverings meeting class A or B
roofing assemblies are permitted in the City of Vernon. Roof coverings required to be listed by this section
shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E 108 or UL 790. The roofing assembly includes the roofdeck,
underlayment, interlayment, insulation and covering, which is assigned a roof classification.
RATIONALE:
The City of Vernon contains numerous large industrial and warehouse facilities that closely spaced together.
In order to minimize the spread of fire during strong wind events it is appropriate to require all roofs to meet a
class A or B standards, which are more fire resistive then class C. Class C roofs are only effective against
light fire test exposure.
FINDINGS:
Local Climatic Conditions — Adverse climatic conditions and strong winds such as those in existence in the
City of Vernon increase the likelihood of fire spreading (conflagration) from one building to another;
Local Topographical conditions - The density of buildings, limited setbacks, narrow access to buildings
and narrow streets in the City of Vernon could potentially impact governmental agencies response to
emergency conditions.
132
2010 LARUCP R10-01. Section R1001.3.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Residential Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
R1001.3.1 Vertical reinforcing. For chimneys up to 40 inches (1016 mm) wide, four No. 4 continuous vertical
bars adequately anchored into the concrete foundation shall be placed between wythes of solid masonry or
within the cells of hollow unit masonry and grouted in accordance with Section R609. Grout shall be prevented
from bonding with the flue liner so that the flue liner is free to move with thermal expansion. For chimneys
more than 40 inches (1016 mm) wide, two additional No. 4 vertical bars adequately anchored into the concrete
foundation shall be provided for each additional flue incorporated into the chimney or for each additional 40
inches (1016 mm) in width or fraction thereof.
RATIONALE:
The performance of fireplace/chimney without anchorage to the foundation has been observed to be
inadequate during major earthquakes. The lack of anchorage to the foundation can result in the overturning or
displacement of the fireplace/chimney.
FINDINGS:
Local Geological Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having buildings
and structures constructed • over and near a vast array of fault systems capable of producing major
earthquakes, including but not limited to the recent 1994 Northridge Earthquake. The proposed modification to
anchor masonry chimneys into concrete foundation will reduce injuries, save lives, and minimize structural
damages and therefore needs to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures
and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with
the scope and objectives of the International Residential Code.
133
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE
Ordinance
2010
City of
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
No.1176
LARUCP
Vernon
Section No.
No.
No.
10 C.(a)
G1-01
Amend CGBSC Section 101.10 Mandatory and Voluntary
Requirements
10 C.(b)
V-29
Add Section 101.12 Green Building Standards Permit Fees
10 C.(c)
G2-01
Amend CGBSC Section 202 Definition of "Low -Rise Residential
Building"
10 C.(d)
G2-02
Amend CGBSC Section 202 Definition of "Sustainabilit "
10 C. e
G4-01
Amend CGBSC Section 4.304.1 Irrigation Controllers
134
2010 LARUCP G1-01. Section 101.10 of the 2010 Edition of the California Green Building Standards Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
101.10 Mandatory and voluntary requirements. This code contains both mandatory and voluntary green
building measures. Mandatory and voluntary measures are identified in the appropriate application checklist
contained in this code. The mandatory measures of Chapter 4 and voluntary measures of Appendix A4 shall
apply to new low-rise residential buildings. The mandatory measures of Chapter 5 and voluntary measures of
Appendix A5 shall apply to all buildings which are not low-rise residential buildings
RATIONALE:
Under the existing definition of Low -Rise Residential Building, measures in the California Green Building
Standards Code would not be applicable to new residential buildings and structures four stories and greater.
With the proposed amendment for Low -Rise Residential Building, this proposed amendment would allow
application of the measures in Chapter 5 and Appendix Chapter A5 for new residential buildings greater than
six stories. This proposed amendment would also allow applicability Chapter 5 and Appendix Chapter A5 to
OSHPD 3 occupancies.
FINDINGS:
Local Environmental/Climatic Conditions —The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having
residential buildings constructed within a region where environmental resources are scarce due to varying and
occasional immoderate temperatures and weather conditions. The proposed modification to require higher
efficiencies of energy usage and greater beneficial use of environmental material will be achieved with the
proposed expansion of the Mandatory and Voluntary requirements and therefore need to be incorporated into
the code to assure that new residential buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope
and objectives of the California Green Building Standards Code.
135
2010 Vernon -29 Section 101.12 is hereby added to the 2010 California Green Building Standards
Code to read as follows:
Section 101.12 Green Building Standards Permit Fee:
Green Building Standards permit fees shall be set forth in a fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City
Council.
A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of the work for
which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
The City Council shall set for the permit and plan review fees by resolution in order ensure sufficient funds are
collected for the services provided. From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not
been completed or is not performed in conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The
City should have the ability to collect for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health
and Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of
building standards and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and
structures and additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in
accordance with the scope and objectives of the California Green Building Standards Code.
136
2010 LARUCP G2-01. The definition of "low-rise residential building" in Section 202 of the 2010 Edition of
the California Green Building Standards Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
LOW-RISE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. A building that is of Occupancy Group R and is th%esix stories or less,
or that is a one- or two-family dwelling or townhouse.
RATIONALE:.
Under the existing definition of Low -Rise Residential Building, measures in the California Green Building
Standards Code would not be applicable to new residential buildings and structures four stories and greater.
This proposed amendment would allow application of the measures in Chapter 4 and Appendix ChapterA4 for
new residential buildings and structures six stories and less.
FINDINGS:
Local Environmental/Climatic Conditions —The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having
residential buildings constructed within a region where environmental resources are scarce due to varying and
occasional immoderate temperatures and weather conditions. The proposed modification to require higher
efficiencies of energy usage and greater beneficial use of environmental material will be achieved with the
proposed expansion of Low Rise Residential Building and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to
assure that new residential buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with the scope and
objectives of the California Green Building Standards Code.
137
2010 LARUCP G2-02. The definition of "sustainability" is hereby added to Section 202 of the 2010 Edition of
the California Green Building Standards Code in alphabetical order to read as follows:
SUSTAINABILITY. Consideration of present development and construction impacts on the community, the
economy, and the environment without compromising the needs of the future.
RATIONALE:
The 2010 California Green Building Standards Code contains the word "sustainable" but does not define it.
Although it is a term used in association with green building, the word "sustainability" is often confused to
mean the same as green building. The proposed amendment allows clarity and distinguishing understanding
while providing for a general definition.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new buildings and structures and
additions or alterations to existing buildings or structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the
scope and objectives of the California Green Building Standards Code.
138
2010 LARUCP G4-01. Section 4.304.1 of the 2010 Edition of the California Green Building Standards Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
4.304.1 Irrigation controllers. Automatic irrigation system controllers for landscaping provided by the e
and installed at the time of final inspection and shall comply with the following:
1. Controllers shall be weather- or soil moisture -based controllers that automatically adjust irrigation in
response to changes in plants' needs as weather conditions change. .
2. Weather -based controllers without integral rain sensors or communication systems that account for
local rainfall shall have a separate wired or wireless rain sensorwhich connects or communicates with
the controller(s). Soil moisture -based controllers are not required to have rain sensor input.
Note: More information regarding irrigation controller function and specifications is available from the
Irrigation Association.
RATIONALE:
The proposed amendment requires that weather -based or soil moisture -based irrigation controllers shall be
provided regardless of which entity provides and installs landscaping. The proposed amendment will then
capture a larger number of landscaping projects with greater flexibility for water savings. The existing code
requirement that conditions a smart controller when landscaping is provided and installed at the time of final
inspection will remain as it appears in the California Green Building Standards Code.
FINDINGS:
Local Environmental/Climatic Conditions — The greater Los Angeles region is a densely populated area having
residential buildings constructed within a region where water resource is scarce. The proposed modification to
install weather -based or soil moisture -based irrigation controllers for any new residential building subject to
Chapter 4, regardless of which entity provides landscaping, will allow greater efficiencies of outdoor water -use
and therefore need to be incorporated into the code to assure that new residential buildings are designed and
constructed in accordance with the scope and objectives of the California Green Building Standards Code.
filKl'l
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE
Ordinance
2010
City of
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
No.1176
LARUCP
Vernon
Section No.
No.
No.
None
140
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AND LARUCP AMENDMENTS TO THE
2010 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
Ordinance
2010
City of
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
No.1176
LARUCP
Vernon
Section No.
No.
No.
11 C. a
V-30
Add Paragraph (i) to Section 100 Energy Permit Fee
141
2010 Vernon -30 Paragraph (i) is hereby added to Section 100 of the 2010 California Energy Code and
shall read as follows:
(i) Energy Permit Fee:
Energy permit fees shall be set forth in a fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council.
A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of the work for
which an inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made.
Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available
at the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for failure to provide access
on the date and time for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from the plans requiring the
approval of the building official.
In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, the city may deny additional inspection of the
work until the required fees are paid.
RATIONALE:
The City Council shall set for the permit and plan review fees by resolution in order ensure sufficient funds are
collected for the services provided. From time to time permittees call for inspection when the work has not
been completed or is not performed in conformance with the plans causing the City to reinspect the work. The
City should have the ability to collect for this additional work.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This amendment establishes administrative standards for the effective enforcement of building
standards.
142
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED VERNON AMENDMENTS TO THE
2009 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE
Ordinance
2010
City of
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
No.1176
LARUCP
Vernon
Section No.
No.
No.
8 B.(a)
V-31
Amend I Existing Building Code Section 202 Definitions
8 B.(b)
V-32
Amend I Existing Building Code Appendix A Chapter Al Seismic Strengthening
Provisions for Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings
143
2010 Vernon -31 International Existing Building Code Section 202 is hereby amended to add the
following definitions in alphabetical order:
International Building Code — shall mean the California Building Code as amended by the
City of Vernon.
Uncontrollable Event— shall mean an act of god including a seismic event, flood, fire,
tsunami or other natural disaster beyond the control of the property owner.
RATIONALE:
It is recommended that two definitions be added. The first is to clarify that the City operates under the
California building code, not the International Building Code and the second establishes the definition for an
uncontrollable event which aides in defining when the provisions of Article XI would commence.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
144
2010 Vernon -32 International Existing Building Code Appendix A Chapter Al is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Appendix A Chapter Al
Seismic Strengthening Provisions for Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings
Section A 101 General — All damaged unreinforced masonry buildings and structures
shall be repaired and strengthened in accordance with the California Existing Building
Code adopted in Section 24.60.
RATIONALE:
The State of California has established the California Existing Building Code as part 10 of title 24 of the
California Code of regulations. This Code establishes the repair criteria for unreinforced masonry bearing
walls. Therefore staff is recommending that the Appendix A Chapter Al of the international building code
which also has seismic strengthening provisions for unreinforced masonry wall buildings be replaced with the
California Existing Building Code standards.
FINDINGS:
Local Administrative Finding — This amendment is necessary for administrative clarification and does not
modify a Building Standards pursuant to Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and
Safety Code.
145
r
�iS �xxi xIILt t ii rXt�ctT#$trzi$, �Itc—
The Only All Hispanic Owned Chain of Bilingual Newspapers
111 S. Avenue 59, Los Angeles, CA 90042-4211
Ph 323.341-7970 Fax 323.341-7976 • www.egpnews.com
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the County aforementioned; I am over the age
of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested
in the above -entitled matter. I am the principal
clerk of the printer of
EASTERN GROUP PUBLICATIONS'
EASTSIDE SUN, MEXICAN AMERICAN SUN
NORTHEAST SUN, BELL GARDENS SUN
VERNON SUN, COMMERCE COMET,
CITYTERRACE COMET, MONTEBELLO COMET,
MONTEREY PARK COMET,
E.L.A. BROOKLYN BELVEDERE COMET
AND WYVERNWOOD CHRONICLE,
newspapers of general circulation, printed
and published THURSDAYS in the County of
Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been
adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles,
State of California, under the
date of JUNE 21, 1966.
CASE NUMBER 884861;
that the notice, of which the annexed is a -printed
copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire issue
of said newspaper and not in any supplement
thereof on the following dates, to -wit:
NOVEMBER , t 4I,
all in the year 2010.
1 certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at LOS ANGELES, California,
this 11iliday of NOVEMBER, 2010.
t2pmck.a�
Signature
This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(�-
CITY OF VERNON
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Public Hearing: Monday,
December 6. 2010 ... Building Code Adoption
CITY OF VERNON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 20, 2011
SUMMARY FOR ORDINANCE NOS. 1160 - 1167, 1169 1181 AND 1183
A CERTIFIED: COPY OF THE FULL TEXT OF ADOPTED ORDINANCE
NOS. 1160 — 1167, 1169 — 1181 AND 1183 ARE AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF
THE CITY CLERK LOCATED AT 4305 SANTA FE AVENUE, VERNON,
CALIFORNIA.
Ordinance Nos. 1160 — 1167, 1169 — 1181 and 1183 were duly introduced at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Vernon and approved and adopted by said
Council at a regular meeting held on September 20, 2011.
On September 20, 2011, the City Council of the City of Vernon adopted Ordinance Nos.
1160 —1167, 1169 — 1181 and 1183 amending certain provisions of the Vernon City
Code as follows:
Ordinance No. 1160 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Sections 13.48 to 13.73 and adding Section 13.74 to Article IV, Hazardous Materials
Monitoring Program, of Chapter 13, Health and Sanitation, of the Vernon City Code as
follows:
1. To change the title of Article IV of Chapter 13 to Hazardous Materials
Monitoring and Control Program;
2. To update and clarify definitions and other provisions in accordance with State
hazardous material laws, regulations and regulatory options;
3. To renumber the following sections: Section 13.55 to 13.57, Section 13.57 to
13.55, Section 13.72 to 13.73 and Section 13.73 to 13.74; and
4. To add a section regarding unlawful,hazardous materials management.
Ordinance No. 1161 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon adopting. by
reference the Department of Water Resources State Model Landscaping Ordinance,.
amending Sections 25.100, 25.101, 25.102, 25.103, 25.104, 25.105, 25.106(b), 25.107(a)
and adding Section 25.112 to Article VI, Water Conservation of Chapter 25, Water, of
the Vernon City Code as follows:
l . To meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Water District Model Efficient
Landscape Ordinance; and 1
2. To add a section regarding the Department of Water Resources State Model
Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 1162 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Article XIV of Chapter 2 of the Vernon City Code relating to the recall of Members of
the City Council.
Ordinance No. 1163, an emergency Zoning Ordinance, was adopted by the City Council
of the City of Vernon prohibiting the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, stores, co-
ops, or marijuana cultivation operations in any zoning district within the City by
amending Sections 26.2.9 and 26.4.1-4, of the Vernon_City Code as follows:
1. To add a definition of marijuana dispensary, store, co-op, or cultivation operation;
and
2. To prohibit the use in any Zone or Overlay Zone of the City.
Ordinance No. 1164, a zoning ordinance, was adopted by the City Council of the City of
Vernon prohibiting the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, stores, co-ops, or
marijuana cultivation operations in any zoning district within the City by amending
Sections 26.2.9 and 26.4.14, of the Vernon City Code as follows:
1. To add a definition of marijuana dispensary, store, co-op, or cultivation operation;
and
2. To prohibit the use in any Zone or Overlay Zone of the City.
Ordinance No. 1165 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Vernon, relating to City Council elections to
implement campaign finance regulations.
Ordinance No. 1166 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon temporarily
suspending acceptance.and review of non-exclusive solid waste franchise agreement
applications..
Ordinance No. 1167 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Vernon, relating to City Council elections and the
appointment of Council members in uncontested elections.
Ordinance No. 1169 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon abolishing
the Police and Fire Commission.
Ordinance No. 1170 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon repealing
Section 7.3 of the Vernon City Code authorizing the delegation of enforcement
responsibilities for certain provisions of the Fire Code and other Fire Safety Regulations.
Ordinance No. 1171 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon adding
Section 13.88 to the Vernon City Code to establish fees and charges pursuant to the
aboveground petroleum storage act.
Ordinance No. 1172 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Sections 2.34, 2.35, 2.36, 2.37 and 2.39 of Article V, Public Library, of Chapter 2,
Administration, of the Vernon City Code as follows:
Establishing a Board of Library Trustees; composition; appointment of members;
and
2. Appointing the Mayor as president and the Mayor pro tempore as president pro
tempore of the Board of Library Trustees.
Ordinance No. 1173 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
the Vernon City Code to authorize the Fire Chief to report directly to the City Council
and defining the term "reporting to the City Council."
Ordinance No: 1174 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
the Vernon City Code to clarify that the City Council appoints the purchasing agent.
Ordinance No. 1175 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon establishing
a three-year restriction on cutting of newly paved or resurfaced streets and amending the
Vernon City Code regarding deposits, surety bonds and liability insurance for
encroachment permits and licenses.
Ordinance No. 1176 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Chapter 24, building and construction, of the Code of the City of Vernon; adopting by
reference (1) the 2010 California Building Code; (2) the 2010 California Electrical Code,
and the 2006 edition of the ICC Electrical Code administrative provisions; (3) the 2010
California Mechanical Code; (4) the 201.0 California Plumbing Code; (5) the 2010
California Existing Building Code; (6) the 2009 International Existing Building Code; (7).
the 2010 California Residential Code; (8) the 2010 California Green Building Standards
Code; and (9) the 2010 California Energy Code, including amendments, additions and
deletions, and repealing all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict therewith.
Ordinance No. 1177 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
Chapter 7, fire regulation, of the Code of the City of Vernon; adopting by reference the
2010 California Fire Code including amendments, additions and deletions, and repealing
all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict therewith.
Ordinance No: 1178 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon extending
the existing time limits for the effectiveness of and the receipt of tax increment for the
industrial redevelopment project.
Ordinance No. 1179 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon eliminating
the existing time limits on incurring debt for the first amended industrial redevelopment
project.
Ordinance No. 1180 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon amending
section 2.1 of the Vernon City Code relating to the time and place of City Council
meetings.
Ordinance No. 1181 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon extending
the existing time limits for commencement of eminent domain proceedings to acquire
property within the industrial redevelopment project.
Ordinance No. 1183 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon establishing
a Housing Commission pursuant to the provisions of the City Charter of the City of
Vernon and specifying the membership and duties of the Housing Commission.
Willard G. Yamaguchi, City Clerk of the City of Vernon, does hereby certify that
Ordinance Nos. 1160 —1167, 1169 —1181 and 1183 were duly introduced and approved
by the City Council of the City of Vernon at a regular meeting and adopted and passed by
said Council at a regular meeting held on September 20, 2011 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gonzales, Davis,
McCormick, Maisano, Newmire
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Dated: September.20, 2011 '
_ 1
1llard G. YaOUCi, C t Clerk
r,