Because moneyQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Not safety or health or sustainability
Printable View
Because moneyQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Not safety or health or sustainability
Get the fuck out of here, the very first thing I said is no one is arguing against structural codes, but surely you understand there are some superfluous code requirements that do not impact the overall safety of a building. I could go back and quote it for you, but you know how to read.
Then you went full architect and brought up Turkey, as if adding thousands of dollars of electrical work to accommodate tens of thousands of dollars in future additional appliances and utility work for EVs, will save a single life.
So no, I'm not the reason the 22 CA Energy code requirements exist. Architects and developers who make a substantial markup on the additional work, along with upper class virtue signaling people are. Fuck affordability, its time to get paid.
Not sure if this is puffin Fred or Fred who understands his biz but posts idiocy cuz TRG…Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
For those reading along at home, this is the ranting of a luddite
alot of these regulations exist due to "health and safety"Quote:
Originally Posted by ::: :::
I understand
the green building movement is a political agenda being forced on us by a small group of people who usually are a do as I say not as I do kinda people
if they cared about the environment they will live less than 200sq ft of interior space per person they will walk use public transportation or ride a bike never use a car or an airplane and only own a few sets of clothing to wear
being told I can only put a max 400cfm fan in a kitchen is bs meanwhile on my un permitted work I happily installed a 1800 cfm 3 speed fan in the kitchen it's like a jet engine but hey its for viking 8 or 10 burner oven
Conspiracy, huh?
Lol
am I the only one who has found this thread pretty much unreadable the last couple of weeks?
You are not alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Nuff said…sorry
#metoo
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
After I moved into my 105 year old home with original windows painted shut in lead paint I solicited all sorts of window contractors to either restore or replace the windows. 99% of them didn't know a flying fuck about old windows. Nearly all of them said rip em out and replace with air tight plastic junk. I ended up finding an old hippie in Portland who was willing to drive up to Tacoma in his Volvo station wagon becuase he used to be stationed at JBLM and wanted to check out his old stomping grounds. He and I fully restored half the windows in my house and I added storm windows on half of them, with plans to add the rest eventually. Wind can come right through these old windows, but my house breathes. I rather have it this way than live in some sealed up plastic home in the suburbs. In 50 years we will all be talking about the health hazards of living in those off gassing bubbles.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
thirded (or whatever).Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper
Move the green housing bullshit to the Rubble
Tell me you've never been to CDMX without telling meQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
We’ll, my biased opinion (I work for a contractor) - my guess is modern buildings will stand but with minor structural damage. There will be widespread power outages, gas leaks, water main breaks, etc… I’m sure some older buildings will fall but I bet we’re surprised with how many are still standing…Quote:
Originally Posted by muted reborn
An SE will tell you different. Back when I was in college one of SE professors that taught seismic design would REFUSE to drive over the old SF-OAK bay bridge (before they built the new span). Dude would drive down to the San Mateo bridge to get to SF….
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Yup, the change in course has me worried rather than laughing and that is why I am here, for the laughsQuote:
Originally Posted by Danno
who else is getting high driving to denver jerking off in the high end lumber mill smoking mire dope and going for a bike ride some of try to win every day
Thanks for this, I guess we will eventually find out the hard way what will stand. I don't have an opinion on this because wtf do I know about codes - just curious what others think. Here in SLC have a pretty good chance of 7.0 earthquake on land that is mostly an old lake bed - aka it will shake like jello. Codes didn't change for earthquakes until the 70s.Quote:
Originally Posted by nickwm21
AR, you remind of Grandpa Simpson, ha.
I've been to Mexico City several times. My parents live in Mexico, about three hours from Mexico City, and have been traveling around Mexico for the last 20+ years. I bet Mexico City has lower per capita homeless than Bellingham. Sure, people are living in shanties sprawling up the mountain sides. But at least they aren't passed out in front of businesses taking shits on the sidewalk like in Bellingham.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker
The number one factor that causes homelessness is high housing costs (see Atlantic article below). You can debate reasons for high housing costs, and ways to try to bring that down. Of all major American cities, Houston gets cited as the city that has done the best job with housing their homeless (by building a shit ton, which they are able to do because of their lower cost of construction and land prices). It's time for these West Coast cities to learn from what Houston is doing right.
"Urban areas with very high rates of poverty (Detroit, Miami-Dade County, Philadelphia) have among the lowest homelessness rates in the country, and some places with relatively low poverty rates (Santa Clara County, San Francisco, Boston) have relatively high rates of homelessness. The same pattern holds for unemployment rates: Homelessness is abundant only in areas with robust labor markets and low rates of unemployment—booming coastal cities.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...causes/672224/
Luckily for Detroit their homeless people just freeze to death or leave. Those coastal cities don't get that luxury, they have to actually deal with them.
These old buildings you see in the PNW have survived several 6+ earthquakes. There was an interesting article in the NYTimes about Erzin, Turkey, which was right next to the epicenter of the quake but survived largely unscathed. The mayor was patting his back saying they survived becuase of his strict enforcement of building codes. But in reality, it was the natural geology of the region that explained the difference (Erzin was built on solid rock as opposed to clay and sand in old river beds like other cities in the region).Quote:
Originally Posted by nickwm21
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/17/w...arthquake.html
It's largely a myth that West Coast cities have bad homeless situation becuase they have to absorb all the homeless fleeing places like Detroit. I expect Austin, Texas, which has seen it's housing costs sky rocket recently, to start having a bad homeless situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermoon
So the cure to the urban unhoused is baseboard outlets?! He may not be the hero we asked for...
Austin already has a bad homeless population, and has a dry mild climate that is much closer to LA than Detroit. Go watch a bunch of Skid Row junkie interviews on Soft White Underbelly. Almost all of them came to LA from somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Tacoma wishes it smelled like a turd on a sidewalk.
So all the homeless drug-addled schizophrenics downtown need to move somewhere cheaper? I’ll be sure to let them know.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I hear Mexico City is nice.