Proposed Modification to
the
Modification #: Section
553.73,
Name: Joseph D. Belcher
Address: 41 Oak Village Boulevard Homosassa, 34446
E-mail:
JDBCodeservices@tampabay.rr.com
Phone: 352-450-2631
Fax: 813-925-4152
Code: Florida
Building Code - Residential
Section #: R301.2.1.2.1
Text of Modification [additions underlined;
deletions stricken]:
R301.2.1.2.1 Modifications to ASTM E
1996. Section 6.2.2 of ASTM E 1996 shall be modified as follows:
6.2.2 Unless otherwise specified, select
the wind zone based on the basic wind speed as follows:
6.2.2.1WindZone 1 - 130 mph ≤
basic wind speed < 140 mph, and Hawaii.
6.2.2.2 Wind Zone 2 - 140 mph ≤
basic wind speed < 150 mph at greater than 1.6 km (one mile) from the coastline.
The coastline shall be measured from the mean high water mark.
6.2.2.3 Wind Zone 3 - 150 mph (58 m/s) ≤
basic wind speed < 160 mph (63 m/s), or 140 mph (54 m/s) ≤ basic wind
speed ≤ 160 170 mph (63 m/s) and within 1.6 km (one mile) of
the coastline. The coastline shall be measured from the mean high water mark.
6.2.2.4 Wind Zone 4-basic wind speed
> 160 170
mph (63 m/s).
Fiscal Impact Statement [Provide documentation of the costs and benefits of
the proposed modifications to the code for each of the following entities. Cost data should be accompanied by a list of
assumptions and supporting documentation.
Explain expected benefits.]:
A. Impact to local entity
relative to enforcement of code:
No
impact to local entity relative to enforcement of code.
B. Impact to building and
property owners relative to cost of compliance with code:
Will result in a reduction in
cost to building and property owners in areas currently included in Wind Zone 4
that are not intended by ASTM to be included in Wind Zone 4.
C. Impact to industry
relative to cost of compliance with code:
Reduction in costs as only
products with approval for use in HVHZ have been designed and tested to meet
the increased impact requirements and the offset criteria intended for Wind
Zone 4.
Please explain how the proposed modification meets the
following requirements:
1.
Has a reasonable and substantial
connection with the health, safety, and welfare of the general public: The
proposed amendment properly correlates the adoption of ASCE 7-10 with ASTM E
1996 within the Florida Building Code, Residential which has a reasonable
connection with the health, safety, and welfare of the general public by not posing
provisions greater than intended by the adopted reference standard.
2.
Strengthens or improves the code, and
provides equivalent or better products, methods, or systems of construction:
The proposed amendment properly correlates the adoption of ASCE 7-10 with ASTM
E 1996 within the Florida Building Code, Residential which strengthens and
improves the by not posing provisions greater than intended by the adopted
reference standard.
3.
Does not discriminate against materials,
products, methods, or systems of construction of demonstrated capabilities: The
proposed amendment does not discriminate against materials, products, methods,
or systems of construction of demonstrated capabilities and, in fact, removes
what could be considered a discriminatory provision.
4.
Does not degrade the effectiveness of the
code: The proposed amendment properly correlates the adoption of ASCE 7-10 with
ASTM E 1996 within the Florida Building Code, Residential which does not
degrade the effectiveness of the code.
5. The
provisions contained in the proposed amendment are addressed in the applicable
international code.
The provisions are not addressed in the IBC 2009 as they
were a Florida Specific Amendment intended to correlate the code and the ASTM standard
with the adoption of ASCE 7-10. The same provisions appear in the 2012 IBC and
the proponent intends to submit a revision in the next available IBC Code
Change Cycle.
6.
The
amendment demonstrates by evidence or data that the geographical jurisdiction
of Florida exhibits a need to strengthen the foundation code beyond the needs
or regional variations addressed by the foundation code, and why the proposed
amendment applies to this state.
The amendment is
intended to address a correlation issue between the code, the adopted ASTM
standard, and the Florida adoption of ASCE 7-10. The change was intended to
correlate the three documents, but the correlation did not occur. Wind Zone 4
in the ASTM standard is intended to address Miami-Dade County and Monroe County.
The revision as adopted expands shutter requirements intended for Miami-Dade
County to numerous other counties in the State of Florida.
7. The proposed amendment was submitted or
attempted to be included in the foundation codes to avoid resubmission to the
Florida Building Code amendment process.
The amendment will be
submitted to the ICC Group B Code Change Cycle for the 2015 International
Residential Code.