A proposed bill before the Las Vegas City Council would allow any building built before 2009 undergoing a renovation to only have to meet the energy code requirements at the time of initial construction, not the current, stricter guidelines. The bill drew strong opposition during a hearing from more than a dozen people, including green building consultants, energy auditors and architects, who called the bill “short-sighted.”
Related Stories
Contractors | Apr 29, 2016
OSHA issues advisory to protect workers from Zika virus
Construction industry workers considered at high risk.
Codes and Standards | Apr 28, 2016
New research finds 30 measures to significantly cut energy use
ASHRAE’s prescription cuts across all building types and climates.
Codes and Standards | Apr 27, 2016
Florida gives developers more time to install first responder radio signal systems
Expensive upgrades can be postponed for several years.
Codes and Standards | Apr 25, 2016
San Francisco becomes first big U.S. city to require solar panels on new buildings
Pertains to commercial and residential buildings shorter than 10 stories.
Codes and Standards | Apr 25, 2016
GSA adopts SITES land development and management rating system
Federal agency will use for properties with and without buildings.
Wood | Apr 22, 2016
Revised 2015 Manual for Engineered Wood Construction available
American Wood Council Document offers design information for structural applications.
Codes and Standards | Apr 20, 2016
OSHA updates eye and face protection standards in final rule
Becomes effective April 26.
Codes and Standards | Apr 18, 2016
Efficiency finance pilot project to spur retrofits on existing buildings
EDF and PG&E team up on interest-free loans for qualified projects.
Codes and Standards | Apr 18, 2016
ASHRAE releases proposed energy standard for historic buildings
Designed to balance with preservation requirements.
Codes and Standards | Apr 13, 2016
Canadian city fines itself for failing to get a building permit for building renovation
Guelph, Ontario, will pay a $1,125 fine to the province.