Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby hnQ_9999 » Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:57 am

Woo's Safety Building is a local Police station, 25Ksf, near airport,
Seismic Zone D, historical rehabilitation project. In Q.20 he
asked would review and approval process for this project any
different from a public library building ? His answer is "NO different",
reasoning both are local owned bds. Other answers saying
Library is reviewed/approved by b)DSA alone, c)SFM alone,
and d) DSA+SFM.

My thoughts:
- Public library is not ESB, Police station is.
- Public Library may also be state owned bd (I am guessing here).
- Public Library plans will be reviewed by State Librarians (agency).
- Library is an occupancy class by itself, by SFM.
- Answer (d) has 75% "correctness" to it compared to "NO different".
- "All projects are not created equal" is my all-time answer.

What is your thought ?
hnQ_9999
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:35 am

Re: Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby adventurer4hire » Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:56 am

Hey Hnq,
I don't agree with many of Woo's assessments or even how he words his questions, and maybe in the long run that is a good thing to keep us on our toes... But with this particular question, #1 is the least incorrect because the DSA and SFM will not be looking at this project. This is a local project that is not State owned or leased. So we can immediately eliminate #2, #3 and #4. That leaves only #1.
adventurer4hire
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:37 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby hnQ_9999 » Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:26 pm

The question said it s a local owned bldg.
The library twist did not say State or local
Library. Yet I agree w you bec the SFM wont
review/approve the proj all by itself.
hnQ_9999
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:35 am

Re: Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby adventurer4hire » Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:20 pm

I am not sure I explained it well enough and I think this is very important. I agree with you that the question could be worded better. If he add the word "local" before the public library, it is a much easier question.

hnQ_9999 wrote:Yet I agree w you bec the SFM wont review/approve the proj all by itself.
However, I don't agree with you on that one. I don't think (I could be wrong, would not be the first time...) that the SFM will look at either of these projects, ever. Not even as one entity out of several. AND even though we don't know what the public library really is, local or state, it doesn't matter because if we use the way he worded the question we can get to the answer. This is the key, in my opinion to passing these exams. If you understand the tricks the test writers throw at us, you can pass with limited knowledge. Think of it like this:

Answers 2, 3, & 4 both contain two statements per answer (or sentence). In order for any one of those answers to be correct, both statements per answer need to be correct. In each case, Woo refers to the Police Station (which we know all about) as the 1st subject in the answer. Then Woo refers to the mystery library (which we don't know much about) as the 2nd subject. Therefore, if we approach the question again with that logic we can find the answer,or least wrong answer... Let us take a look at the answers:

2. This project will be reviewed by the Division of the State Architect (WRONG), a public library will be reviewed by local building department (CORRECT, if it is a local project, but it does not matter because the first statement was wrong, therefore the whole answer is wrong).

3. The project will be reviewed [by] the State Fire Marshall (WRONG), a public library will be reviewed by local building department (CORRECT, if it is a local project, but again it does not matter because the first statement was wrong, therefore the whole answer is wrong).

4. The project will be reviewed by both the Division of State Architect and the State Fire Marshall (WRONG), a public library will be reviewed by local building department (CORRECT, if it is a local project, but again it does not matter because the first statement was wrong, therefore the whole answer is wrong).

That leaves only #1 left.
adventurer4hire
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:37 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby hnQ_9999 » Fri Apr 28, 2017 3:03 pm

Inductive Reasoning is absolutely correct, logically.
ARE did a very good job of trashing out the inductive
multiple choices (and double-negative) since v4.0.
I can't say the same for CSE, and I wish they read this.
hnQ_9999
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:35 am

Re: Woo's Safety Building - Q20

Postby adventurer4hire » Fri Apr 28, 2017 4:50 pm

hnQ_9999 wrote:I can't say the same for CSE, and I wish they read this.

Don't worry. "They" will read it. CAB and NCARB read through this and other forums all the time...
adventurer4hire
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:37 pm
Location: San Jose


Return to CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENTAL EXAM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests

cron