Email for clarification is away. I think there's no way this 4 story FSAE requirement is real, and our realistic worst case risk is that the misunderstanding goes back to before they made the very good decision to take out the Rescue Air requirement.

There's nothing unclear in writing, it seems. I'm emailing the relevant local fire marshal for clarification

Agreed, was just about to correct myself. Ok I'm stumped. Maybe the Berkeley fire official similarly misinterpreted?

@stephenjacobsmith.com check this out. FSAEs to be required starting at "the lowest level of fire department vehicle access," everywhere in California, under the new code taking effect Jan 2026.

codes.iccsafe.org/content/CABC...

Check out 46:30 - the Berkeley fire official says it will be a *state* requirement to have an FSAE above 4 stories!

Nuts. Willing to indulge us with a timestamp?

And when you account for the massive increase in construction costs during the pandemic, the story looks even worse. We estimate that there was no consequential increase in spending on bridges, rail transit, or transit in general. Even spending on highway pavement has barely increased.

Also, the application of criteria to the real design can vary. A PDB or DBB delivery method has a built-in incentive for conservative design, and we should celebrate an owner agency getting engaged and pushing back on that. The proof in the pudding is the tunnel reduction from 16 to 4 miles.

I don't see the 4 story FSAE requirement included in today's local code amendments - @jwbee.bsky.social was that a verbal proposal for future adoption?

berkeleyca.gov/sites/defaul...

Holy smokes this'd be bad