Existing Building Basement Addition

[phwgray]

Good day,

I'm involved in a project where a single story building built in 50's had basement expanded for fur storage not so long after the building was built. Current owner was in the process of getting occupancy permit for new tenant and inspector, after looking into basement, advised client to get a engineer to look at it.

Added basement walls were built of CMU and are in good shape. Basement floor is slab on grade in good shape as well. Level 1 slab was a concrete slab that before used to be slab on grade. Surprisingly, the slab didn't have any large cracks on the underside. I designed shoring structure to support this slab as I had doubts of any reinforcement present in it.

Authorities did not accept my certification of the space after the construction of shoring structure because they say there is no evidence that added CMU walls are safe. They are now requesting the information about wall construction such as block/mortar strength, reinforcement, how it connects to basement floor slab etc.

Im curious to know how many of you would flag the wall "issue" during site visit and if you would be concerned of this wall performance. Again, walls are in good shape without any signs of distress or deterioration whatsoever and been there for 60 years.

Thank you

 

[oldestguy]

OK Nonpl. What can we do to help? He/she knows the situation is difficult.

 

[phwgray]

Gentlemen, thanks a lot for your answers. No help is needed. All I wanted to see that I didn't miss anything important. Happy Holidays!

 

[TLHS]

Doesn't commentary L have a clause that basically says that if it's been there for thirty years, isn't deteriorated, hasn't fallen down and nothing's changed then you're probably good? Is that what you're trying to use as your basis? I've used that with an authority having jurisdiction before and my 'analysis' was basically listing the requirements and explaining why the situation met each one.

Have you tried just expanding on your justification like that?

Obviously don't certify anything, but you could say that the opinion meets the standard of care suggested by the commentary.

Maybe all the jurisdiction really needs is an more official looking letter