Foundation Plans not meeting code requirements & legal obligations

[DDDeng]

I am a school board member and a licensed professional engineer with over 15 years of experience in structural engineering. A local group (Future Farmers of America Alumni Association) wanted to generously purchase and construct a greenhouse on the school property. The greenhouse came with a set of engineered drawings that stated the foundation and anchorage needs to be designed by a locally licensed structural engineer. The school's architect put together the plans for the foundation. Columns set on piers with a grade beam between columns. The foundation plans did not contain, IMO, the necessary information to properly construct the foundation to code. Some of the items that were not provided were: rebar lap slice requirements, rebar cover requirements, details on how the rebar was to be placed at the corners (terminate bars in corner or continuous with bars lapped into perpendicular grade beam), grade beam to be cast monolithic with piers or unbonded joint or intentionally roughened & bonded joint, any detail on how column ties were to be fabricated (no reference for bars to be IAW ACI SP-66 or similar), plans stated "concrete = 4000 psi at 28 days with A/E" but did not specify what the A/E range is, plans did not provide anchor bolt size or type.

I as a school board member I asked the architect about these items and he stated that his structural engineer omitted them and provided a new set of plans. Now FFA Alumni is VERY upset with me that there are additional requirements. Did I overstep my role? In my opinion the plans did not meet code requirements.

Note, that this is being constructed by the FFA Alumni, not a contractor. People who have great intentions but are not experienced in building structures to meet commercial standards.

Do I have a legal obligation, as a licensed professional engineer having knowledge of this to speak up? Or as the FFA Alumni are saying, "feeling the need to act superior while picking apart a project that the community believes is necessary and good"

 

[JStephen]

If you have a knowledge of the deficiencies, should you speak up? Probably so.
Are you required to have any knowledge of the technical aspects of the project? No. Generally, school board members aren't expected to offer engineering input on work being done for the district. So if you just look at it and say "Yup, looks like a greenhouse", that's all the input you really need to have.

I see quite a few online posts along the lines of "Am I the a-hole" in whatever situation there was. The problem is, on something like those, or on this post, you get one side of a story, and it's hard to really tell how it was perceived by the other side.

A somewhat-related tale. Are you familiar with those little observation towers they use to look over a marching band practice field? Several years back, my boss was contemplating fabbing up one of those for the local school, and asked me to look into the design. My first thought was "Does this need to meet the building codes?" So all of the sudden, I became the bad guy, and that was the end of that project.

 

[RPGs]

Personally I would not be too bothered. It seems like you were acting in the best interest of the school board, although I have no clue if anybody had to legally abide by your comments. Regardless, the architect seemed to agree with you and took responsibility by having the specs added. The angry folks' comments are the definition of ad hominem and should be disregarded entirely. Tell them to pound sand and take it up with the architect that agreed with you and had the specs changed.

 

[BAretired]

Did I overstep my role?

I don't think so. You may have done the FFA Alumni a favor by pointing out items which could come back and bite them after the construction was completed. If you knew of deficiencies in the design and failed to bring it to their attention, you could be charged with unprofessional conduct in the event of structural problems arising after construction.

 

[DaveAtkins]

You did nothing wrong. I assume the school board values your expertise, just as they should for members who practice in other professions. For example, during COVID, if I had been a doctor or nurse on a school board, I certainly would have advocated for school closings and the use of masks.

Anyway, what you asked for should make absolutely no difference to the cost of the project.

DaveAtkins

 

[271828]

...Some of the items that were not provided were: rebar lap slice requirements, rebar cover requirements, details on how the rebar was to be placed at the corners (terminate bars in corner or continuous with bars lapped into perpendicular grade beam), grade beam to be cast monolithic with piers or unbonded joint or intentionally roughened & bonded joint, any detail on how column ties were to be fabricated (no reference for bars to be IAW ACI SP-66 or similar), plans stated "concrete = 4000 psi at 28 days with A/E" but did not specify what the A/E range is, plans did not provide anchor bolt size or type.

I as a school board member I asked the architect about these items and he stated that his structural engineer omitted them and provided a new set of plans. Now FFA Alumni is VERY upset with me that there are additional requirements.

It's hard to see how the quoted text ended up at the last sentence, "Now FFA Alumni is very upset with me..."

The design team erroneously left a bunch of stuff off the drawings. You mentioned these errors and they fixed them. Why isn't the FFA mad at the design team for having the errors? Would they have preferred the foundation be constructed from erroneous drawings? "If you would've just shut up, we could've done it wrong!" Doesn't make any sense.

It sounds like this didn't go over smoothly on the inter-personal level and someone detonated an ego bomb.

 

[lexpatrie]

Did you overstep?

NO. Your duty to the public is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. You had an ethical obligation to speak up. Had "they" not listened, you'd likely have been forced to elevate it to the building official. Fortunately the Architect and Engineer stepped up. This information sounds like it's needed for the building official during their site visit and review of the foundation.

Did you overstep "your role" (I presume as school board member).

I don't care. Nor should you. You acted ethically to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public, based on your knowledge and experience as a structural engineer.

Do I have a legal obligation, as a licensed professional engineer having knowledge of this to speak up? Or as the FFA Alumni are saying, "feeling the need to act superior while picking apart a project that the community believes is necessary and good?

If it catches fire and somebody dies, most likely, .... fixing the greenhouse to the foundation (which was missing on the details) means it has no reliable force transfer.

Was "the ship" in San Diego "necessary and good?"
Was the flammable insulation in the Station night club "necessary and good?"

https://www.structuremag.org/?p=1883

As a side note, the reason there is professional engineering licensure in Texas is because the New London school had a boiler explode in the 1920s. Hundreds died. Is a greenhouse going to be that level of hazard? Doesn't matter. Feel free to explain, but do not apologize. Bad splice lengths can harm the durability of the foundation, would the school like a foundation that falls apart six years after they build it? Would the school board rather the structure slide off the foundation during a 30 mph wind in six months? Or collapse during stronger winds?