Structural Shenanigans 9

[Eric C.]

I am working on a project where I am to design and develop a plan to renovate/repair/rebuild the structure of a 100% burned out commercial building. Client is a GC(first bad sign). This building is approximately 24'x60', exterior walls are unreinforced/ungrouted CMU(~20' tall), basement and one floor, backfilled 7'-9' on two sides. All that remains are the exterior CMU walls and the basement slab.

Right away my concern was the structural integrity of the CMU walls, any damage done by the heat to which they were exposed, the level of backfill and the lack of any reinforcing or grouting. I advised my client of my concerns and I also informed them that the forensic analysis and design of structural masonry was not in my tool bag and that I would need to retain the services of someone capable in this area to do an inspection, analysis and a remedial plan if needed. My client agrees to this. Additionally, my reading and understanding of the IEBC 2018 is that an analysis of the lateral load bearing system, exterior CMU walls, is needed to determine whether or not the current code requirements are met. Two birds with one stone, so to speak. So, I contacted an engineer whom I trust, received a proposal and passed it to my client for approval before proceeding.

This is where the fun begins. All of the sudden there is NO money for this masonry analysis and even LESS time. Client is demanding that I "stamp some drawings" so that they can submit for the building permit and get going on construction. Even going as far as telling me to omit any reference or drawing notes concerning the masonry and just wait and see if the Codes Dept. catches it. I'm not buying in to this. My position is that I'm not going to "stamp some drawings" as long as I have not satisfied myself that the structural integrity of the building is intact or until another engineer with masonry expertise can provide me with a plan to make the structure sound(if needed). I'm ready to tell some folks to go pound sand.

I know the answer to this...Surely I'm not being as unreasonable as I'm told??

What have I left out of my story? I've been in the practice of engineering for many years, out of school for many more. Maybe my tolerance for shenanigans has reached an end.

 

[Rabbit12]

JAE, the way I read the OP the GC wants to try to pull the wool over the eyes of the building department. I see that as incredibly unethical by the GC. They don't have time or budget to analyze the CMU wall. What happens if the building is permitted and the wall fails? The original poster is probably involved just by association. Oh, Mr. Original Engineer, you knew the GC didn't intend to look at the wall even though you advised them to?

I see nothing unprofessional about writing a letter absolving your association with the project. You don't have to level any allegations; just state facts (although you can argue purposely leaving a critical structural element off the plans is likely a violation). Maybe the letter isn't to the building official but the GC but I sure as heck would want something in writing.

 

[JAE]

I see that as incredibly unethical by the GC

I agree

What happens if the building is permitted and the wall fails?

People perhaps get hurt and the GC will be held liable, hopefully.

Oh, Mr. Original Engineer, you knew the GC didn't intend to look at the wall even though you advised them to?

The OP above should, as I stated, write a letter outlining why they would be withdrawing, notifying the GC that they were being unethical and wrong.
That is the proper thing to do.

Because the GC "might" continue on their path doesn't implicate the OP in terms of culpability. How would the OP know that the GC would indeed continue to do the wrong thing?

I can play the lawyer quote game too: "Oh, Mr. Original Engineer. You defamed my GC client by notifying authorities that my client was going to do something unethical. How do you know the future? Show me your crystal ball, please."

I see nothing unprofessional about writing a letter absolving your association with the project.

I don't either.

You don't have to level any allegations;

This is my point exactly - I'm glad you agree. Don't level allegations of something based on your expectation that the GC will actually do something unethical when you don't actually.

Maybe the letter isn't to the building official but the GC but I sure as heck would want something in writing.

OK - Please go read what I wrote....exactly what you are stating here.


There is a real danger here in writing a letter of innuendo, or opinion-based allegations of illegal behavior when none has occurred...yet.
You could definitely get sued and lose.

Now I will give in just a little here - if later you drive by the project and see (somehow) that the walls were not ever altered or repaired and you have some definite visual and analytical evidence that there may be a threat to public safety and welfare - then indeed write a letter or contact the AHJ to notify them of your concerns.

 

[msquared48]

JAE...

I totally understand and share your concerns regarding the legalities mentioned above.

My concern is the legality of knowing the possibility of a structurally compromising situation and professionally choosing to do nothing. To me, that is wrong. In my mind, I do not believe it is the intent of the law, although it may be what is written.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA, HI)

 

[Eric C.]

Wow!! I never thought there would be this much discussion about this. I have read each and every reply and you have all contributed to my solution. I thank you all for taking the time to reply. I am going to try to address certain points that I've read in the replies.

1) I contacted the client first thing this morning and verbally advised him that I am not going to be a party to any misrepresentation nor deception and that I must respectfully withdraw from this project. Letter to him advising of my withdrawal and an invoice to follow. Maybe I will get paid, maybe I wont. Either way I am better off.

2) I contacted the building codes department and advised the building official of my withdrawal. As there had been no formal submittals made as of yet and I was not on record with them this was done as a courtesy. I want to stay on good terms with them. I reiterated my masonry concerns and, as it stands, I had voiced my concerns about the masonry at a preliminary building codes dept. planning meeting two weeks ago and these were recorded in the minutes of the meeting which was attended by all involved. I obtained a copy of the minutes for my file. I did not and will not write a letter to the building codes dept. as they are already notified and I was assured that the masonry would be addressed when the time came. More "piling on" won't help.

3) I am not going to report Mr. GC to anyone. At this point it would just be finger pointing and "he said-she said" and, as has been correctly pointed out, nothing illegal has taken place.

4) Its my understanding that former client has submitted graph paper plans to the building codes department in order to obtain a permit. I further understand that my name is nowhere to be found on these plans. That suits me just fine. Given the size of the project and the simple nature of the construction involved I don't know why he just didn't do this to begin with except for he wouldn't have anyone else to share blame with when things went sour.

5) I'll watch this project out of the corner of my eye but, in the mean time, I have a meeting Friday with a repeat client to discuss our next little project.


Again, thank you all for your comments, replies and concerns. They were ALL helpful.


Eric C.

 

[msquared48]

Ok. Thanks for the info.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA, HI)

 

[JAE]

Mike, I think the distinction is between "knowing the possibility of a structurally compromising situation"......and knowing OF a true structurally compromising situation.

In the case here, there is definitely a possibility that the GC, based on the original post, would perhaps continue seeking ways to ignore the wall.
But it had not yet developed to a true compromising situation.

Better to be safe and report the concern to authorities? I would not without more "proof" that danger was at hand.

A gray area here for sure, though.

 

[r13]

I think OP handled professionally - notified the authority through casual conversation manner, and get record for it.