I’ve got this plan checker telling me I have to have my form work engineered for a concrete bunker I’m building. Anybody ever heard of such a thing? Seems like total b.s. to me.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story

Framing the floor inside a crawlspace foundation keeps a gable-end addition close to grade.
Featured Video
Builder’s Advocate: An Interview With ViewrailHighlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
???????????
Seems like total b.s. to me
You are kidding?
You must be in Florida ... Yes that is the way the law is written.
I tried to explain I was building a simple block foundation and wall, like 10,000 other walls they built past year here and the veteran crew wouldn't know how to build it any other way but they still wanted an engineer stamp on a plan any mason could draw on a McDonalds napkin.
I ended up drawing up a plan myself, having it stamped and turning it in.
The engineer copied all the details directly from handouts he got from the state and off we went. It still took three swings at it to get everything sorted out and on the right page to make them happy but nothing really changed from the first plan I drew up on day one.
I never actually saw any real "engineering" going on. When I asked him, he said the way they want things built, based on the handouts he gets from the state, far exceed any numbers he can put to paper to get the strength they want.
the form itself? not the rebar or mix, but the form? wow.
I mean, I've seen tables for the load of various walers under "full head" and whatnot, but that always seemed like an issue for the builder to consider, not a general public health/safety thing. At most it'd be a OSHA type, jobsite safety concern.
I guess if you were building in a place where a blown form could lead to concrete spilling onto an adjacent structure or a sensitive ecosystem, it might make sense, but otherwise...
k
Edited 12/13/2008 10:08 pm ET by KFC
The forms themselves. Unbelievable! In all my years of building structures I've never seen a set of plans detailing how you're supposed to build the forms. And I built a structure almost identical to this one about eight years back too. Ridiculous!
This is in northern california by the way.
and there are no obvious ecosystem/storm drain/adjacent property concerns?
Nothing even remotely along those lines involved. I think this is the case of a guy not having seen anything like it and coming up with this b.s. to justify his existence.
I've seen a large retaining wall form bulge pretty badly during a poor. The builder forgot to run whalers or vice versa.
The wall was 20' high and 40' long. You should have seen those carpenters scrambling to brace it.
He could have used some engineering. Or just some common sense. Wet concrete's heavy!
yeah, there's no question a blown form can be a huge issue, but i've never heard of it needing a stamped plan checked by the B.D.
i wonder which B.D. it is.
k
I agree completely. The way I look at it, the dept. of building and safety is for making sure buildings are safe long term for the owner.
A form for pouring concrete is short term and on the builder to build correctly.
Maybe they are trying to pass off some of their job to someone else?
Yeah, it seems like an OSHA issue, not a B.D. one. It'd be like a plan checker wanting to see stamped plans for excavation shoring.
Or it could be just another plan check fee to collect. Some B.D.'s generate a lot of income...
I'm trying to be non-cynical and imagine how a poorly braced form could negatively affect the final structure. I guess you could maybe end up with eccentric loading of footings if the form bulged. Or you might exceed the bearing capacity of the soil.
k
Yeah, this really is ####. What the guy is claiming is that the forms have to be strong enough to support the roof of the structure when the concrete is wet, and it's his business to know. It has no effect whatsoever on the long term stability of the building.
I'm debating whether to go over his head or just draw up something with the cad program I used to do the construction documents and have the engineer stamp it. The latter seems like the least irritating option at this point. Unbelievable.
so it's the roof.
well, (and I'm stretching to imagine his p.o.v. here) I guess if the form bulged, the eventual roof could have more concrete and therefore weigh more than engineered for, in terms of supporting itself and in terms of the load it'll throw into the walls during an e.q.
I still agree with you that it seems unreasonable though. At most the thickness could be verified by the inspector.
As to whether it's worth going over his head, I probably wouldn't, but who knows. Could be if you don't push back he'll be unreasonable every time you deal with him. Or it could be that he'll pick every last detail apart forever if you do push back.
There's one particular inspector that my old boss challenged in Berkeley, and every time I see that guy I know he's going to be gnat's eyelash about everything. Of course, he was pretty much gnat's eyelash before he was challenged, so who's to say.
good luck.
k
I had a guy in Palo Alto who was a real pain. Told me I had to take the top six inches off a 6500 square foot house off due to daylight plain issues. Now that was something worth going over his head for.
After that he had it in for me and on the final claimed the basement required egress at every lightwell. Had a real attitude about it. I had to beat him down on that one too. So anyway, fighting with those clowns is something you have to weigh carefully.
Is he talking about the wall forms, or is the roof going to formed and poured? Vince Carbone
Riverside Builders
Franklin,NY
The roof is going to be formed and poured. I built one with almost identical specs eight years or so ago with not one word from the building department on how to do the form work. The steel's what holds this thing up.
again, i've never heard of that. but what would you say if it was a question of form deflection and extra concrete?
i'll be curious to hear how this all turns out, especially if you fight it.
keep us posted.
k
Just back from up north where I'm doing the project. Handed the idiot plan checker stamped plans for my form work. Ridiculous.
I can't see the load caused by extra concrete due to deflection in the forms being an issue. I think you'd have a much bigger problem than that during the actual pour if the amount of deflection was great enough to account for enough excess concrete as to be a factor. The building is already way overengineered to accomodate an indeterminate amount of earth on top.
yeah, i didn't buy it either, even as i was saying it. it was the best I could come up with. When I'm butting heads with a bureaucrat I try to imagine whatever their concern might be, no matter how ridiculous it seems.
I've found if I acknowledge their concern, sometimes they lighten up. makes it less adversarial. sometimes i even think of a potential problem i hadn't noticed before.
usually i just go away shaking my head that these idiots are the people with control over real decisions affecting my life. then i do the unnecessary extra step they want me to, just to get them off my back.
how much time and money did getting a wet stamped set of form drawings cost you?
k
Oh, no big thing when you get right down to it. I suppose I spent twenty minutes modifying a previously drawn cad detail and sending a pdf off to the engineer, who charged me eighty bucks to do the calcs and stamp it. It's just extremely irritating to have to deal with these morons in various positions of "authority". But, like you said, you just do what you have to do to get them out of your life. Brings to mind a friend's quote, "The world is run by eight dollar and hour clerks".