Haven't seen a thread about this yet, and I think it should have its own so perhaps a mod can create a new thread (couldn't decide which subforum is best), but a report has come out detailing how Briarwood Elementary in Moore destroyed in the tornado last May was not up to code in its construction. Sigh.

Deathtrap: Moore tornado debris reveals construction flaws, code violations | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2014/02/20/deathtrap-moore-tornado-debris-reveals-construction-flaws-code-violations-real-estate/#ixzz2tyM1U0Cc)

Haven't seen a thread about this yet, and I think it should have its own so perhaps a mod can create a new thread (couldn't decide which subforum is best), but a report has come out detailing how Briarwood Elementary in Moore destroyed in the tornado last May was not up to code in its construction. Sigh.

Deathtrap: Moore tornado debris reveals construction flaws, code violations | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2014/02/20/deathtrap-moore-tornado-debris-reveals-construction-flaws-code-violations-real-estate/#ixzz2tyM1U0Cc)

I seen this earlier, one of the parents whose child passed away posted this a couple hours ago on facebook, its sad that newer (after 1980s) schools are being built this way to save money

I find it unfathomable that there wasn't or isn't even a rudimentary structural inspection required for a commercial building like that!?! For heaven's sake, a house with a wood frame that has essentially no chance in a tornado, gets at least a city framing inspection.

And I wondered about the difference in OKC versus Moore muncipal inspections....geez...think this is something that should be addressed if it remains the law today in OKC..

I find it unfathomable that there wasn't or isn't even a rudimentary structural inspection required for a commercial building like that!?! For heaven's sake, a house with a wood frame that has essentially no chance in a tornado, gets at least a city framing inspection.

And I wondered about the difference in OKC versus Moore muncipal inspections....geez...think this is something that should be addressed if it remains the law today in OKC..

Wasn't one of the schools in OKC while the other was in Moore? It is interesting that this hasn't been noted somewhere else. This could mean a lawsuit, just not sure if you blame the contractor, city, or school.

Wasn't one of the schools in OKC while the other was in Moore? It is interesting that this hasn't been noted somewhere else. This could mean a lawsuit, just not sure if you blame the contractor, city, or school.

Exactly my point - two differing jurisdictions based on the location of the schools. Briarwood was in OKC, Plaza Towers in Moore. Apparently, neither city had (has?) any type of mandatory structural inspection?

Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong. I really, really want to be wrong on this one.

I mean, this sounds like something you hear about in third world nations after hundreds die in collapsed buildings that were "inspected" by corrupt local officials, or not "inspected' at all.

I loathe additional regulation, but I don't see how local municipalities can't require this kind of inspection. What's the point of code if there's no legitimate mechanism to enforce it?

Edit: Just for info, several other Moore schools would fall under OKC jurisdiction, including but not limited to:
Sky Ranch Elementary (S. Western)
Red Oak Elementary (S. Penn)
Wayland Bonds Elementary (S. May)
Westmoore HS (S. Western)
Kelley Elementary (SW 89th)
Moore West Jr. High (S. Penn)
Brink Jr. High (S. Western)
Eastlake Elementary (SW 134th)
Fisher Elementary (Just north of SW 119th between Penn and May)

I'm sure there are others, just can't think of them immediately. I believe Kelley is the oldest, followed closely by Sky Ranch (both opened in late 60's). Bonds is the newest. Moore West opened as the original location for Highland West Middle School around 1976, became Moore West Mid High, then Moore West Jr. High later still. Point being there are lot of schools - older and newer - that could probably stand reinspection. Lots of angry bond voters would probably be justified in expecting some answers.

Thanks for posting this.....
Since code enforcement varies so much from city to city this is an issue that we need to look at as a state.

This could mean a lawsuit, just not sure if you blame the contractor, city, or school. Don't forget the architects and engineers employed by the school district. They are the persons responsible for the design and oversight, especially on a commercial project such as a school.

Good article. Thank for posting it. As a carpenter (mostly a framing carpenter) by trade, in another phase of my life, I always aspired to a level of quality approaching that of, say, Norm Abrams, Tommy Silva or Mike Holmes. I always erred on the side of "overbuilding" even though most of what I did would be covered by sheetrock, siding and shingles. When I was learning the trade, I worked for a few guys whose attitude was, "You can't make any money if you build it as good as you would build it for yourself." When I went into business for myself, I ignored that advice (although I did find out that most people don't want to pay what top quality craftsmanship is worth).

Even today, sometimes when someone is asking me for advice about certain construction-related concerns, they will say, "I live in the country and I don't have to worry about building codes because there won't be any inspections." I always tell them, "If you don't care enough to build it right, for yourself, remember that you won't be living in that house forever. Think about the next person."

I know that this story involves commercial, rather than residential, construction yet the apparent shoddiness involved here just makes me sick. All I can surmise is that this illustrates the massive unintended costs and false economy of accepting the lowest, rather than the lowest and best, bid.

Good article. Thank for posting it. As a carpenter (mostly a framing carpenter) by trade, in another phase of my life, I always aspired to a level of quality approaching that of, say, Norm Abrams, Tommy Silva or Mike Holmes. I always erred on the side of "overbuilding" even thought most of what I did would be covered by sheetrock, siding and shingles. When I was learning the trade, I worked for a few guys whose attitude was, "You can't make any money if you build it as good as you would build it for yourself." When I went into business for myself, I ignored that advice (although I did find out that most people don't want to pay what top quality craftsmanship is worth).

I know that this story involves commercial, rather than residential, construction yet the apparent shoddiness involved here just makes me sick. All I can surmise is that this illustrates the massive unintended costs and false economy of accepting the lowest, rather than the lowest and best, bid.

Not of the standards back then, but now, by virtue of having to prequalify with the City, all bids are considered lowest and "best" when evaluated. If you meet the City's standards and requirements, you can then bid and win.

That doesn't speak to the level of scrutiny involved in prequalification, more the theory.

Schools are not owned by the city or cities. Schools are a part of each independent school district. The ISD is not even required to obtain a building permit from the city in which a school is being built or remodeled. Often times they do out of courtesy, but are not required and therefore do not even fall under the authority of the cities building department. This is why a ISD hires an architectual firm to design and oversee the project.

Schools are not owned by the city or cities. Schools are a part of each independent school district. The ISD is not even required to obtain a building permit from the city in which a school is being built or remodeled. Often times they do out of courtesy, but are not required and therefore do not even fall under the authority of the cities building department. This is why a ISD hires an architectual firm to design and oversee the project.

Are you certain this is true under Oklahoma law? The "ISD" terminology is not something I've heard typically in conjunction with Oklahoma school districts, but is in Texas. OKC issues occupancy permits, as I understand it, so there is some measure of accountability in place, so I'd be very interested to explore this issue further.

Section 117. School Districts Designation.
All school districts in Oklahoma, now in existence or which may hereafter be created, shall be
designated only as independent, elementary or technology center school districts. Independent school
districts, elementary school districts and technology center school districts shall be under the supervision
and the administration of the respective boards of education thereof. (70-5-101)
Section 118. Independent School Districts.
All independent school districts in Oklahoma shall be those which shall have maintained during
the previous year a school offering high school subjects fully accredited by the State Board of Education.

A reasonable deviation from any of the requirements enumerated herein shall not operate to
prohibit the State Board of Education from designating any district as independent if the other
requirements are sufficiently superior to the minimum standards required herein, but standards therefor
shall be reduced to writing and a copy thereof sent to all districts maintaining high schools in Oklahoma
at least one (1) year prior to the time requirements become effective. Until the effective date thereof, the
requirements hereinabove enumerated shall remain in full force and effect. As a basis for attaining the

Section 122. School District - Body Corporate - Powers.
Every school district shall be a body corporate and shall possess the usual powers of a corporation
for public purposes by the name and style of “Independent (or Elementary, if it is an elementary school
district) School District Number ______ (such a number as may be designated by the State Board of
Education) of ________________________ (the name of the county in which the district is located, or if
lying in more than one county the name of the county where supervision is located) County, Oklahoma,”

Section 117. School Districts Designation.
All school districts in Oklahoma, now in existence or which may hereafter be created, shall be
designated only as independent, elementary or technology center school districts. Independent school
districts, elementary school districts and technology center school districts shall be under the supervision
and the administration of the respective boards of education thereof. (70-5-101)

Good article. Thank for posting it. As a carpenter (mostly a framing carpenter) by trade, in another phase of my life, I always aspired to a level of quality approaching that of, say, Norm Abrams, Tommy Silva or Mike Holmes. I always erred on the side of "overbuilding" even though most of what I did would be covered by sheetrock, siding and shingles. When I was learning the trade, I worked for a few guys whose attitude was, "You can't make any money if you build it as good as you would build it for yourself." When I went into business for myself, I ignored that advice (although I did find out that most people don't want to pay what top quality craftsmanship is worth).

Even today, sometimes when someone is asking me for advice about certain construction-related concerns, they will say, "I live in the country and I don't have to worry about building codes because there won't be any inspections." I always tell them, "If you don't care enough to build it right, for yourself, remember that you won't be living in that house forever. Think about the next person."

I know that this story involves commercial, rather than residential, construction yet the apparent shoddiness involved here just makes me sick. All I can surmise is that this illustrates the massive unintended costs and false economy of accepting the lowest, rather than the lowest and best, bid.
Yep, pretty much the way that I look at it. If you aren't willing to build it to the level that you personally would accept, then you shouldn't be building it at all. You can imagine how rare that is in contracting.


Schools are not owned by the city or cities. Schools are a part of each independent school district. The ISD is not even required to obtain a building permit from the city in which a school is being built or remodeled. Often times they do out of courtesy, but are not required and therefore do not even fall under the authority of the cities building department. This is why a ISD hires an architectual firm to design and oversee the project.
Permits/inspections are required in most jurisdictions, in county only areas it can get a little murky. We are doing some additions to some Denver Public Schools which is part of the City/County of Denver and we are required to have it permitted. I have projects out at DIA and I have a review by DIA Engineering and the City/County of Denver and that is for projects at a City/County of Denver facility. These are tenant remodel projects so no structural inspection but I do have electrical, HVAC, fire sprinkler and fire alarm inspections by the city/county and inspections by the DIA Project Manager.

In regards to inspections by code officials most barely know anything and look at 5-10 items they think they know and ignore the rest. Probably only about 10% really know their stuff.

The other issue is 99% of clients always try to cut the Construction Administration budget, usually more than half as they don't want to pay for the oversight which lets the contractors do pretty much what they want. In effect they are getting what they paid (or didn't pay) for which is minimal oversight.

Some of the photographs I recall from that Plaza Tower wall made me wonder if there were any pieces of rebar in that wall period.

Yep, pretty much the way that I look at it. If you aren't willing to build it to the level that you personally would accept, then you shouldn't be building it at all. You can imagine how rare that is in contracting.


Permits/inspections are required in most jurisdictions, in county only areas it can get a little murky. We are doing some additions to some Denver Public Schools which is part of the City/County of Denver and we are required to have it permitted. I have projects out at DIA and I have a review by DIA Engineering and the City/County of Denver and that is for projects at a City/County of Denver facility. These are tenant remodel projects so no structural inspection but I do have electrical, HVAC, fire sprinkler and fire alarm inspections by the city/county and inspections by the DIA Project Manager.

In regards to inspections by code officials most barely know anything and look at 5-10 items they think they know and ignore the rest. Probably only about 10% really know their stuff.

The other issue is 99% of clients always try to cut the Construction Administration budget, usually more than half as they don't want to pay for the oversight which lets the contractors do pretty much what they want. In effect they are getting what they paid (or didn't pay) for which is minimal oversight.

Huh? Different state. Not talking about Denver, Co.

Not of the standards back then, but now, by virtue of having to prequalify with the City, all bids are considered lowest and "best" when evaluated. If you meet the City's standards and requirements, you can then bid and win.

That doesn't speak to the level of scrutiny involved in prequalification, more the theory.

Point well taken . . .
Suggested Reading: The Honeywood File/The Honeywood Settlement (c. 1926 re: Common English Construction Law, parody thereof)
Also the book "House" by Terry Kidder. (no joke: that was the writer's name)

too bad that extra wealth can't be applied to school buildings. or maybe i am wrong again. =)
only time and the next tornado will tell . . .

Huh? Different state. Not talking about Denver, Co.

Yup, Klop, I think ya' done nailed it.
Please don't confuse that with "trolling".
Trolling has nothing to do with this.
Outrageous example
Of the Violation
Of Basic Construction Principles
(as compared to principals)
is all that this post is about.

Exactly my point - two differing jurisdictions based on the location of the schools. Briarwood was in OKC, Plaza Towers in Moore. Apparently, neither city had (has?) any type of mandatory structural inspection?

Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong. I really, really want to be wrong on this one.

I mean, this sounds like something you hear about in third world nations after hundreds die in collapsed buildings that were "inspected" by corrupt local officials, or not "inspected' at all.

But we're not talking about buildings that collapsed because of shoddy construction and lack of inspection. These building took a direct hit by a massive tornado .. BIG difference.

But we're not talking about buildings that collapsed because of shoddy construction and lack of inspection. These building took a direct hit by a massive tornado .. BIG difference.

Dr. Ramseyer (one of the main figures behind this report) is a professor of mine, and I've been able to listen to his presentation on his surveys of the tornado damage several times. He noted at one point that even without the tornado, the way some of the walls were constructed he could have pushed them over himself. A huge number of critical connections in some of the masonry walls were never made after the blocks were laid, concrete back-fill was missing, and the lap lengths were laughably short - just to name a few issues.

We can design class-3 structures that can stand up pretty well to just about any tornadic event, event a direct hit. Just look at how the hospital held up - sure it was destroyed, but it kept the people inside safe. The shock of this report is in the fact that some of these schools just might not be safe in any case.

The shock of this report is in the fact that some of these schools just might not be safe in any case.
Which begs the question..... what if any inspections were done on the building since its construction and if there were any what type of inspection was done.....?

Since it sometimes takes a long period of time for building flaws to show up it seems like buildings of significance’s should be required to undergo ongoing major structural inspections. Perhaps every 10 years or so?

But we're not talking about buildings that collapsed because of shoddy construction and lack of inspection. These building took a direct hit by a massive tornado .. BIG difference.

But one that that report points out is that the lack of proper lap joinery in the rebar prevented one of those cinderblock walls from collapsing the way it was designed to collapse - that is, the absence of proper overlap caused each junction point to operate as a hinge, rather than a single rigid body. Imagine a roll-top desk and the way each longitudinal piece behaves in the overall structure - then try to hold that up in place.

Whether the wall would have afforded any more protection in the vein of this particular tornado had it been built correctly is something we'll never know - but we apparently do know with reasonable engineering certainty is that it was never designed to fail the way we already know it did.