Anytime I see two less than 4' tall retaining walls very close to each other, I become suspicious that this approach was used to escape meeting retaining wall codes - and not having to use professionals (engineers and soil experts). Typically, a 4' retaining wall (aka, the above ground portion/height) is only part of the height of the wall (the footing is under the ground). Stepping two walls, as you describe, then also requires certain distances from one another - based on soil, wall design, wall height, etc. . . Usually those pushing for taking this approach do so for cost reasons - not for performance reasons . . . and also so that they can do the job (versus what is frequently the better/more secure approach). Of course "customers" like this cheaper approach - at first. While you say your county/State has no code/regulations to retaining walls, I think that only applies to walls that are less than 4' . . . and probably the reason why you have two walls, each at the "proverbial" 4 feet level, combined to retain 8 vertical feet of soil (and more importantly, water saturated soil). What is being done about water control? Drainage? Is there a drainage system built into the wall design? Is the land above the 1st wall getting watered daily? Water weighs a LOT and is responsible for roughly 90% of retaining wall failures! The other 10% is poor design, miscommunication, post-installation work in the area that puts the wall's retaining ability at risk. This is what you should do . . . find a very good firm who builds real, full height retaining walls and is licensed. Ask if they have an engineer on staff or how they handle the engineering on their projects. If they can answer that question satisfactorily, then ask them to come out, review, make a recommendation, and provide a quote.

A PE will perform a detailed set of calculations for the exact application. All the codes have margin built into them based on the worse case for the conditions defined. In many cases these conditions can be changed to allow for a different answer. Wood species, wood grade, and actual loading conditions (snow, wind, seismic, structral differences from the assumed design used for the code tables, etc.) for a location can be exactly accounted for. Even a 20 PSF snow load is not used in most of Texas and the south. The fact that the tables in the IRC do not cover this case does not mean you cannot design for it. It means they saved space in the code book for more important things. Table R502.5(1) covers girder and header spans in exterior load bearing walls. It only covers #2 wood, assumes the lowest strength wood, and makes assumptions about roof type in load determination. While many (probably most) houses have gable roofs, a hip roof and a header near a corner have different loading parameters. Te code tables are designed to allow a non-engineer to use them and produce a structure that will meet the minimum code under the most pessimistic assumptions. An analysis by a PE of the exact structure and loads will need to be stamped off to be acceptable to the AHJ, but changing any of the assumptions inherent in the code tables will change the final design. The code does not cover everything, including flitch beams, various engineered wood products (I-joists, gluelams in there many flavors, etc.). The manufacturers typically provide the design services to satisfy the AHJ requirement for an engineering review and a PE stamp. Many of the early I-joist long spans had problems. The code allows 1/360 deflection. A 30 foot I-joist with this deflection moves 1 inch at mid-span and maximum load. Structurally fine, but the complaints of bouncy floors poured in. The deflection must be reduced below the code to crate a decent floor. Most quickly changed the Ârules they use. The codes do not even address 'more than minimum' requirements that can arise from the use of large ceramic tiles, stone, etc. The normal floor deflection limits are not suitable for these materials. Joist must be spaced closer, have additional height, or be stiffened in other ways to provide a stable installation base. Closer is usually not a very good solution. If you have a standard gable roof house of 1 or 2 stories with no oversize openings in bearing walls the code tables will allow you to build something without paying a PE. Change from 'standard' and you will need a PE (or architect in some places) to seal off the plans. I have a PE and perform a lot of these design reviews. A recent one was an owner who wanted 16 inch sidelights on the front door. This requires a larger header, but there was not enough height to use a plain wood header (it was heading towards 2x14 size). A 2x10 flitch beam with #8 steel neatly solved the problem for a pretty minimal cost. The AHJ will inspect to the drawing for bolt placement and jack stud requirements (3 per side), along with checking that the installation is in accordance with the drawing.

That's a great video but I wouldn't be able to remember them when I need to. Maybe I will get my scarf and try out a few styles in front of the computer. Of course then I need a mirror. Oh well!

Jan Moyer you are right on the money. Every single manufacturer knows how to build an upholstered piece the right way, it's not a secret and it's not rocket science. However this is a price-driven industry and the consumer demands lower prices, so most these companies respond accordingly. There are only two ways to lower the cost of the build 1) Reduce you labor costs 2) Reduce your material costs. You take it out of the craftsmanship or the materials. A manufacturer will decide what level they want to produce at - and then target the build to that price point. This is very much a time-business as well, so they are always looking for ways to make it faster to save on labor cost to meet target goals. The result is shortcuts and elimination of time-honored techniques and materials. How much can they eliminate in the cost to build is a meeting they have in staff every single week? Dealers demand it because they have the pressure from the retail consumer. However, everything they reduce - takes away from the quality of the build in one form or another. At some point down the line, they're are producing junk that goes to the landfill rather quickly. Companies that are publicly held and traded on the stock market are under enormous pressure to maximize profits for stockholders. Those that are privately held much less so, depending on what the owner wants to do. Best example I know of this is Hancock and Moore, which was started by Jack Glasheen and Jimmy Moore when they were fed up with the cutbacks at Classic Leather in the early 1980's and decided to go out together and build a new company that doesn't take shortcuts. I know both of them quite well personally and they have never wavered in the quest to build the best in the industry and also take care of any issues that may pop up from time to time. They very soon took over from Classic Leather as the # 1 builder in the USA. Jack and Jimmy retired a few years ago and sold the company, but not just to anyone. There were many who wanted to buy it, but they would only sell to someone who has the same beliefs and would continue the legacy of the build. That was Alex Shuford at Century, who runs his companies the same way. That's why H&M is now a part of Rock House Brands, the parent holding company. I don't carry poor or mediocre brands in my store. I know what makes a good piece of furniture in the 34th year of doing this and I build relationships with both my suppliers and customers, not just "make sales". I know that cheap sofas go to the landfill quickly, good ones actually cost less over time as they are serviceable for many years. It's my job to show clients what makes a good piece of furniture and what they are getting for their money so they can make an informed decision. Knowledge is Power. Empower the consumer through education, which is also why I participate in forums like this and run one myself. How strongly do I believe in that? I even have a cut-away of a Hancock and Moore chair in my store that I had custom made to show those interested how its made. Once you know the right way to do it, it's easy to spot the poorly made stuff. For the most part "you get what you pay for" in this industry. - Duane Collie