12 story apartment building suddenly collapses in Miami

[Greenman]

I'm trying to picture how that would work. The only phase that I could see having an impact would be excavation.

 

[Zorba]

I'm trying to picture how that would work. The only phase that I could see having an impact would be excavation.

Yeah, I doubt that is going to go anywhere.

"Our building was built like shit, with a shallow foundation, therefore you can't build on your lot because it might cause ground vibrations."

 

[dawp]

I don't know how that works but I doubt that it's a requirement to verify the stability of an older building next to your site.

Seems to me their reaching here.

 

[interchange]

The suit alleges that they didn't follow industry standards and ignored clear warning signs that the neighboring building was unstable. They of course would need to prove this claim, but if true I don't think this is a laughable suit at all.

 

[Zorba]

The suit alleges that they didn't follow industry standards and ignored clear warning signs that the neighboring building was unstable. They of course would need to prove this claim, but if true I don't think this is a laughable suit at all.

I think they just can't deal with the fact they voted NO to repairing their own building and want to blame other people. But I haven't read the lawsuit.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I think they just can't deal with the fact they voted NO to repairing their own building and want to blame other people. But I haven't read the lawsuit.

This and your previous.
The video from before the collapse looked scary to me and I am not a contractor or architect or structural engineer.
Plenty of cracks, obvious water damage.
They shirked their responsibility to maintain their structure.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

I'm not sure what all was involved in the new construction, but if they had to drive any piles, there would likely be impact forces felt close by.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm not sure what all was involved in the new construction, but if they had to drive any piles, there would likely be impact forces felt close by.

I think the question isn’t how far impacts are/ were felt. The question is a normal structure should be capable of withstanding them.
Why was this structure not?

 

[interchange]

I think they just can't deal with the fact they voted NO to repairing their own building and want to blame other people. But I haven't read the lawsuit.

Despite this, the other development team might have some liability if they can prove they knew of the risk their construction was causing on the other building and chose to ignore it.

 

[pmv]

I think they just can't deal with the fact they voted NO to repairing their own building and want to blame other people. But I haven't read the lawsuit.

Given the scale of the disaster, and that people actually died, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to suggest those doing building work nearby had some responsibility to be sure it wasn't having a bad effect on the existing building - even if that was partly because of pre-existing faults with that existing building.

Thinking about it, it seems like it is morally-complicated in a similar way to the Baldwin-Hutchins shooting. The question being how far, when doing something potentially dangerous, is it reasonable to assume everyone else around you has done their job perfectly?
(Anyone who thinks Alec Baldwin as an actor was responsible, even partly, in that case, should surely also hold the builders of the new building responsible in this case?)

Also I can't entirely blame the owners of appartments for not being keen to pay for massive repairs on their building, because of the way these things work, where current owners find themselves lumped with huge bills because of past-owners failure to do what was necessary, or put any money aside for such repairs.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Given the scale of the disaster, and that people actually died, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to suggest those doing building work nearby had some responsibility to be sure it wasn't having a bad effect on the existing building - even if that was partly because of pre-existing faults with that existing building.

That may have been reasonable if the collapse has occurred during or shortly after the construction of the new building.

 

[Zorba]

Given the scale of the disaster, and that people actually died, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to suggest those doing building work nearby had some responsibility to be sure it wasn't having a bad effect on the existing building - even if that was partly because of pre-existing faults with that existing building.

Thinking about it, it seems like it is morally-complicated in a similar way to the Baldwin-Hutchins shooting. The question being how far, when doing something potentially dangerous, is it reasonable to assume everyone else around you has done their job perfectly?
(Anyone who thinks Alec Baldwin as an actor was responsible, even partly, in that case, should surely also hold the builders of the new building responsible in this case?)

Also I can't entirely blame the owners of appartments for not being keen to pay for massive repairs on their building, because of the way these things work, where current owners find themselves lumped with huge bills because of past-owners failure to do what was necessary, or put any money aside for such repairs.

You can't prevent people from building on their property because you have refused to maintain your property.

But I need to read the actual claims, maybe the did do something specific that cause geotechnical damage to the neighboring property.

 

[K1052]

You can't prevent people from building on their property because you have refused to maintain your property.

But I need to read the actual claims, maybe the did do something specific that cause geotechnical damage to the neighboring property.

If the HOA had evidence that the construction of the adjacent building caused the damage they contend I'd think they would have likely sued them to help pay for the 15M in repairs that they were facing. The developers are the only target with deep pockets at this point.

The numerous significant problems of the collapsed building are certainly going to be star attractions in any such lawsuit so I'm skeptical about the outcome here even if it was, somehow, a contributing factor.

 

[fskimospy]

If the HOA had evidence that the construction of the adjacent building caused the damage they contend I'd think they would have likely sued them to help pay for the 15M in repairs that they were facing. The developers are the only target with deep pockets at this point.

The numerous significant problems of the collapsed building are certainly going to be star attractions in any such lawsuit so I'm skeptical about the outcome here even if it was, somehow, a contributing factor.

I think this is a very good point. You knew someone was going to get sued due to this and since the building owners can’t well sue themselves there’s a strong probability they went searching for who they could sue. I’m skeptical this has merit.

 

[pmv]

You can't prevent people from building on their property because you have refused to maintain your property.

I think there's more to the question than that, though.

As I said, the question (as in the Baldwin shooting case) is to what degree is one morally (or legally) obliged when doing something potentially dangerous to life and limb, to take into account the fact that others around you might not have done their jobs perfectly?

When driving, is it acceptable to assume that every other driver on the road will be absolutely flawless in their driving, for example? Or when a road traffic engineer designs a road, particularly with regard to the safety of pedestrians, do they do so on the assumption that every driver will be perfect and infallible, or is there an obligation to build into the system a degree of allowance for human fallibility?

You can't "prevent people building on their property because you have failed to maintain your property", but one could argue that the correct response to that situation is for the wanna-be builders to demand you make your property safe...not to to go ahead with their own building even in the knowledge that it might cause the existing one to fall down.

Not that it's necessarily the case here that that's what happened, there's a question of whether it's reasonable for the new builders to even have been aware of the danger, and the factual question of whether the building work actually played any role at all - I guess those are things the case is supposed to decide. But I don't think there's an absolute defense in the argument that the collapsed building was already faulty.

Another analogy occurs to me - if you are driving along and see a drunk passed-out in the middle of the road, that's partly their fault for falling down drunk in the road, but it still doesn't mean you are 100% blameless if having seen them you opt to just drive right over them.

 

[manly]

A couple weeks ago, The Miami Herald had reported on vibrations caused by construction across the street. Experts interviewed by the Herald mainly agreed the vibrations were not powerful enough to have caused any particular damage to the ill-fated Champlain Towers South building.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/special-reports/surfside-investigation/article255411881.html

 

[gorobei]

the YT channel that did the full analysis of the building collapse and design issues has been covering the latest filings by the CTS lawyers.

while it looks like the lawyers are throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks, there seems to be more to it. they seem to be digging into some of the construction planning-legal improprieties of the next door property. it is a sordid mix of quid pro quo and bait and switch of the miami scene.

the review and oversight that tends to slow down construction/development would seem to have a place to prevent this sort of stuff, despite the power it lends to nimby obstructionism.

 

[hal2kilo]

Yeah, I doubt that is going to go anywhere.

"Our building was built like shit, with a shallow foundation, therefore you can't build on your lot because it might cause ground vibrations."

Looking for deep pockets.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

quote of spam post removed.

I am interested in finding out more about free iPads.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Redux in the works ....

April 5 (UPI) -- Months after a Miami Beach condominium collapsed killing nearly 100 people, officials have ordered a nearby building to evacuate.

The City of North Beach said Monday that the order was issued for the five-story Bayview 60 Homes apartment complex after it received a brief letter Friday from structural engineer Bronislaus P. Taurinski who wrote the building was "structurally unsound and must be evacuated immediately."

The building, which was built in 1972, was undergoing repairs in advance of its upcoming 50-year recertification inspections when Taurinski informed the building's owner and the city for it to be immediately evacuated due to "critical structural issues" caused by "a deflection in the elevation of the building's floor slabs."

Residents will receive a refund of April's rent and return of their security deposits and the city will allow renters to re-enter the building later this week to pick up their belongings and to move out furniture.

Officials issue evacuation order for building near Surfside condo collapse over 'critical structural issues' - UPI.com

Months after a Miami Beach condominium collapsed killing nearly 100 people, officials have ordered a nearby building to evacuate.

www.upi.com

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Residents will receive a refund of April's rent and return of their security deposits and the city will allow renters to re-enter the building later this week to pick up their belongings and to move out furniture.

Rofl, threaten people's lives and throw them out on the street, and do literally the minimum required effort to get them out the door.

I hope there's a class action.

 

[KB]

Redux in the works ....

April 5 (UPI) -- Months after a Miami Beach condominium collapsed killing nearly 100 people, officials have ordered a nearby building to evacuate.

The City of North Beach said Monday that the order was issued for the five-story Bayview 60 Homes apartment complex after it received a brief letter Friday from structural engineer Bronislaus P. Taurinski who wrote the building was "structurally unsound and must be evacuated immediately."

The building, which was built in 1972, was undergoing repairs in advance of its upcoming 50-year recertification inspections when Taurinski informed the building's owner and the city for it to be immediately evacuated due to "critical structural issues" caused by "a deflection in the elevation of the building's floor slabs."

Residents will receive a refund of April's rent and return of their security deposits and the city will allow renters to re-enter the building later this week to pick up their belongings and to move out furniture.

Officials issue evacuation order for building near Surfside condo collapse over 'critical structural issues' - UPI.com

Months after a Miami Beach condominium collapsed killing nearly 100 people, officials have ordered a nearby building to evacuate.

www.upi.com

That sucks. And just as mortgage rates are rising and housing it harder to find.
I hope this will be an abundance of caution thing, and that they may be able to save the building since they know what went wrong with the other one.

 

[Moonbeam]

The wonders of tall buildings.

 

[alien42]

The wonders of tall buildings.

These buildings aren't that tall

 

[interchange]

Rofl, threaten people's lives and throw them out on the street, and do literally the minimum required effort to get them out the door.

I hope there's a class action.

Do they have resources to do anything more?