I'm disappointed at the level of discourse on HN about the topic. This amount of inane argument about "but the report doesn't seem that urgent" is what I would expect from Reddit.
Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
71–80 of 83 posts
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phrasing from the report: > The failed waterproofing is causing major structural damage to the concrete structural slab below these areas. Failure to replace the waterproofing in the near future will cause the extent of the concrete deterioration to expand exponentially. I agree that it doesn't say "it'll fall apart right this moment" (and well... it did take like 2 more years), but I would wonder why anyone woul…
I want to know if an analytical monotone is typical for these reports. Would a report like this be expected to emphasize urgency or would the reader be assumed to know that "major structural damage" means urgent? If I were writing a report on a piece of software for my boss and I found unsanitized inputs to an SQL database, I wouldn't highlight that any more than anything else I found as he would know that was severe…
I haven't read one for a 136-unit condo complex, but this is typical of most home inspections that you'd see in a SFH real-estate purchase. In general engineers & inspectors present facts, and it's up to the reader to add whatever emotive interpretation they feel is appropriate. There will often be multiple readers for such a report, and the appropriate emotion will often vary depending on who's reading it.
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#73The owners were tax evaders and bribers. Truth had no place in their vocabulary. They are dead and gone, current owners have to cope with this shitstorm A concrete slab, with water penetrated rebar will progressively fail in an exponential manner because rebar oxidizes = irrestible expansion and progressive expansion of the corroded area. Concrete and steel in these situations turn to dust and gravel with zero residu…
How do we know they were bribers and tax evaders? Who were the owners exactly?
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the document omitted anything; I don't believe the engineer thought the building was at risk of catastrophic collapse. My point is that _if_ the engineer believed the building was at risk of catastrophic failure they would have stated as much.
> My point is that _if_ the engineer believed the building was at risk of catastrophic failure they would have stated as much. It seems like maybe the report author(s) did state as much when they said “major structural damage”. I don’t know anything about architecture but, for example, when an accounting firm issues an adverse audit opinion they don’t say “this company is totally screwed!” they say “these financial s…
>It sounds boring and benign to most people but it’s the CPA equivalent of a red alert.
Exactly. Joe Blow building manager is not a structural engineer. The comment about "major structural damage" at the end of report was probably not even read. The beginning of the document is about paint bubbles and 'the tile makes the rail too short'. That sets the context.
The article casts a building department administrator as having some dire knowledge of the building condition and simultaneously telling residents everything is fine. But a close examining of the situation leads me to believe the building department administrator had no such indication.
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#75Having read the report, I am stopping my monthly contributions to NPR. This is straight up quote mining as far as I'm concerned. Nothing in the report would lead me to believe the structure was in imminent danger if I were a resident / board member / inspector etc. This is trash journalism. Edit: I would like to note the following for people following this story: The report author has stated: “among other things, our…
The Washington Post's reporting seems to back you up:
> Kilsheimer said he didn’t believe the damage highlighted in the 2018 report could have led to the collapse of the building. “Nothing in it raised a red flag,” he said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/condo-collapse-sunda...
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My point is that _if_ the engineer believed the building was at risk of catastrophic failure they would have stated as much. It seems like maybe the report author(s) did state as much when they said “major structural damage”. I don’t know anything about architecture but, for example, when an accounting firm issues an adverse audit opinion they don’t say “this company is totally screwed!” they say “these financial s…
>It sounds boring and benign to most people but it’s the CPA equivalent of a red alert. Exactly. Joe Blow building manager is not a structural engineer. The comment about "major structural damage" at the end of report was probably not even read. The beginning of the document is about paint bubbles and 'the tile makes the rail too short'. That sets the context. The article casts a building department administrator as…
"An occupied building partially collapsed, killing multiple residents. But on the other hand, the report about its systemic structural issues was long and kind of a boring read"
Are you for real?
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#77The owners were tax evaders and bribers. Truth had no place in their vocabulary. They are dead and gone, current owners have to cope with this shitstorm A concrete slab, with water penetrated rebar will progressively fail in an exponential manner because rebar oxidizes = irrestible expansion and progressive expansion of the corroded area. Concrete and steel in these situations turn to dust and gravel with zero residu…
How do we know they were bribers and tax evaders? Who were the owners exactly?
They died a few years ago, and they were charged and settled.
Root among these...
https://www.google.com/search?q=florida+collapse+lawsuit&rlz...
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#78Having read the report, I am stopping my monthly contributions to NPR. This is straight up quote mining as far as I'm concerned. Nothing in the report would lead me to believe the structure was in imminent danger if I were a resident / board member / inspector etc. This is trash journalism. Edit: I would like to note the following for people following this story: The report author has stated: “among other things, our…
Because it wasn't urgent at the time if the report, but the report is from 2018, more than 3 years ago.
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#79Having read the report, I am stopping my monthly contributions to NPR. This is straight up quote mining as far as I'm concerned. Nothing in the report would lead me to believe the structure was in imminent danger if I were a resident / board member / inspector etc. This is trash journalism. Edit: I would like to note the following for people following this story: The report author has stated: “among other things, our…
Everyone is suddenly an expert on structural engineering and thinks that NPR should have one write their news, too.
Re: Surfside official told residents building was safe, despite engineer's warning
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
OMG why is this not searchable text?! (Instead of pictures of the report's pages)
On the same site there is a file "email-related-2018-structural-field-survey-report.pdf" which contains/embeds the same report in searchable format, and on page 18 includes a table "ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF THE PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST" whose bottom line is TOTAL SUMMARY OF REMEDIATION PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST $9,128,433.60
That's a very specific number for an estimate :)