4 dead, 159 missing in Miami building collapse

[The Brain]

As a lawyer - I've always learned that clients will probably read one or two pages at most (especially if they're not also lawyers) so make sure the most important information is at the top and possibly in bold

I'm not aware of any industry where not reading safety reports is an option.

It looks like the report was addressed to the condo board. I wonder who was on that, and if they cared.

If they don't care then making the report look like a YouTube thumbnail won't make them care.

[Sheilbh]

As a lawyer - I've always learned that clients will probably read one or two pages at most (especially if they're not also lawyers) so make sure the most important information is at the top and possibly in bold

I'm not aware of any industry where not reading safety reports is an option.

It looks like the report was addressed to the condo board. I wonder who was on that, and if they cared.

Yeah - and even if someone has to read a report doesn't mean you shouldn't make it user friendly.

[The Brain]

As a lawyer - I've always learned that clients will probably read one or two pages at most (especially if they're not also lawyers) so make sure the most important information is at the top and possibly in bold

I'm not aware of any industry where not reading safety reports is an option.

It looks like the report was addressed to the condo board. I wonder who was on that, and if they cared.

Yeah - and even if someone has to read a report doesn't mean you shouldn't make it user friendly.

You'd have to be functionally illiterate not to understand the report.

[The Brain]

Are people in the US and UK really that dumb? I don't think so. It seems unlikely to me that grown-ups wouldn't be able to process a 9 page document with color pictures.

[DGuller]

I think the condo board cared, they set aside $12 million to act on it, if I understand the sequence of events correctly.  That's quite a big chunk of money for a building with 150 units.  They were under impression that it wasn't urgent urgent, though, which is why they took a couple of years to think it over.

[DGuller]

I keep thinking back to the images from Google Maps street view.  The amount of concrete spalling that was visible seemed very excessive.  Obviously I wouldn't be looking at that building if it didn't fall down, so a lot of bias has to be assumed, but I don't think I've ever seen a building that was so pock-marked with missing chunks of concrete. 

The stuff that was visible was probably inconsequential; a balcony with an exposed rebar for a floor won't make the building fall down.  However, it may have been an indication that the steel rebars were popping concrete off in all the places, including the ones that made the building stay up.

[The Minsky Moment]

Also some bad writing - surely you lead with the most serious issues and what needs to be done about them rather than issues with the window sealent and balconies

I agree but I come at it from a similar perspective.
Expert engineer reports prepared for litigation always start with an executive summary or prelim statement highlighting the key points.
But engineers that arent professional witnesses don't necessarily think that way.  This report definitely buried the lead but probably not deliberately.

[The Minsky Moment]

Are people in the US and UK really that dumb? I don't think so. It seems unlikely to me that grown-ups wouldn't be able to process a 9 page document with color pictures.

Clearly you've never served on an American condo board.

[The Brain]

Are people in the US and UK really that dumb? I don't think so. It seems unlikely to me that grown-ups wouldn't be able to process a 9 page document with color pictures.

Clearly you've never served on an American condo board.

Thanks.

[The Minsky Moment]

I think the condo board cared, they set aside $12 million to act on it, if I understand the sequence of events correctly.  That's quite a big chunk of money for a building with 150 units.  They were under impression that it wasn't urgent urgent, though, which is why they took a couple of years to think it over.

Assuming DG got the reserve right, this seems to make sense.
The  report is very bad, but doesn't directly say "this building might collapse at any moment!!!!"
I could easily see a board adding an assessment to build up a fund and then take time to price out contractors and do the repairs ad seriatum.

What I found interesting about this report was the bluntness that the consultant using calling out the deficiencies of the original engineering firm.  That's the kind of comment people can sue for defamation over, so this engineer must have been quite confident.  That fact alone would have been a big red flag to me but a condo board member might not gave picked up on that.

[alfred russel]

I think the condo board cared, they set aside $12 million to act on it, if I understand the sequence of events correctly.  That's quite a big chunk of money for a building with 150 units.  They were under impression that it wasn't urgent urgent, though, which is why they took a couple of years to think it over.

It is a lot of money for just 150 units. I'm not sure how many units were lost in the building collapse, but I suspect there are less units now, which is going to make it even harder to raise the funds.

[DGuller]

I don't think they're going to go forward with the repairs now.

[DGuller]

Here is an article with pictures of the pool room from two days before collapse: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article252421658.html.

Between this, the engineering report from three years ago, and one of the victims on the phone saying that a hole formed in the pool deck, it seems like the strongest early theory is that the pool deck started off the collapse.  It seems to be in the vicinity of where things started falling down first.

[viper37]

Why should the government be footing the bill for that?

The government didn't pay for new buildings to be up to current standards, and it didn't pay for older buildings that exceeded the codes pre andrew. Seems like a bailout of landlords and other large property owners that have unsafe buildings.

if it's mandatory to upgrade your building to new standards, the govt has to foot part of the bill, since it's a sudden change in regulations.

[The Brain]

Why should the government be footing the bill for that?

The government didn't pay for new buildings to be up to current standards, and it didn't pay for older buildings that exceeded the codes pre andrew. Seems like a bailout of landlords and other large property owners that have unsafe buildings.

if it's mandatory to upgrade your building to new standards, the govt has to foot part of the bill, since it's a sudden change in regulations.

wut?