Florida building collapse: Emergency response after incident in Surfside near Miami

**SMH at some of the responses here** This was NOT a controlled demolition! PERIOD!

Moving on...

Some interesting articles now showing up on the collapse. One of them was even on CNN (which I REFUSE to link. Because...CNN! Not going to send them the clicks!). Anyway, seems a property management firm specializing in resort condo management took over from the previous company a couple years ago. And, they ordered a comprehensive 'Reserve Study' be performed on the property. The study found that there elements of the building such as the parking garage and pool area, along with other elements of the building had a "zero" year life expectancy unless critical structural repairs were made.

Residents of the building were apparently all up in arms about an upcoming $15m assessment which was coming their way. Repair costs of $20m had been identified, but the HOA only had $700k in reserves, per the Reserve Study. The new management firm tried to convince residents the repairs were mandatory, but the residents kept voting them down by vote to 'waive'. This has apparently been going on for years, to the point where one of the slides in a recent formal powerpoint presentation to homeowner's by the management firm said only..."Shouting at others is not helping solve the problems!"...in big bold underlined letters.

The management company tried unsuccessfully to secure loans for the repairs, but these were denied because of the low reserves noted above. Apparently they did recently receive approval on a $11m loan from a 3rd bank. Whether or not this loan money was the impetus for the upcoming repairs is unclear.

ETA - In any case, it seems the structural issues with this building were well known for years.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
**SMH at some of the responses here** This was NOT a controlled demolition! PERIOD!

Of course it wasn't, it was a missile. Or nano-thermite holographic planes.

I'm on the fence at the moment.

My folks live in Florida and live less than a mile from the ocean. The ocean front properties close to them are constantly going under construction to repair just about everything exterior. I don’t think it is unreasonable to believe that the building fell down due to being exposed to the weather down there. It’s unfortunate that this happened but when looking at these large complexes the maintenance on these buildings is immense and in my opinion cannot be sustained unless rent is really high.

That said I cannot rule out foul play either based on everything going on in the world right now.

originally posted by: Charliebrowndog
That said I cannot rule out foul play either based on everything going on in the world right now.

Actually, you can, the building has been sinking since the 90's.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

actually they got a loan and were in the process of repair and bids were out. also there some stink about the city not approving / taking over a month to respond and just a few hours before it fell the town ask for more info

Emails first obtained by the Herald show the condo building manager growing impatient at the lack of response from the town to plans for a temporary parking plan needed to move forward on repair of a concrete slab under building’s pool and on damaged columns in its garage. “As we are out to bid on our project (we) need to get to answers to these questions,” wrote building manager Scott Stewart to a town building official on June 21, more than a month after an initial email request was sent. “This is holding us up and cost (sic) are going up and out (sic) 40 year is coming up fast.” He added, “Can we get some feed back please so we can keep moving forward please.” The town responded with requests for additional information on June 23, just 14 hours before major sections of the 12-story building pancaked on itself, burying sleeping residents in twisted metal and broken concrete. So far, 24 people have been confirmed dead and 121 are still unaccounted for.
Surfside pushes back on report on delayed building repairs

it also says at the end of the article that they got a loan, bid were put out, and some tenants had already paid share in full other that were going to make payments first one was due on july first.their cost of the repairs.

When the building fell on June 24, the board had taken out a loan, work on the roof had begun, requests for bids for structural repairs were put out, and some owners had already paid in full their special assessment to pay for the work. Those who elected to pay in installments over many years instead faced a deadline for their first payments on July 1.

now it seems that some where someone is not telling the truth, and if they have emails that prove they submitted for permits, heads need to roll in city hall.

no doubt that the building had issues for a long time, and something should have been done long before. there is no telling if they would have started a month ago it would have saved it, but it may have saved lives if it had.if they had and found it unsafe for habitation while repairs were being made. which i think they probably would have.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Well, they had a contractor mobilized to do something at the time of the collapse, so my point was...it unclear if the repairs they had mobilized a contractor for were the major structural repairs funded by the loans, or if they were just incidental repairs to the roof. That was all.

ETA - Another somewhat misleading article. Nobody had paid "in full". Some residents had only paid this year's installment of the increased assessment 'in full'. Other residents were objecting to do even that. A similar assessment would need to be paid, by all residents, every year until the $15m assessment increase had been satisfied. This is what the residents were up in arms and objecting to; they were mad they even had to pay this year, and were screaming about having to pay in subsequent years. This appears to be the fundamental funding issue.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

In other words, it looks like a lot of "not my problem" and then it become someone's problem after a lot of bodies were created in the chaos.

It's truly tragic, but it looks like a lot of people have a little bit of the share on this one if your stories are all a bit true: tenants not wanting to help finance repairs, HOA not managing funds better, building owners not strongarming tenants, city hall not moving their bureaucratic butts ...

a reply to: ketsuko

I'd probably go even further than that. I'll bet you could find blame all the way back to construction of the facility in the first place. Substandard practices, inspectors looking the other way, palms getting 'greased' downtown, etc., etc.

I don't think it's an issue of 'not my problem' so much as it is one of 'kicking the can down the road' (by everyone) until it became a crisis and a tragedy.

ETA - ...until the building finally spoke up and said..."If all people are gonna' do is talk about me, but no one is actually gonna' DO anything about me...Well, I'm outta' here!"

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

You're saying the same thing.

By "not my problem" I meant it isn't their problem because it's not going to fail on their watch. Sort of like NOLA's levees. Corruption and graft and mismanagement of what should have been ample funds all the way up until the day they broke. They should have been in decent shape to handle what everyone knew was a possible disaster, but no one figured it would ever happen when they were around to have to take the fall for it ... so they skimmed money, mismanaged, etc., enriched themselves at the expense of the levees.

a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed.

Eerily, it's very much like the game of Jenga!, but sadly with human lives. The strategy is not to be the guy who's turn it is when the stack falls. Worse, there really are no winners because the stack always falls in the end. There are only those left holding the last straw, or block as it were.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

the building has been sinking since the 90's

No, no, no, no... didn't you get the memo? The building wasn't sinking; the sea was rising.

Because of Global Warming.

Starting when the buildings were built.

Only in Miami.

Darn that carbon dioxide! Someone oughta tax it!

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I don't think it's only in Miami. I recall a thing about beachside condos up and down the Brazilian coast that are leaning all crazy, but that's in Brazil.

a reply to: ketsuko

Not rising in Myrtle Beach... or Manhattan... or Virginia Beach...

...yet...

TheRedneck

Update: The reports are all hours old now

86 deceased
43 unaccounted for
1 cat excaped alive and returned to owner

The news reports are slowing down even more now. Even CNN is several hours old.

Several articles have been mentioned above about the blame throwing going around.

One cat that lived on the 9th floor apparently had evecuated on its own from the still standing portion before its demolition. It had been staying around the building area and when checked at an animal shelter, was identifed and the owners contacted. The cat is named Binx.
USA Today

Thank you to those that are appreciating these updates. I don't mind that there were several days with no comments but mine. There sometimes is not much new information to cover and discuss.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Here is an amination showing sequence of collapse of the building

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: turbonium1

My first job out of high school was dealing with structural steel supports. My second was designing steel buildings.

Yes, it can and yes, it will collapse downward without apparent resistance under the right conditions. All a controlled demolition does is recreate those conditions. They can also be created any number of other ways naturally. Once the collapse begins, each floor produces a massive impact load to the floor beneath it, causing each floor to break free in quick succession... a quick, smooth motion until it all hits the ground.

If people were to buy into your uneducated hypothesis, it would make sense to not even bother with the second building inspection; if it isn't rigged with explosives, there's no danger, right? But there is danger because the soil itself is unstable under that kind of loading. I'm glad you can ignore that possibility. I cannot in good faith do so.

Those who don't agree with me on this, must try and replicate such a collapse

Nope.

I'm also not going to spend time verifying that gravity exists; I'm not going to design an experiment to verify Ohm's Law; I'm not going to test to see if I can grow corn from a peachtree seed; I'm not going to waste my time proving the sky is blue. Some things are simply known, such as wet sand shifting under load, and need not be re-proven every time someone decides that they don't believe it's true. That's why we have these things called "books."

TheRedneck

Nobody CAN replicate such a collapse, that's the problem. Calling it a 'waste of time', is an excuse. Saying nobody needs to prove 'gravity', when it has never even been proven to exist in the first place, is absurd.

And no, buildings do not lose all support is a precise, downward sequence by local failures, which are NOT uniform, and cannot transform into uniform collapses. They cannot collapse within seconds, it's absolutely impossible, because it has hudreds or thousands of intact supports inside, NOT damaged at all. They don't all vanish away after localized failure occurs somewhere, that's ridiculous.

Look at some videos of CD's, and how fast they collapse - in seconds. Because they remove all of the supports in a precise downward sequence, that's why it looks so 'smooth', because of precise sequential removal of its supports, floor by floor, within a few thousandth seconds each time.

It cannot be done by random damage. CD's are incredibly intricate, precise, and planned out thoroughly. Just figuring out where to place the charges exactly throughout the structure takes a lot of work, and expertise, and experience. The sequence pf setting off the charges has to be worked out, as each building is different, and they have to set a perfectly timed sequence, within milliseconds of each other.

The absolute dead giveaway of a CD is the incredible SPEED of collapse, that alone proves the recent collapses WERE, without any doubt, CD's.

It's scary that so many people think such collapses are 'normal', because of media brainwashing, and schools, and so-called 'experts' lying their asses off about how buildings CAN collapse in a few seconds, from local damage!

They cannot replicate it, with models, and when ALL structural failures can be replicated, we know it's all BS.

Everything is more and more twisted, buildings can drop to slivers in a few seconds from local damage or failures, now. Who needs to spend all that time, money, planning, setting charges in exact positions, setting them off within milliseconds of each other, when it all happens by random chance now?


It's pretty sickening, and getting worse all the time. I wonder what will be 'normal' in the future? They could show fake videos of monkeys flying out of people's asses, and say it's 'normal' and people would buy it all up, since many people today don't use their brains for anything more than what to eat for dinner. The TV set does all the rest of their thinking FOR them. It's ever more becoming a brainless world, of human zombies.

Update: Four more recovered today

90 deceased
31 unaccounted for

Seventy one of the deceased have been identified and returned to their families.

Over fourteen million pounds of debris has been removed from the collapsed building.
NPR

Many condos are finding it hard to get financing for repairs as they have not set aside enough money to maintain the buildings. This could cause condo prices to go up and be less attractive to buyers.
Washington Post

The news reports are still becoming less frequent.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Dont be a jerk here. Most large structures sink over time...this is especially true with Miami Beach where they are built on a sandbar.

You do realize that both structures sinking and sea level rise can both be true, right?

I get your ideaology dictates that you must deny the science behind global warming...but come on man.

What is concerning is many condos were hastily constructed during the 'Coca-cola' boom in the late 1970s to mid 80s. Many of those dwarf this one and have been observed to sinking.

The combination of this with rising sea levels will cause more to fail prematurely. We can only hope that this collapse will be a warning to others that they can not afford ignore structural issues in their barrier island high rise condo.

a reply to: jrod

I grew up Suncoast. Literally on the coastline, never more than 4 blocks from any given bay or private beach shoreline. Edit: For nitpickers: with the exception of a few years inland in the boonies. And it was still a short drive to the coast.

None of the Gulf spots I know intimately as a local have sunk into the rising boogeyman waters. Nothing of the coastline changed at all between Gore mouthing off, and today, other than the river & inter-coastal dredgings spiking to account for bigger water toys over time. Don't get me started on the god damn shore damage that did to formerly No Wake zones.

The coasts haven't sunk or rather, haven't been swamped with rising water, give me a break. The wakes have eroded them, just like how the Great Lakes ate their own shorelines, except that was high rain runoff & thus high lake levels. Again, wakes snorting the sand away in the waves is NOT the ocean rising.

a reply to: jrod

Dont be a jerk here.

Oh, NOW someone's not supposed to be a "jerk." Right. Where were you when any suggestion of subsidence was laughed at on here? Hmmm? It's OK for someone on your "side" to be a "jerk" but if anyone on the other "side" does it, it's bad.

Most large structures sink over time...this is especially true with Miami Beach where they are built on a sandbar.

True, on both counts. All buildings "settle," and the heavier they are/the softer the soil under them is, the more they sink with time.

You do realize that both structures sinking and sea level rise can both be true, right?

Of course that is possible.

What is simply not possible is for one (or even a few) areas around the globe to experience sea level rise while the rest of the coastal areas do not. Well, not unless those mean little carbon dioxide molecules are rearranging the planetary mass under the crust or selectively changing the gravitational constant in select areas they don't like.

I was raising alarms about the subsidence issue long, long ago when it seemed everyone else was only worried about Global Warming... we could have maybe done something about this building sinking, but that "scientism" you're so proud of said "Oh, no! The buildings are fine! It's the sea level rising in Miami due to Global Warming." People like you gave the owners of these buildings the perfect excuse to not do anything about the problem: it was obviously something that required carbon credits and international conventions to discuss the crisis, not anything that could be done to that building.

Sleep well tonight knowing that all those dead people really did die from Global Warming... not because we released carbon dioxide, but because we as a society wouldn't consider anything else.

Better a "jerk" than complicit in over 100 needless deaths.

TheRedneck