Tracklayer
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of news covering the accident last week where a building that was being demolished fell on an adjoining building that was to be saved. That building to be saved was a thrift store that was occupied, and six of the occupants were killed. Despite the intense news coverage, it is impossible to understand what actually happened.
They charged the excavator operator because he was high on pot. How did they determine that, and what role did it play in the operator’s performance? What did the operator actually do with the excavator that caused this accident? There seems to be hundreds of photos of the accident scene, but a lot of debris has been cleaned up and moved around.
However, I did see one photo prior to the accident that made it appear as though the one-story building that was to be saved was connected to the four-story building that they were taking down by a common wall of structural brick. So that would mean the three stories of that common wall had to come down while preserving the first story of it. And it had to be done without dropping any debris onto the one-story building that was to be saved.
If I was seeing it right, the photo showed the common wall still standing two or three stories above the thrift store. That wall appeared to be completely free-standing with all of the floors and the roof of the four-story building removed. What was their plan to take down that last portion of the tall wall? I cannot imagine nibbling away at it with the excavator and expecting every last bit to fall to the proper side. The slightest miscalculation might drop a couple tons two stories down and onto the roof of the occupied building.
What would be the proper way to take down the big building while saving the thrift store? Seeing what they were doing, I cannot image that it would be acceptable to have the thrift store occupied during this high risk technique. I saw a Philadelphia official say that it is entirely proper and acceptable to have an occupied building next to one that is being demolished. Maybe so with a space between them and a barrier set up, but this looked as risky as riding a bicycle across the Grand Canyon on a wire. So I am wondering who is actually responsible for this accident.
They charged the excavator operator because he was high on pot. How did they determine that, and what role did it play in the operator’s performance? What did the operator actually do with the excavator that caused this accident? There seems to be hundreds of photos of the accident scene, but a lot of debris has been cleaned up and moved around.
However, I did see one photo prior to the accident that made it appear as though the one-story building that was to be saved was connected to the four-story building that they were taking down by a common wall of structural brick. So that would mean the three stories of that common wall had to come down while preserving the first story of it. And it had to be done without dropping any debris onto the one-story building that was to be saved.
If I was seeing it right, the photo showed the common wall still standing two or three stories above the thrift store. That wall appeared to be completely free-standing with all of the floors and the roof of the four-story building removed. What was their plan to take down that last portion of the tall wall? I cannot imagine nibbling away at it with the excavator and expecting every last bit to fall to the proper side. The slightest miscalculation might drop a couple tons two stories down and onto the roof of the occupied building.
What would be the proper way to take down the big building while saving the thrift store? Seeing what they were doing, I cannot image that it would be acceptable to have the thrift store occupied during this high risk technique. I saw a Philadelphia official say that it is entirely proper and acceptable to have an occupied building next to one that is being demolished. Maybe so with a space between them and a barrier set up, but this looked as risky as riding a bicycle across the Grand Canyon on a wire. So I am wondering who is actually responsible for this accident.