Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Miami Beach, Champlain Towers South apartment building collapse, Part 14 41

Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Is there any documentation on multiple units being combined? There's no permits for such modifications.

Kitchen and laundry room walls were removee in many units. They were noted as not load bearing, though I too doubt that.
 
Demented said:
Is there any documentation on multiple units being combined?

If you scroll through this Miami Herald piece, the graphic for each floor shows each unit. Of course it may be wrong, but it doesn’t show any gigantic combined units.


>>>>>Edit: A similar piece by the NYT also shows the penthouse and the first floor.


Blockshopper shows that some investors owned multiple units, but the numbering doesn’t seem to indicate that any units were combined.


NOTE: These links are all in the Witness Statements spreadsheet.
 
I don't think there are any load-bearing walls inside the units unless somebody has seen something in the floor plans that I didn't notice. But usually, the columns themselves with the slab floor become the load support and all of the interior walls and condos are typically just metal studs which are not load-bearing walls. So the only load bearing walls I can think of would be the exterior walls and every living room has columns, and I have not really checked to see if the hallways had any load-bearing walls in them.

Bottom line is my guess is they could open up do units all they want and it wouldn't likely not be a problem comma as long as they don't mess with the columns or the exterior load-bearing walls
 
I don't think that's an accurate listing. That's one unit, a unit I, with the kitchen and laundry room walls still in tact; the kitchen actually closed off. This might be the unit that was mentioned very early on when there was a comment by an acquaintance of a unit owner about the amount of weight of marble that was added into one unit in unpermitted work. Hell of a unit though.

Precision guess work based on information provided by those of questionable knowledge
 
I made a couple gifs to summarize most of Mike Bells video. These are beams along K,LM under the planters. The rightmost beam is M from the tictok video.

qsfZCKn.gif
8AXsK1D.gif


Edit: There I added Mike Bells name.
 
Reverse_Bias said:
I made a couple gifs to summarize most of Mike Bells video.

These GIFs are using Mike Bell’s unaccredited work, and the right thing to do is to take them down. At first I suggested that you watermark them, but that robs Mike of income for his work.
 
Ampaire (Electrical)17 Oct 21 18:19 said:
He might prefer that over dissing his work as "unaccredited" ;)
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Have you even watched the video? He gives credit to every work he cited, even if he disagrees with the source. If you disagree, please say so, please don't just be snide about.


SF Charlie
Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
 
un·ac·cred·it·ed
/ˌənəˈkredədəd/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
not recognized as having attained an acceptable standard.
"a mail-order degree from an unaccredited correspondence school"
Definitions from Oxford Languages


Precision guess work based on information provided by those of questionable knowledge
 
As opposed to uncredited, the intended (I hope) word. The gifs don't credit the original video creator, even if the post they're in does (though it lacks a link).

Since there's no other license listed, it's under the "Your Content and Conduct" portion of the Youtube Terms of Service aka the Standard Youtube License.

Standard Youtube License said:
License to Other Users

You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access your Content through the Service, and to use that Content, including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display, and perform it, only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds). For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

So it's copyright infringement, since creation of gif clips isn't a feature of Youtube.
 
Eufalconimorph said:
So it's copyright infringement, since creation of gif clips isn't a feature of Youtube.

Yup. “Uncredited” is what I meant to type, and I will correct it. When people fail to obtain permission to use the work of content creators, or fail to credit the creator after having received permission to use it, it is unethical. I have an artist friend who is constantly being ripped off, and it is not only a hassle for her to fight it but also hits her right in the pocketbook. For some reason, a lot of people seem to think that publication on the Internet implies public domain. As you stated better than I, it does not.
 
Eufalconimorph said:
So it's copyright infringement, since creation of gif clips isn't a feature of Youtube.

That's splitting the hair pretty thin. Youtube doesn't feature transcript translation either. No one found that troubling.
 
Creative work is protected by copyright from creation. If it's not creative work, it's not copyrightable.

A "transcript" is not creative work.


spsalso
 
A ten second clip to illustrate a point is probably fair use anyway. But it's certainly polite to give credit.

It's a reasonable interpretation but I'm still not convinced by the 'pool deck first' because of the noises in 1211 the day before, which imply that something was wrong with one of those x11 column stacks before the pool collapse. But we aren't really getting any new information these days so there's not a lot to go into our theories.

@MaudSTL: interesting story about the corruption and money laundering, thanks for that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top