Car park collapse

formatting link

There seem to be a distinct lack of rebar in the bit that's fallen off. That can't be right surely?

Tim

Reply to
Tim+
Loading thread data ...

That's what I thought too. It goes a long way to explaining why that bit fell off. It will be interesting to see whether they can effectively check the rest of it for structural integrity. My guess is that they will have to demolish the whole lot. More than one multi-storey car park in Norwich has gone the same way (due to deterioration of the concrete rather than lack of rebar). Even one of the replacements had structural issues a few years later.

Reply to
Biggles

Most of them have suffered from lack of maintenance generally and water gets in the cracks etc, and metal inside rusts. I'm expecting several around here to be condemned soon. Bloody eyesores they are. Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

Concrete 'cancer'. Inadequate rebar, not covered by sufficient concrete (made worse by the decorative fluting which allows water to penetrate more deeply).

Reply to
Andrew

Looking on Google Streetview it appears to have had some additional tubular steel supports on the exterior to pass some loads down to the ground.

Reply to
DerbyBorn

Actually, looking at that silver people carrier, I suspect it rammed into the wall in reverse which is which why its wheels are hanging over the edge. That retaining wall has an L shaped bottom which looks like it was attached to the precast flooring sections with rebar. where the man is attacking with a breaker is the top surface so you wouldn't expect to see any rebar there.

Whatever weakness had built up in the structure because of concrete 'cancer' was exposed by the sudden impact.

Reply to
Andrew

Ah, now it becomes a bit clearer why there are vehicles with their rear wheels hanging (or else almost hanging) off the floor. I'd thought that the wall was flush with the vertical pillars and horizontal beams on that floor, and that therefore the collapse had also made vehicles roll backwards. But looking at the floor above, it extends another metre or so, so part of the floor has snapped off, back to the level of the horizontal beam.

The silver Transit-type van doesn't appear to have any damage to its rear end, which you'd expect if it had hit the wall hard enough to snap it off.

Reply to
NY

Looking at other news photos it looks like the car park was already under renovation and that would be the most likely cause of the collapse.

eg

formatting link

Reply to
ARW

In the picture a transit van has reversed into a wall and knocked it off the deck of the car park.

The question is does the wall have to stop a transit van going through it or not? The car park shows no signs of falling down.

Reply to
dennis

On second thoughts it is falling to bits.

Reply to
dennis

Yup I think some of the deck came off as well as the wall, and just dropped the rear wheels of the van in the process.

Reply to
John Rumm

Yup, this image shows it better:

formatting link

Reply to
John Rumm

What I find strange is that the Council have apparently told the BBC that it is nothing to do with them because it is privately owned. I would have thought that the council would be involved in both finding out whether it had been built according to regulations and whether it was a danger to the general public around. Unless no part of it is near a public place, which seems unlikely.

Reply to
Roger Hayter

En el artículo , ARW escribió:

Looking at those, my first thought is that the deck overhang past the horizontal support is rather large for such a thin deck, especially with the weight of the vertical fluted fascia panel perched on the end.

Also noticeable that the rear wheels of the silver people carrier are actually past the horizontal support - compare with other parked cars whose rear wheels are more or less sitting on the horizontal beam underneath (see image 23).

Reply to
Mike Tomlinson

In message , at

00:06:33 on Sun, 20 Aug 2017, John Rumm remarked:

The question is: when were those pit-props put there. Before or after the collapse?? Could easily be "after", as part of the process of evacuating the trapped vehicles.

Reply to
Roland Perry

In message , at 04:59:29 on Sun, 20 Aug

2017, Mike Tomlinson remarked:

Although the people-carrier is nearer the edge, I don't think its bumper would have hit the parapet. Perhaps they should have roped off that line of parking bays while they fettled around underneath.

The line of overhanging deck/parapet could have peeled away starting at the scaffolding near the blue saloon, and running towards the entry/exit ramps, before being halted by the pit-props.

Reply to
Roland Perry

In message , at 00:35:51 on Sun, 20 Aug 2017, Roger Hayter remarked:

I agree. They surely have a duty to the public regarding the safety of buildings in general, let alone (more) bits of buildings falling onto the highway. They've even got a contract out:

formatting link

Probably talking to the wrong department (parking rather than Building Control).

NCP appear very relaxed - "a bit of the facia fell off - so what?"

Reply to
Roland Perry

You are probably only seeing a small number of the cars, the front wheel drive cars having already been moved

Reply to
FMurtz

In message , at

16:35:37 on Sun, 20 Aug 2017, FMurtz remarked:

The indcident happened at 3.30am, and it was probably pretty empty. Aren't all the three vehicles shown FWD?

Reply to
Roland Perry

No vehicle would hit the wall directly. There is (was) an armco barrier stopping that happening (see images 22 and 26).

Reply to
ARW

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.