CRANES (CARLSON)
Sissy Siganoff panicked after hearing of New York's March 15 crane collapse that killed eight people. This wasn't because she feared the loss of a loved one. Instead, Siganoff was reminded of when a 14-foot piece of a crane pancaked the taxi she was in less than two years ago.
Siganoff and the taxi driver are suing Tishman Construction Corp., the company that oversaw the site; New York Crane, the company which owned the crane (which, as far as I can tell, is the same company involved in the most recent collapse); and Broadway Crane, the company that was leasing the crane at the time. All of the defendants are claiming that they are "not at fault" because they say they followed New York City Building Code regulations.
Siganoff says she is disgusted that City Hall failed to impose sweeping changes to the code to prevent further accidents after her own near-death experience. With construction rates increasing in the city, there hasn't been a correlated increase in inspections -- meaning that not only have building codes remained stagnant, but there are more opportunities for tragedies like that which occurred on March 15.
It was only after this most recent incident that the New York City Building Commissioner, Patricia Lancaster (who has held this position since 2002), imposed broad changes to the way the City inspects and regulates tower cranes. Lancaster has held this position since 2002, and despite pressure from victims such as Siganoff, regulations regarding cranes were left mostly untouched during her tenure -- until now. The March 15 incident is being looked into by the Investigative Department, an office that is known for investigating cases of public corruption.
I will take a closer look into the failure of the City to implement changes following the 2006 accident and whether the recent deaths were preventable -- beyond placing the blame on the inspector charged in relation to the collapse. I also want to chat with industry insiders about the new regulations, which seem to impose a hefty onus on the inspectors (who will have to be present when a crane is installed, jumped, or dismantled) and engineers (who will have to provide a written protocol and certify the crane for use).
As I recently took on this topic, I have mostly been doing research and will be doing interviews in the coming days/week. Here are some potential sources to contact:
-Sissy Siganoff, crane collapse victim
-Howard Raphaelson, Siganoff's attorney
-Pat Lancaster, New York City Building Commissioner
-Thomas Auringer, owner of U.S. Crane and Rigging L.L.C., which conducted the first crane extension since March 15 and under the new guidelines
-Operating Engineers Union
-New York Crane
-Broadway Crane
-Investigative Department
-construction workers
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Sooyeon's progrss memo
Because the 17-acre U.N. compound, built in the early 1950s, is technically international territory, it was exempt from state and federal regulations on worker and environmental safety, and even with respect to smoking, until last year the inspection by the NYFD.
They racked up 866 violations. It estimates that fewer than 20 percent of those violations have been addressed so far, according to the mayor's office.
Also required improvements included certifying a number of U.N. security personnel as fire directors, filing updated plans to address the remaining fire-code violations and establishing a link with the city in case of fire.
I also found out that U.N. have struggled for years to persuade the United States and the other 191 member nations to finance a multibillion-dollar renovation project for the headquarters. The project, known as the Capital Master Plan, has finally received funding but is not scheduled for completion until the end of 2014.
I interviewed a couple of random UN employees working at the UN headquarter building. But they didn’t want to put their name on my articles. ( I guess UN has pretty strict rule to talk to newspaper..) They generally talked me how much they feel unsafe about the building and some said the UN had ignored and didn’t have any budget when NYFD inspected the building. They had to take some money from the other budget. Some were happy to see the renovation plan finally approved, but said “it can’t take care of the problems right now’’
Today, I finally got the contact of Gary Fowlie, Chief of the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit, fowlie@un.org, through Prof. Barbara Bors.
So hopefully, he will be able to answer the main questions (If there has been any changes since 9/11, or what has been updated or fixed since the inspection last year. )
Most of all, I’m planning to ask him to introduce me someone working for the UN building. (I heard there is a guy, the only one who can control the old building system.)
Also I will contact NYFD if they have done more updates about the violations at UN since last November.
They racked up 866 violations. It estimates that fewer than 20 percent of those violations have been addressed so far, according to the mayor's office.
Also required improvements included certifying a number of U.N. security personnel as fire directors, filing updated plans to address the remaining fire-code violations and establishing a link with the city in case of fire.
I also found out that U.N. have struggled for years to persuade the United States and the other 191 member nations to finance a multibillion-dollar renovation project for the headquarters. The project, known as the Capital Master Plan, has finally received funding but is not scheduled for completion until the end of 2014.
I interviewed a couple of random UN employees working at the UN headquarter building. But they didn’t want to put their name on my articles. ( I guess UN has pretty strict rule to talk to newspaper..) They generally talked me how much they feel unsafe about the building and some said the UN had ignored and didn’t have any budget when NYFD inspected the building. They had to take some money from the other budget. Some were happy to see the renovation plan finally approved, but said “it can’t take care of the problems right now’’
Today, I finally got the contact of Gary Fowlie, Chief of the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit, fowlie@un.org, through Prof. Barbara Bors.
So hopefully, he will be able to answer the main questions (If there has been any changes since 9/11, or what has been updated or fixed since the inspection last year. )
Most of all, I’m planning to ask him to introduce me someone working for the UN building. (I heard there is a guy, the only one who can control the old building system.)
Also I will contact NYFD if they have done more updates about the violations at UN since last November.
Sarah's Progress Memo
At this point I have interviewed a person whose 36-story building caught fire a few weeks ago. Fire alarms did not go off throughout the building, but they did go off on the floor where the fire started. Her apartment did sustain a lot of water damage from the building's sprinkler system and the fire fighters' hoses. She lives on the 12th floor.
I've also done some research through the FDNY Web site, which is help shedding light on how the fire department responds to emergencies in hi-rise residences. Especially insightful was story of the plane that crashed into the 30th and 31st floors of a 46-story residence on 10.11.06 -- Cory Lidle's small, fixed-wing aircraft. The story of this incident describes the way the fire department responds when they are dealing with a hi-rise evacuation in this way: "The Air Rescue plan calls for two ladder companies and a Battalion chief, who are trained in high-rise roof operations, to meet the NYPD emergency services unit and aviation unit at a designated landing spot to prepare for an airlift."
I've found that fire officials typically ask residents to stay in their apartments with the doors closed during a building fire. For the most part, fires can be contained in the apartment where the fire started due to the construction of the buildings.
I've also done some research through the FDNY Web site, which is help shedding light on how the fire department responds to emergencies in hi-rise residences. Especially insightful was story of the plane that crashed into the 30th and 31st floors of a 46-story residence on 10.11.06 -- Cory Lidle's small, fixed-wing aircraft. The story of this incident describes the way the fire department responds when they are dealing with a hi-rise evacuation in this way: "The Air Rescue plan calls for two ladder companies and a Battalion chief, who are trained in high-rise roof operations, to meet the NYPD emergency services unit and aviation unit at a designated landing spot to prepare for an airlift."
I've found that fire officials typically ask residents to stay in their apartments with the doors closed during a building fire. For the most part, fires can be contained in the apartment where the fire started due to the construction of the buildings.
Progress Memo: Galyean
PRIMARY SOURCES - highlights:
Being ignored by Dept. of Buildings, but have pulled all applicable documents from their website. Have compiled several remarks from previous interviews with Patricia Lancaster as well as press releases, her testimony to City Council - see below for samples.
Drafted questions for Glenn Corbett, John Jay College (scheduled to address class on 4/4) - I was already planning on him as a source for my story.
Reviewed Dept. of Buildings WTC Building Code Task Force meeting agendas to find changes considered but not included in final code. - MORE TO DO
Quotes from Patricia Lancaster (previously published):
From NYT: regarding why the 1995 fire evacuation recommendations weren't implemented in the WTC before 9/2001: "It just didn't happen."
From NYT: "No building is safe from everything. It's up to the owners to assess how much risk their building, their piece of land, their edifice, is at. There's no one answer to what you should do. That's why not everything is mandated in the building code. If you mandate too much, then we'll be building concrete bunkers."
From NYT: "If you increase a stairwell by one inch at the top of a 90-story building, you are giving up dozens and dozens of square feet of rentable space."
From NYT: re: why not requiring more stairwells: "We were not successful in gaining consensus on that issue."
From NYT: re: requiring sprinklers: "I think it's a miracle we got this passed at all, frankly." AND "The real estate industry was pretty darn good about stepping up to the plate and going along with this stuff. They were sobered, as were the rest of us, after 9/11. When they became convinced that this would really help people in an extreme event, they adopted it. It's really pretty striking. Those guys have big bucks."
From Gotham Gazette: "When the mayor asked me to write a new building code, I wasn’t sure it was possible. It hadn't been possible in 40 years."
SECONDARY SOURCES - highlights:
I've been comparing NIST and McKinsey (FDNY) reports related to fire codes (WTC compliance and recommendations) with relevant 2008 NYC Building Codes to see which recommendations were incorporated.
- Identified the 13 NIST recommendations that have been included in 2008 building code
- drafting questions about those related to fire & evacuation that were not included in NYC bill 126-A.
Culled information from previous reports (NY Times, Gotham Gazette, Village Voice, Daily News, NIST website)
Per NYT article: “Dr. Sunder said that fully equipped firefighters - carrying nearly 100 pounds of gear up stairs - begin to reach their physiological limits about the 15th or 20th floor, and that it takes about two minutes to climb per floor. For people on the 60th floor of a building that has lost power, Dr. Sunder said, "help is actually a few hours away. We did not look at other buildings, but we are very confident in our recommendations."
NIST report: on 9/11, even though building was not at capacity, people took about twice as long to go down each flight of stairs as engineering standards estimate - this calculation does NOT appear to have been effected design (width) of staircases in new building standard.
North tower impact area: three staircases about 70 feet apart - all destroyed immediately.
South tower impact area: three staircases about 200 feet apart - one partially intact.
NYC building codes called for 4 staircases in each tower, but there were only 3 in each – total 6. 5 were destroyed by planes – one in south tower was used by at least 18 survivors.
No one above the 91st floor on North Tower could get out.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey used 1968 NYC building code that did not require as many staircases as 1938 version.
But 4th staircase was required because Windows on the World (north tower) and observatory (south tower) had occupancy ratings over 1,000
The Port Authority is not bound by NYC codes, but claims to "meet or exceed"standards.
NYT article: "On the issue of the fourth staircase, we will respectfully disagree with the N.I.S.T. findings and maintain that we met the city building codes in this area," said Steve Coleman, an agency spokesman.
But former WTC director told 9/11 Commission in 2004 that stairwells needed to be wider for faster evacuation.
From NYT:
Port Authority correspondence includes note from Malcolm P. Levy, the Port Authority's chief planning engineer (now deceased): ''The tower core should be redesigned to eliminate the fire towers and to take advantage of the more lenient provisions regarding exit stairs.''
NOTE: 2008 Building Codes do not require additional or wider staircases compared to 1968 Codes.
Being ignored by Dept. of Buildings, but have pulled all applicable documents from their website. Have compiled several remarks from previous interviews with Patricia Lancaster as well as press releases, her testimony to City Council - see below for samples.
Drafted questions for Glenn Corbett, John Jay College (scheduled to address class on 4/4) - I was already planning on him as a source for my story.
Reviewed Dept. of Buildings WTC Building Code Task Force meeting agendas to find changes considered but not included in final code. - MORE TO DO
Quotes from Patricia Lancaster (previously published):
From NYT: regarding why the 1995 fire evacuation recommendations weren't implemented in the WTC before 9/2001: "It just didn't happen."
From NYT: "No building is safe from everything. It's up to the owners to assess how much risk their building, their piece of land, their edifice, is at. There's no one answer to what you should do. That's why not everything is mandated in the building code. If you mandate too much, then we'll be building concrete bunkers."
From NYT: "If you increase a stairwell by one inch at the top of a 90-story building, you are giving up dozens and dozens of square feet of rentable space."
From NYT: re: why not requiring more stairwells: "We were not successful in gaining consensus on that issue."
From NYT: re: requiring sprinklers: "I think it's a miracle we got this passed at all, frankly." AND "The real estate industry was pretty darn good about stepping up to the plate and going along with this stuff. They were sobered, as were the rest of us, after 9/11. When they became convinced that this would really help people in an extreme event, they adopted it. It's really pretty striking. Those guys have big bucks."
From Gotham Gazette: "When the mayor asked me to write a new building code, I wasn’t sure it was possible. It hadn't been possible in 40 years."
SECONDARY SOURCES - highlights:
I've been comparing NIST and McKinsey (FDNY) reports related to fire codes (WTC compliance and recommendations) with relevant 2008 NYC Building Codes to see which recommendations were incorporated.
- Identified the 13 NIST recommendations that have been included in 2008 building code
- drafting questions about those related to fire & evacuation that were not included in NYC bill 126-A.
Culled information from previous reports (NY Times, Gotham Gazette, Village Voice, Daily News, NIST website)
Per NYT article: “Dr. Sunder said that fully equipped firefighters - carrying nearly 100 pounds of gear up stairs - begin to reach their physiological limits about the 15th or 20th floor, and that it takes about two minutes to climb per floor. For people on the 60th floor of a building that has lost power, Dr. Sunder said, "help is actually a few hours away. We did not look at other buildings, but we are very confident in our recommendations."
NIST report: on 9/11, even though building was not at capacity, people took about twice as long to go down each flight of stairs as engineering standards estimate - this calculation does NOT appear to have been effected design (width) of staircases in new building standard.
North tower impact area: three staircases about 70 feet apart - all destroyed immediately.
South tower impact area: three staircases about 200 feet apart - one partially intact.
NYC building codes called for 4 staircases in each tower, but there were only 3 in each – total 6. 5 were destroyed by planes – one in south tower was used by at least 18 survivors.
No one above the 91st floor on North Tower could get out.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey used 1968 NYC building code that did not require as many staircases as 1938 version.
But 4th staircase was required because Windows on the World (north tower) and observatory (south tower) had occupancy ratings over 1,000
The Port Authority is not bound by NYC codes, but claims to "meet or exceed"standards.
NYT article: "On the issue of the fourth staircase, we will respectfully disagree with the N.I.S.T. findings and maintain that we met the city building codes in this area," said Steve Coleman, an agency spokesman.
But former WTC director told 9/11 Commission in 2004 that stairwells needed to be wider for faster evacuation.
From NYT:
Port Authority correspondence includes note from Malcolm P. Levy, the Port Authority's chief planning engineer (now deceased): ''The tower core should be redesigned to eliminate the fire towers and to take advantage of the more lenient provisions regarding exit stairs.''
NOTE: 2008 Building Codes do not require additional or wider staircases compared to 1968 Codes.
Progress Report Giegerich
I am investigating the emergency management industry which is companies that specialize in consulting and training building staff to ensure that they are well prepared to respond to most emergencies, should they occur. The industry went through some changes in 2006 when New York passed Local Law 26, which requires that all buildings 100 feet or taller prepare an Emergency Action Plan (EAP) that must be accepted by the Fire Department before its implementation. Prior to LL26, Local Law 5, which basically said that buildings must have fire drills every six months, proved insufficient in the 9/11 attacks and the need for better preparedness in the case of various emergencies was addressed.
Emergency management consultants and fire consultants help buildings create and practice their EAPs by assessing the needs of the building and what a sufficient EAP would include.
My highlights are my interviews.
I’ve interviewed Anita Ohm, and Walter Ulmer, of Remlu Inc., and gained insight into how training is led and the reasons why buildings look to private consultants for help with EAPs. I hope to get some color by attending Remlu’s tabletop session where Walter will work with a midtown building to decide on an effective EAP.
Walter gave some insight in the theory of emergency management and the methodology of what he does, which may help me discuss the effectiveness of training for events that probably will not happen. A problem that I have is that there is no solid way to measure if training works. Asking if people will be saved because of sufficient training would be like, as Walter put it, “like asking a therapist, will less people kill themselves because of your sessions?”
I hope that an interviewee I have yet to hear back from can shed some light on this or at least some statistics.
I’ve also interviewed Bob Pecora, of Quality Fire, a fire consultant company that has become an emergency consultant company to comply with LL26. Pecora explained how fire safety has grown and what the differences are in the training since LL26.
Kathleen Dunne, of Dunne and Markis consulting, is an architectural/structural consultant who told me a little bit about how that industry works. Her interview may serve as a side note but strays too far from emergency management for use on my story.
I am waiting to hear back from the communication director of the International Association of Emergency Managers, and from Captain Joe Evangelista, captain of the EAP team at NYFD. Dawn Shiley, the director of IAEM, I expect will be able to help me figure out how many businesses rose after 9/11 and how many are currently functioning in New York.
Captain Evangelista will hopefully be able to answer questions about how efficiently the city is enforcing acceptable EAPs, and also what is the difference between an EAP that is “accepted,” which is the requirement, or an EAP that is exceptional?
My story is going to be a report on one positive change that has occurred since 9/11, LL26. While employees working in hi-rises may not enjoy extra drills and information sessions that prepare them for something that most likely will never happen, if people in New York are thoroughly prepared for emergencies, if they do happen again then many lives could be saved. And it seems that many buildings are working with reputable consultants to have sufficient EAPs which means there is concrete evidence that at least one change since 9/11 has materialized into a positive way to deal with emergencies.
I am in the middle of research and interviews and think in a good place, especially once I attend a Remlu training session.
Emergency management consultants and fire consultants help buildings create and practice their EAPs by assessing the needs of the building and what a sufficient EAP would include.
My highlights are my interviews.
I’ve interviewed Anita Ohm, and Walter Ulmer, of Remlu Inc., and gained insight into how training is led and the reasons why buildings look to private consultants for help with EAPs. I hope to get some color by attending Remlu’s tabletop session where Walter will work with a midtown building to decide on an effective EAP.
Walter gave some insight in the theory of emergency management and the methodology of what he does, which may help me discuss the effectiveness of training for events that probably will not happen. A problem that I have is that there is no solid way to measure if training works. Asking if people will be saved because of sufficient training would be like, as Walter put it, “like asking a therapist, will less people kill themselves because of your sessions?”
I hope that an interviewee I have yet to hear back from can shed some light on this or at least some statistics.
I’ve also interviewed Bob Pecora, of Quality Fire, a fire consultant company that has become an emergency consultant company to comply with LL26. Pecora explained how fire safety has grown and what the differences are in the training since LL26.
Kathleen Dunne, of Dunne and Markis consulting, is an architectural/structural consultant who told me a little bit about how that industry works. Her interview may serve as a side note but strays too far from emergency management for use on my story.
I am waiting to hear back from the communication director of the International Association of Emergency Managers, and from Captain Joe Evangelista, captain of the EAP team at NYFD. Dawn Shiley, the director of IAEM, I expect will be able to help me figure out how many businesses rose after 9/11 and how many are currently functioning in New York.
Captain Evangelista will hopefully be able to answer questions about how efficiently the city is enforcing acceptable EAPs, and also what is the difference between an EAP that is “accepted,” which is the requirement, or an EAP that is exceptional?
My story is going to be a report on one positive change that has occurred since 9/11, LL26. While employees working in hi-rises may not enjoy extra drills and information sessions that prepare them for something that most likely will never happen, if people in New York are thoroughly prepared for emergencies, if they do happen again then many lives could be saved. And it seems that many buildings are working with reputable consultants to have sufficient EAPs which means there is concrete evidence that at least one change since 9/11 has materialized into a positive way to deal with emergencies.
I am in the middle of research and interviews and think in a good place, especially once I attend a Remlu training session.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Pat Alex talk - 03/28
Whassap all
Here's the link to an audio recording of the talk by Pat Alex of the Bergen Record last class. She spoke about her investigative reports on the Rutgers football team expenses and on mental health issues of college kids. It was pretty interesting - so much so that a few of you asked me to record it and put it online.
The link: http://saveandrewgarib.com/audio/08.03.28-13h11m59s_Pat_Alex_Inv_Reporting.wma
Andrew
Here's the link to an audio recording of the talk by Pat Alex of the Bergen Record last class. She spoke about her investigative reports on the Rutgers football team expenses and on mental health issues of college kids. It was pretty interesting - so much so that a few of you asked me to record it and put it online.
The link: http://saveandrewgarib.com/audio/08.03.28-13h11m59s_Pat_Alex_Inv_Reporting.wma
Andrew
Progress Report (Steagall / Scaffold Law, Section 240 Labor Law)
As indicated during the pitch session(s) and preceding posts, my topic is the move to repeal Section 240 of the New York Labor Law, commonly known as the Scaffold Law. Section 240 both ensures that workers receive the proper safety equipment, and their right to sue in the event that an injury occurs.
Things are progressing at a good clip. Research is done except for one issue with liability insurance rates that I hope to clear up through an interview with a seller of general liability insurance.
The following is a list of the interviews I have conducted, or hope to conduct;
Mike Elmendorf, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, a group pushing for the repeal of Section 240. (spoke for a little while today, scheduled for another chat Friday afternoon)
Working Family's Party, a group directly concerned with issues of this sort (waiting for a call back)
A seller of general liability insurance (looking into who the best options are right now)
Workers: (have conducted an interview with worker Miguel Lagos, not a union worker, and am actively trying to arrange further interviews with unionized workers)
Attorney Kevin Fowler, of Fowler, Rodriguez, Kingsmill, Flint, Gray & Chalos LLP, which specializes in labor cases (conducted, very "lawyer-like" answers, which is good for what it is, will get the color elsewhere)
Essentially, the story is written minus the quotes (unless, of course, someone tells me some revelation, which seems unlikely); it is the story of pro-business groups pushing to gut the law, and pro-worker groups pushing to keep it. Naturally, in NYC, it looks like the pro-business groups are going to win. I am actively pursuing the interviews and see no reason why they should not be forthcoming in the next week or two, right on schedule.
Highlight thus far: Elmendorf repeated a quote (almost verbatim, he must have his talking points memorized) I'd read elsewhere on the web: speaking of the Scaffold Law: the job-killing law places a financial burden on businesses in New York, driving up the cost of liability insurance and in some cases making it impossible to even secure liability coverage. By some estimates, it adds $10,000 to the cost of building a house in upstate New York.
Seems a little sensationalized, and that's why I'm looking into general liability insurance prices.
The video component of my article is almost finished save for some music I am making for the background and some final editing.
Things are progressing at a good clip. Research is done except for one issue with liability insurance rates that I hope to clear up through an interview with a seller of general liability insurance.
The following is a list of the interviews I have conducted, or hope to conduct;
Mike Elmendorf, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, a group pushing for the repeal of Section 240. (spoke for a little while today, scheduled for another chat Friday afternoon)
Working Family's Party, a group directly concerned with issues of this sort (waiting for a call back)
A seller of general liability insurance (looking into who the best options are right now)
Workers: (have conducted an interview with worker Miguel Lagos, not a union worker, and am actively trying to arrange further interviews with unionized workers)
Attorney Kevin Fowler, of Fowler, Rodriguez, Kingsmill, Flint, Gray & Chalos LLP, which specializes in labor cases (conducted, very "lawyer-like" answers, which is good for what it is, will get the color elsewhere)
Essentially, the story is written minus the quotes (unless, of course, someone tells me some revelation, which seems unlikely); it is the story of pro-business groups pushing to gut the law, and pro-worker groups pushing to keep it. Naturally, in NYC, it looks like the pro-business groups are going to win. I am actively pursuing the interviews and see no reason why they should not be forthcoming in the next week or two, right on schedule.
Highlight thus far: Elmendorf repeated a quote (almost verbatim, he must have his talking points memorized) I'd read elsewhere on the web: speaking of the Scaffold Law: the job-killing law places a financial burden on businesses in New York, driving up the cost of liability insurance and in some cases making it impossible to even secure liability coverage. By some estimates, it adds $10,000 to the cost of building a house in upstate New York.
Seems a little sensationalized, and that's why I'm looking into general liability insurance prices.
The video component of my article is almost finished save for some music I am making for the background and some final editing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)