Very fascinating.
- It is PEAB that built it. This should cost a penny — but I don't see any reservations or notes in their latest quarterly report. Since it is older than 10 years, everything should be statute-barred — but I saw in an article that they 'have had problems with cracks since we opened'. If you point out a defect, the statute limitation is broken.
- Ikea has knocked out many competitors and is very accessible in Uppsala. It creates a clear "shortage situation" in the whole city when the store is closed. Maybe not like all gas stations/grocery stores would close — but it's something like that anyway.
- It's no more dangerous to enter the store today than when it opened in 2009, someone said. Yet it has been closed due to safety.
I personally think it's easy to overlook the fact that something is tried and tested in these cases. You look at something and see that it wasn't done 'by-the-book' and therefore conclude that it's not safe. The reasoning is that there is no support for something that's not by-the-book to be safe.
At the same time, everyone knows that 'by-the-book' is not safe. We learn things all the time, and when we look at what has been by-the-book for the last 10 decades, there are quite a few question marks...
Here you have a result of a building that has stood for 15 years and has had problems with cracking. Still, it seems like there is fear that the whole structure will collapse in year 16. Where do you draw the line?
- Compare, for instance, with all the dilapidated football stadiums and hockey arenas around Europe. There is no current support for a stadium built in 1920 with multiple concrete floors not to collapse. But there, they entirely rely on the fact that it hasn't done so in 105 years.
- It is PEAB that built it. This should cost a penny — but I don't see any reservations or notes in their latest quarterly report. Since it is older than 10 years, everything should be statute-barred — but I saw in an article that they 'have had problems with cracks since we opened'. If you point out a defect, the statute limitation is broken.
- Ikea has knocked out many competitors and is very accessible in Uppsala. It creates a clear "shortage situation" in the whole city when the store is closed. Maybe not like all gas stations/grocery stores would close — but it's something like that anyway.
- It's no more dangerous to enter the store today than when it opened in 2009, someone said. Yet it has been closed due to safety.
I personally think it's easy to overlook the fact that something is tried and tested in these cases. You look at something and see that it wasn't done 'by-the-book' and therefore conclude that it's not safe. The reasoning is that there is no support for something that's not by-the-book to be safe.
At the same time, everyone knows that 'by-the-book' is not safe. We learn things all the time, and when we look at what has been by-the-book for the last 10 decades, there are quite a few question marks...
Here you have a result of a building that has stood for 15 years and has had problems with cracking. Still, it seems like there is fear that the whole structure will collapse in year 16. Where do you draw the line?
- Compare, for instance, with all the dilapidated football stadiums and hockey arenas around Europe. There is no current support for a stadium built in 1920 with multiple concrete floors not to collapse. But there, they entirely rely on the fact that it hasn't done so in 105 years.
Last edited:
Doesn't need to be, I know a consultant/inspector who was a supervisor at Karlatornet and was responsible for checking the reinforcement to ensure the builder followed the plans, but after three months he quit because the builders constantly cheated and simplified, so it became a mutual departure for him..returen said:
Serneke was managing the construction themselves..
Last edited:
It can hardly be completely free of reinforcement, then it should have collapsed a long time ago.
Absolutely not, where have I written that?H hempularen said:
Quote from post #9.useless said:
Just realized that my post could be perceived in connection with the post about Karlatornet. I was referring to IKEA, the store should have collapsed a long time ago if there is no reinforcement at all?
The review from UNT
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1DN8jU6xfw/
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1DN8jU6xfw/