2. Case Objective
Each tiny step is significant in a building project, the construction supervisor needs
to perform his duties honestly, have a moral responsibility, and take care to avoid risking
the lives of others.
3. Case study
• This event occurred in 2004 in Texas City, where a newly completed mansion known as
the central Texas lakeside residence was located.
• The event began when two guests decided to stroll onto the third-floor balcony, which
was around 20 feet above the ground, to enjoy the view of Ink Lake, when the balcony
abruptly collapsed, causing significant injuries to these two visitors.
• The architect should not pay the contractor until the materials and quality of work were completed and
checked.
• There was a contract between the contractor and the architect, and it was their ethical responsibility to check
the work quality, and this error was not supposed to happen. So now we have a case and an argument about
who is at fault because there was no contract between them and the contractor.
4. Ethical issues
• The contractor ignored the design requirements.
• The site investigation was not carried out by the contractor or the designer.
• When attaching the ledger boards to the building, the contractor favored using less
expensive materials.
5. Suggested solutions and learned lessons
• Perform the necessary inspections that would have alerted him to the problems and allowed
for repairs to be made.
• Joists that pierce the structure would be one option for increasing safety and strength, since
they would provide the necessary moment capacity at the wall to enable the joists to be
installed.
• Before opening the balcony to the public, it must undergo rigorous testing, including the
application of a load.
• One option would have been for the architect to perform the necessary inspections that would
have alerted him to the problems and allowed for repairs to be made.
• Joists that pierce the structure would be one option for increasing safety and strength, since
they would provide the necessary moment capacity at the wall to enable the joists to be
installed.
• Before opening the balcony to the public, it must undergo rigorous testing, including the
application of a load.
6. Facts
• Even the original design was unable to be safe since it was built on a relatively modest live load, which
would have caused even the bolts to fail without the installation of joist hangers that penetrated the structure
and provided more strength for the cantilevers beam.
• The design have been checked by the framing contractor.
• The designer should inspect the quality of the job before paying.
• To ensure that the construction is reliable and safe, certain tests have to be conducted.
7. Consequences
• Two accidental victims nearly died.
• The contracting business was responsible for covering any site-related losses.
• All site losses incurred have to be covered by the contracting business.
8. Issues Faced
Factual issues:
If the nuts were utilized, will the balcony stay alive?
Conceptual issue:
• what is the meaning of the word SAFE?.
Application issue:
If an accurate description of safety was provided to the designer and the contractor, was
the balcony safe?
9. Moral issues:
• The architect failed to conduct a quality assessment, which resulted in the balcony
being inadequately maintained by the nails used.
• The contractor did not follow the specifications when performing his job.
10. Ethical approach
Utilitarian Approach
In the interest of the safety of society, the architect and contractor need to have a proper
conversation before reconsidering the agreement. To verify the caliber of the supplies
and craftsmanship employed, he can evaluate the contractor's decision to fire him.
Without his assurance, the balcony's durability and safety might not be assured.
11. Respect for person approach
It is the responsibility of both the architect and contractor to take, respect for people
when doing their work, as we can see that both disrespected the safety of the people
and their needs.
12. Did the characters respect ethical principles?
There was no compliance between the architect and contractor with ASCE's ethical first
canons, state:
“When carrying out their professional responsibilities, engineers must put the safety,
health, and welfare of the general public first and work to adhere to the principles of
sustainable development.”
Code of ethics
According to the ASCE ethical code, which forces the engineer to follow the third canon, they
failed to do so.
"Engineers must only make public statements in an accurate and fair manner."
This event occurred in 2004 in Texas City, where a newly completed mansion known as the central Texas lakeside residence was located. The event began when two guests decided to stroll onto the third-floor balcony, which was around 20 feet above the ground, to enjoy the view of Ink Lake, when the balcony abruptly collapsed, causing significant injuries to these two visitors. This balcony was a cantilever balcony that was fastened to the structure with a ledger board and nails rather than bolts as described in the architectural blueprints.
The contract said that the architect should not pay the contractor until the materials and quality of work were completed in accordance with the contract, and it did not require the architect to conduct regular site inspections. So now we have a case and an argument about who is at fault because there was a contract between the contractor and the architect, and it was who's ethical responsibility to check the work quality, and this error was not supposed to happen if any reasonable engineer simply did a routine inspection of the work.
One option would have been for the architect to perform the necessary inspections that would have alerted him to the problems and allowed for repairs to be made. The architect may have demanded that the contractor explain why he was using nails instead of bolts, or the contractor could have simply followed the directions and requirements as written in the blueprints. Joists that pierce the structure would be one option for increasing safety and strength, since they would provide the necessary moment capacity at the wall to enable the joists to be installed. Before opening the balcony to the public, it must undergo rigorous testing, including the application of a load.
Two lives were in jeopardy because the architect and the contractor failed to do their jobs properly; the architect didn't check the quality of the work, and the contractor didn't follow the instructions in the plans he was given. This case taught us the importance of being trustworthy in our professional endeavors. They also disregarded the first ASCE code of ethics, which states that engineers must prioritize public safety and that engineers should always conduct their jobs properly. The importance of performing thorough site inspections before submitting a project to the owner is another key takeaway. These inspections ensure that the work is safe, and they also verify that the beams, columns, and other structural elements can withstand the anticipated loads, weather, and other challenges.
