Tragic fire in Sea Point: One man dead after blaze

fires are never rare, the reaction and firefighting equipment needs to be up to scratch,
or as usual building codes are bent freely when an area is so expensive and generates so much in revenue
 
Grant said:
fire started around 3.30pm

web.facebook.com

82K views · 546 reactions | 🟡Firefighters remain on scene battling a blaze at an apartment building (The Dorchester) on High Level Road, Sea Point. Crews were alerted to the fire at around 3:30pm and firefighters from several stations, supported by t

🟡Firefighters remain on scene battling a blaze at an apartment building (The Dorchester) on High Level Road, Sea Point. Crews were alerted to the fire at around 3:30pm and firefighters from several...
web.facebook.com web.facebook.com
Click to expand...
EMAM said:
And it's apparently still burning
Click to expand...
Have they managed to put the fire out now?!!
Grant said:
fire flared up again early morning.
top floor is gutter - remainder of the building "unsalvageable" - severe structural damage

View attachment 1926119
Click to expand...
Why is the building structurally unsalvageable?
The fire has only affected the upper floor?
 
Last edited:
Sheish. Used to date a girl that lived there and spent many a night in one of those apartments.
 
Jet-Fighter7700 said:
surprised those apartments dont have a sprinkler system installed
considering the high cost of living there, Id imagine they have thought of these things ahead of time.
Click to expand...

Sprinklers are expensive to fit and maintain, particularly in older buildings. I have never seen them in residential apartments, more in shops, offices and parking garages. They are actually better at saving lives, by permitting safe evacuation, than actually extinguishing fires. Spraying water everywhere actually causes enormous damage, not something I would trust to have automated in an old building.
 
airborne said:
Why is the building structurally unsalvageable?
Click to expand...
rebar issues within reinforced concrete - building has lost structural integrity
airborne said:
Has the fire only affected the upper floor?
Click to expand...
top floor is gutted, rest of building now considered unsafe (structurally) - extensive smoke and water damage, electrical & water reticulation systems are wrecked
 
Grant said:
rebar issues within reinforced concrete - building has lost structural integrity

top floor is gutted, rest of building now considered unsafe (structurally) - extensive smoke and water damage, electrical & water reticulation systems are wrecked
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean that the building is going to fall down tomorrow. It does mean that the habitabilty of the building cannot be guaranteed, and is unsafe until proven otherwise. Determining the residual strength of reinforced concrete (by drilling core samples) is prohibitively expensive, and this type building is probably not be economical to repair. Concrete is relatively fire resistant, but high temperatures for many hours will cause hidden and irreversible damage.
 
News reports that the victim was a man in his 90s. Not clear if he was living alone, but mobility at that age is limited:
novanews.co.za

Sea Point apartment fire claims elderly man's life

An elderly man died after a fire tore through a Sea Point apartment block. Firefighters battled the blaze overnight as police investigate.
novanews.co.za novanews.co.za
 
Grant said:
rebar issues within reinforced concrete - building has lost structural integrity

top floor is gutted, rest of building now considered unsafe (structurally) - extensive smoke and water damage, electrical & water reticulation systems are wrecked
Click to expand...
I suppose still to be determined but the developers going apesht all over Sea Point must be rubbing their greedy little hands gleefully hoping it comes on the market.
 
airborne said:
I suppose still to be determined but the developers going apesht all over Sea Point must be rubbing their greedy little hands gleefully hoping it comes on the market.
Click to expand...

It's not that simple, a heritage building (over 60 years old) cannot simply be demolished and replaced with something else. There is a 100 year old house near me (part of an old age home) that suffered a fire two years ago. Not a single brick has been rebuilt during that period, as the whole process is tied up in red tape. If the floors were yellowwood, then it has to be rebuilt using equivalent materials. Yellowwood trees are a protected species, and you can't find fresh timber.

Edit: I hope their insurance covers this eventuality. Cover limits should exceed the value of constructing a new building, because of complex demolition procedures like this, and the need to find alternative accommodation at short notice.

Google summary:
If a heritage building burns down in South Africa, it is strictly protected by the National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999. This means you cannot simply demolish the remains or rebuild a modern structure; you must navigate a strict legal, environmental, and restoration process.

1. Mandatory Post-Fire Site Protection
Site Freeze: The site is immediately cordoned off. It is an offense to disturb, clear, or alter any part of the site without written permission from the relevant authority.
Assessments: Structural engineers and heritage architects appointed by the owner must conduct a damage assessment to determine what original fabric, walls, or materials are salvageable.

2. Legal Requirements to Restore or Rebuild
Permits Required: Because the remains (and any structure older than 60 years) are protected, the owner must obtain a special permit from the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) or the relevant Provincial Heritage Resources Authority to do any work, including clearing debris.
Reinstatement: Heritage authorities heavily prioritize the preservation of the building's original design, spatial integrity, and traditional materials. Reconstruction often requires sourcing period-appropriate materials and matching historical proportions, making it significantly more expensive and time-consuming than standard reconstruction.

3. Investigation and Accountability
Cause Investigation: The police (SAPS) and fire departments investigate the cause of the fire.
Liability: If the fire was caused by the owner's negligence (e.g., lack of maintenance or failure to meet fire regulations like SANS 10400-T), they can face massive insurance claim denials or criminal charges for violating heritage and safety laws. If the fire is deemed arson, perpetrators face additional charges for damaging national heritage.

4. Exceptions for Total Destruction
If a building is completely destroyed beyond any possibility of physical reconstruction or the salvage of original elements, authorities may eventually declare that the heritage value has been lost. However, even in cases of complete demolition, you cannot build whatever you want. The site will still be subject to zoning laws, and a modern replacement structure often requires public participation and approval from local heritage councils to ensure it fits the character of the surrounding area.
Click to expand...
 
wingnut771 said:
What do the police know about investigating fires?
Click to expand...

Is that a rhetorical question?

According to their website they do, though it falls very far down their priority list:
FIRE AND EXPLOSION INVESTIGATIONS (ARSON AND EXPLOSIONS)
This component assists in the investigation of explosions by:

Analysing exhibit material after an explosion to determine what type of explosive was used.
Rendering technical assistance to the Bomb Disposal Unit in evaluating home-built explosive devices and explosives.
In the event of suspected arson expert assistance is rendered by;

Attending fire scenes and performing a detailed physical appraisal of the scene.
Analysing exhibit material for traces of liquid fire accelerate (e.g. petrol, paraffin). Issuing a detailed report based on the physical and chemical investigation unto the fire ion.
Click to expand...
 
wingnut771 said:
Maybe I'm used to watching Chicago Fire where the fire department investigates fires.
Click to expand...

Both the SAPS and local authorities have overlapping responsibilities to investigate fires. Assigning blame, and charging arson cases, is a whole different legal question:
Municipal firefighters and specialised municipal fire safety officers secure the scene, extinguish the flames, and conduct initial "origin and cause" assessments to figure out how and where a fire started. Larger metros (like the City of Cape Town) sometimes deploy specialised forensic or safety units to look into the physical dynamics of complex or suspicious fires. However, their mandate is technical, public safety, and operational.

South African Police Service (SAPS): As the national law enforcement agency, SAPS (along with specialised divisions like the Local Criminal Record Centre or the Hawks for high-profile state cases) holds the legal mandate to investigate arson as a criminal offence. They collect evidence of foul play, interview suspects, take witness statements, and bring charges against perpetrators.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X