By: David A. Smith

[Editor’s note: As the memory of Haiti ‘s devastating earthquake fades, we are able to see that much of the tragedy was preventable – not the quake itself, but the toll in human lives. And we can therefore see this cautionary tale from Shanghai as not merely comic but tragicomic. – Ed.]

A building at the Lotus Riverside complex in Shanghai ’s Minhang district collapsed, nearly intact, on Saturday morning (Imaginechina via AP Images)



To be stable, how far down must a building go? As seen dramatically in this story from last June in The Wall Street Journal’s China Reality Report, that depends partly on what happens to the ground on either side of it.

In the weekend’s more bizarre news, a nearly finished, newly constructed building in Shanghai toppled over, killing one worker.

Fortunately, no one else, as the building was unoccupied.

As can be seen in the photo below, the 13-story apartment building collapsed with just enough room to escape what would have been a far more destructive domino effect involving other structures in the 11-building complex.

Good thing the adjacent lot was vacant – or was it a good thing at all?

The development, known as “Lotus Riverside,” has a total of 629 units, 489 of which have already been sold. Now buyers are clamoring to get their money back, and authorities are making efforts to reassure them.

That’s hardly reassuring

Although the Lotus Riverside property was somewhat more substantial than Monty Python’s Mystico Towers , which stood so long as its inhabitants believed in it, the developer’s credibility has now vanished as if disappeared by El Mystico himself.

I can make your credibility … disappear!

The assets of the project’s developer, Shanghai Meidu Property Development Co., have been frozen and the city officials said the developer’s ability to repay homebuyers was secure, according to a statement on the municipal government’s Web site (in Chinese).

Oh really? I hope they have really good insurance.

A hotline has been set up for Lotus Riverside buyers, and by Sunday afternoon, more than half of them had met with a group of lawyers and officials organized to help them negotiate with the developer, according to the statement.

‘Negotiate with a developer’ is an ominous phrase. What’s to negotiate?

Defense of property rights is an intrinsic function of government. If government’s doesn’t defend my property rights – against fire, against robbery, against vandalism, and against shoddy or fraudulent construction – then what is it for? What are building permits for?

What are taxes for, if not to provide services on which consumers can rely?

Property rights are Tocquevillean – that is, they promote the development, strengthening, and integrity of civil and democratic institutions – because (a) their defense requires an equitable and honorable government, and (b) they are expected by demanding middle-class customers. The clamor for restitution is a promising sign; so is its focus on the city government.

Meanwhile, the cause of the accident is under investigation and nine unidentified people from the developer, contractor and management company have been detained.

Have they fallen over too?

A representative of Shanghai Meidu could not be reached for comment.

There’s nobody here!

Particularly as the building which toppled appears to be no different from the adjacent buildings, whose apartments I presume have already been sold and are now being occupied. Wouldn’t you want out of a condominium with some zero of falling over?

According to Shanghai Daily, initial investigations attribute the accident to the excavations for the construction of a garage under [They have to mean adjacent to and lower-grade than – Ed.] the collapsed building.

An underground garage was being dug on the south side, to a depth of 4.6 meters





It takes some never to decide to build a major subsurface garage after you’ve already put up a multi-story tower, for anyone with a fourth-grade knowledge of construction knows that vertical force translates into horizontal force when it is not properly and symmetrically buttressed. That’s the sole purpose of buttresses and flying buttresses – to deflect lateral force and brace against it squeezing the cathedral walls out, collapsing the roof.

A decade or so ago, when Boston was excavating up and down the Central Artery in the Big Dig, those with property abutting the excavation areas demanded – and got – comprehensive and well collateralized indemnities against the possibility their building would shear, subside, or crack in consequence.

The excavated dirt was being piled up on the north side, to a height of 10 meters





Large quantities of earth were removed and dumped in a landfill next to a nearby creek; the weight of the earth caused the river bank to collapse, which, in turn, allowed water to seep into the ground, creating a muddy foundation for the building that toppled.

Any real estate person knows that water is property’s greatest enemy . Aside from roof and building-envelope leaks , it rearranges the land, shifting buildings on their buildings.

The building experienced uneven lateral pressure from south and north





(I still remember a UDC affordable housing property in upstate New York that had an Edward Durrell Stone design – Howard Roark designing for the masses – that might have been fine on level ground, but was a catastrophe on a hillside. Heavy snow plus melting plus grade meant that over a very few years, the buildings began glaciating off their pads, costing millions to fix. You’d think somebody would have connected the dots.)

This resulted in a lateral pressure of 3,000 tons, which was greater than what the pilings could tolerate.

You absolutely cannot have a massive load-bearing structure that you then undermine on one side and overpress on another – the shear forces will be massive, and unrelenting.

As a result, the building fell over.

The South China Morning Post noted that the pilings used in the Lotus Riverside development, made of pre-stressed, precast concrete piles, are outlawed in Hong Kong because they aren’t strong enough to support the kind of ultra-high buildings that are common in Hong Kong .

And concrete, though immensely strong against compression, is immensely brittle. The pilings appear to have had no steel reinforcing, as would be mandatory in a US development – or, for that matter, in Hong Kong , which – returning to our Tocquevillean theme – has a much sterong orientation to consumer protection.

Looking like nothing so mulch as rotted piers, all snapped off at the same place.

In mainland China , they are often used because buildings there are typically much shorter (subscription required).

Also because mainland China is still the land of the quick-buck real estate developer.

Not a developer in sight

The disaster could reveal some uncomfortable facts about lax construction practices in China , where buildings are put up in a hurry by largely unskilled migrant workers, and developers may be tempted to take shortcuts.

Oh, you think?

Holes where rebar should be

In the US, as in most developed nations, buildings will have a design architect – with professional liability insurance to cover just such design omissions as this – and then a supervisory architect, independent of the contractor, who makes sure that what is build conforms to the plans and specifications, and that there are no substitutions of cheaper/ inferior materials. All those checks on developer short-term profit-taking appear absent in the Lotus Riverside.

The air costs nothing – and supports nothing

Quality problems have long plagued construction in China , though they seem to be more apparent in rural areas and smaller cities, not in major metropolises such as Shanghai and Beijing .

When school buildings were flattened by last year’s massive Sichuan earthquake, a number of parents faulted shoddy construction for creating “tofu buildings” that fell while other nearby structures were able to withstand the impact of the quake.

Disaster vulnerability reduction is thus not just an exercise in consumer protection, it’s also national risk mitigation.

This couldn’t happen in San Francisco

We may grumble about earthquake reinforcement, or high-rise sprinkler systems, or lead-based paint/ asbestos removal – but each time these features are added to the building codes, we incrementally de-risk our cities, and that strengthens society.

More recently, state media reported that several new dams along the Yellow River are in danger of collapse, a situation attributed to:

Shoddy construction practices

Embezzlement and

Unqualified workers.

A winning trio!

We’d have been in fat city except for you unqualified worker!