Architects' lawyers argue they had no responsibility to protect public in demolition
The professional duty of an architect to protect the public was the focus of testimony Thursday as the civil trial in the deadly 2013 Center City building collapse continued before a Philadelphia jury.
The professional duty of an architect to protect the public was the focus of testimony Thursday as the civil trial in the deadly 2013 Center City building collapse continued before a Philadelphia jury.
The lawyer for Salvation Army architect Jack Higgins challenged the opinions of architect and expert witness Walter E. Green.
"So you're a nonworking architect who comes into court and criticizes the performance of working architects," said lawyer Daniel J. McCarthy.
"Based upon my 35 years as a working architect," replied Green, a consultant for Fleisher Forensics in Ambler.
Green was a witness for lawyers suing on behalf of the six people killed and 13 injured when an unbraced multistory wall at a demolition site fell and crushed a Salvation Army thrift store at 22nd and Market Streets.
Green criticized two architects being sued who played key roles in the weeks before the June 5, 2013, collapse: Higgins and Plato A. Marinakos Jr., who was hired by the owner of the building being razed to monitor demolition progress.
Green testified that Pennsylvania's licensing rules for architects and standards of professional conduct of the American Institute of Architects require architects to protect "life, health, and safety of the public."
Lawyers for Higgins and Marinakos, however, contend the responsibility for razing the building and protecting adjacent properties and the public rested solely on the demolition contractor.
In a daylong questioning by defense lawyers, Green argued that an architect has an ethical duty to let people know of a dangerous situation.
McCarthy, for example, asked why Higgins, an architect hired by the Salvation Army to evaluate its thrift store, had any responsibility for examining the demolition next door.
Green, voice wavering with apparent frustration, explained that the four-story Hoagie City building and one-story thrift store were attached.
"The thrift store was not existing in isolation," Green testified. "There was an ongoing adjacent demolition going on."
Higgins, of Kunkletown, Pa., was hired by the Salvation Army to research the Philadelphia building code to see what protections there were for the thrift store and to document the store's condition in photographs.
In testimony Friday, Higgins said he went to the site on May 20, 2013, spoke to the demolition contractor, and concluded no demolition was ongoing.
But in an email sent the following day to Salvation Army officials, Higgins wrote that demolition was occurring on the store's neighbor.
Higgins also noted that a protective shell had not been installed over the thrift store's roof and no sidewalk covers were in place to protect pedestrians - both required by the Philadelphia city code.
At that time, the Salvation Army and the owner of the vacant four-story building - New York real estate speculator Richard Basciano and his STB Investments Corp. - were at odds about whether demolition workers should get access to the thrift store roof.
Both sides had hired lawyers and, according to trial testimony, the Salvation Army believed no demolition would happen until they resolved the roof-access issue.
Given an STB warning of "imminent collapse" that Higgins was given by the Salvation Army, Green said, Higgins should have asked to consult a structural engineer and monitored the demolition every day.
Green also criticized Marinakos, citing testimony that Marinakos recommended to STB property manager Thomas Simmonds that they resolve the roof-access impasse by leaving intact the Salvation Army chimney, which climbed three stories and was attached to the wall of the taller Hoagie City building. Marinakos said they should demolish Hoagie City, leave the chimney standing, and report the Salvation Army to the city Department of Licenses & Inspections for creating a dangerous situation.
"Here is a design professional who is advocating the solution to a problem by creating a hazardous condition," Green said. "It's totally unconscionable."
215-854-2985 @joeslobo