Pictures of The Grove apartments in Denton, TX show a (very) few holes where the balcony was anchored into the wall in some way. It appears that the balcony had no supportive ledger board. Or if there was one, it does not appear that it was attached in any way to the apartment wall. It is clear from the number and positioning of the holes that the balcony could not have supported much weight.
News reports of the Denton balcony collapse quote a spokesperson who emphasizes that the balconies and their railings were purely "decorative" structures attached to the building merely for aesthetic reasons. The spokesperson specifically states that the balconies were not designed to bear weight. It sounds like The Grove apartments in Denton, TX and their owner, Campus Crest, try to use this as a "defense" against the balcony collapse. But as a defense, it just doesn't seem to hold up (much like the balcony).
Could Campus Crest be facing legal fallout from the balcony collapse?
It's just plain negligent to deliberately attach non-weight bearing balconies to an apartment (especially on the 3rd floor, directly above a hard concrete surface) and then create fully functional doors that residents can use to go out upon that balcony. The Grove apartments' spokesperson says the balcony was never intended to bear the weight of the adults who were on it that night it collapsed. Yet the complex had constructed doors that open right out onto those balconies and that seem to invite you to step out upon these non-weight bearing balconies. Did the complex tell the students that it was dangerous to use their balconies and that these balconies weren't designed to bear weight--that they must only look, and not touch them? (Probably not.)
We have been scrutinizing Ted Rollins and his legal/business practices for some time. Looks like others are going to join that effort.
1 | 2