Posted on 08/02/2016 7:35:46 AM PDT by Kaslin
Not sure how they got away with not anchoring such a large building to bedrock. They must have bribed some city officials.
The geologists who approved this project should be shot.
A simple bubble level could have proved them wrong. Even used as a plumb bob.
Of course, a laser...
——sunk 16 inches and shifted 2 inches to the northwest-—
When viewed from the Pacific ocean, it is left leaning
When the Bigg’un comes, the building will come toppling down.
By failing to stabilize their neighbors foundation, the Transit folks are in very expensive and big trouble
Check out the 4th (and 2nd) picture from the top on this site:
http://www.atlantatimemachine.com/downtown/c_and_s.htm
allowed what?
“I can’t believe a building inspector allowed this, especially in earthquake country.”
I’m $ure the $an Franci$co building in$pector$ were very thorough in their $ei$mic in$pection$ and that they dotted every “I” and cro$$ed every “T”.
The transit authority also said the high-rise is made of concrete rather than steel, “resulting in a very heavy building. This heavy structure rests on layers of soft, compressible soil. The foundation of the Tower, however, consists only of a concrete slab supported by short piles that fail to reach the bedrock below. That foundation is inadequate to prevent settlement of a building with the weight of the Tower.”
If it’s true they didn’t sink the piles into the bedrock, then it’s the builders’ fault.
Would depend on which side you view from. A sink of 16 inches should have condemned the structure without the 2 inche tilt! The residents better get the heck out while they can ... scramble Joe, SCRAMBLE! RUN dude!
Well, the building inspector would have only been able to inspect it during construction, and while the foudation was exposed - both could only be looked at BEFORE it began to lean.
The subsidence dropping down) of 16 inches is nasty: and means the foundation is terrible.
2 inch “lean” is not too much, but it will never get better, particularly since the 16 inch drop means the foundation itself is still moving and twisting under simple static loads. If an earthquake happens, that 2 inch may become dozens of inches, or complete collapse.
That would be true only if that was the contemporary building code requirement in 2008 during construction. If the builders built to code (and can prove it) and a neighboring construction causes damage to a prior-existing structure, the "a priori" assumption is that the new construction is at fault.
Who wins? I don't know but the lawyers will submit a lot of billable hours! If the civic transit construction loses, then probably the taxpayers of SanFran, then of the county, then the state and finally everyone who pays taxes in the country!
I believe it is too the builder’s fault.
“That would be true only if that was the contemporary building code requirement in 2008 during construction.”
Sorry, but it’s irresponsible to build a highrise or skyscraper that isn’t resting on bedrock, no matter what the building code says. The courts can play out the legal drama, but it’s the builders’ fault if their shoddy construction is shoddy.
Depends on where you are when looking at it :)
The FTA statement coincides with my thinking. The engineering firm was negligent. The footing/foundation contractor should have known better. The city should have known better if they bothered to look at the geological survey. Basic fuster-cluck all around. IMO
In this corner we have the private owner of a governmentally-approved and inspected foundation design.
Over in this corner we have a next door government project with very deep subterranean ambitions that could well be threatening that foundation.
You may think you have seen this one before but we guarantee new thrills and spills (oops).
.
expect lawsuits til the cows come home from the casino
Buildings of the size have to be anchored to bedrock.
I wonder what that means. Even if a building is "anchored to bedrock", if the bedrock is some distance below, perhaps the anchors/pilings are not always sufficient to support the entire weight of the building, especially if some of the intervening fill is displaced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.