Construction of San Francisco Transit Center causes 58 story high rise next door to start leaning.

Real nice. This is something you expect in a third world country NOT the United States. I thought the SFO high rise codes was they were to sink piers to the bedrock (or am I thinking Manhattan?), if so, how can this happen?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/08/01/swanky-san-francisco-high-rise-sinking-tilting.html

It happened in Chicago in 1942. The steeple of Holy Name Cathedral acquired a slight but visible lean to the southwest at the time the State Street subway was bored in 1942.

Some one has a lot of explaining to do unless they have already left the country .

Correct this if wrong but did the worse damage during the 1906 earthquake occurr to building built on fill and sediment and not anchored to bed rock ?

Wonder if the dewatering for the transbay terminal caused the pad to sag ?

Another question is how deep is the lowest basement and how does that compare to the Terminal ? Is the high rise’s total weight more or less than excavated soil ?b

When did construction on the terminal begin? Is there any record of how much the building has sunk each year since its construction?

In a response, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority said Monday that residents’ claims against the TJPA are “misplaced; as demonstrated by data collected over more than seven years,” adding that “full responsibility for the tilting and excessive settlement of the building lies with Millennium Partners, the developer of the Tower.” 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.” That is 99% the more likely culprit, aka cheap corner cutting developer. if the vibrations from the ground work on the Metro center has does this guess what w moderate earthquake will do? yep, possibly topple the whole thing due to liquifaction under the too-short piles. I’m in the building business, you do not build something this big and heavy unless you sink piles into bedrock, especially in a city so prone to earthquakes.

That, and the S.F. Planning Commission voting 4-1 to approve the deficient design. The sfgate article has a map showing a trace of the former shoreline. Excavations in this area occasionally uncover old ships.

The lawyers have got to be salivating by the bucket full! A good, and rich, time will be had by all. Popcorn, popcorn.

Gee - building into what had been the Bay. Who would ever have thought the land would be unstable. [/sarcasm]/

I’d have to guess that currently, the Planning Commision and the Engineering Company are hunkered down in a Defensive Position and exercising their best " Sgt. Shultz Defense" [I Know Nothing!] [:-^]

The Planning Commission vote would have been in reference to the land use for the building, not the technical design and construction techiques. They have no liability unless they went around some policy they had in place prohibiting such a large building in an old fill area.

On the other hand, the SF building standards department (whatever its properly called), along with the design and construction engineers probably should have their checkbooks out.

Here is an article with a picture of what happens to buildings when an earthquake causes liquefaction of saturated soils, like what the towers were built on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_liquefaction

SF also had these type of problems in the 1989 earthquake.

Nope, no department other than the S.F. Planning Commision would have approved the design, it’s just the way thing work out here and it keeps the process simpler for developers, however it does make it harder for those on the Planning Commision as they have to perform two jobs instead of just one.

Some questions for inquiry probably others as well.

  1. How is a 2 inch lean measured ? Surface to top of building ?

  2. According to the articles and map the lean is away from the Transbay terminal ?

  3. Maybe the terminal buttress did its job too well ?

  4. Did the seller’s disclosure document to buyers note that total anticipated sinking would be just 10 inches but as of now over 16 inches ? What was the sinking rate disclosed to buyers ??

  5. Did disclosure document state building on pilings that were not sunk to bedrock ?

  6. Did disclosure state building would / is heavier than normal steel buildings of same height ?

  7. Did disclosure state building is in a potential liquidfaction zone and did the area liquify in the 1906, 1989 quakes ?.

According to this news on MSN, the builders had predicted that the building would sink six inches in its lifetime, but it had already sunk ten inches when work started on the transit center in 2010.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/contractors-luxurious-new-san-francisco-high-rise-is-sinking-tilting/ar-BBv96fF?li=BBnb7Kz

San Franciscans are perhaps the most clever and creative people I’ve ever met. It can’t be long before we hear the promotion of a new tourist attraction, “The Leaning Tower of San Francisco.” “First there was Coit Tower, now there’s the Leaning Tower of San Francisco!”

Perhaps some engineers will think BIG and build a flying buttress or two across Mission Street to keep the building from leaning some more. Such a buttress might have to be 20 or more stories high! Just imagine!

A new skyscraper that sinks and leans. Aren’t you glad you don’t have to pay the mortgage on this building?

We supposedly love accountability in America, but apparently not for highly paid professionals. I bet no one is ever named, shamed, fined, or de-licensed, let alone jailed for this example of massive professional ineptitude or malfeasance.

Poor people really are held to a totally different standard of justice.

The Old Terminal was a classic in a town that has no sence of history-

https://www.google.com/search?q=transbay+terminal&safe=strict&rlz=1C1KMZB_enUS704US704&espv=2&biw=1600&bih=752&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi5mLKVsKbOAhWDSyYKHbvCDNIQ_AUICCgD&dpr=1#imgrc=iemeViGQaWteRM%3A

Assuming these figures are correct:

When the building was built in 2008, the builders predicted it would sink six inches in its lifetime.

When work began on the transit center in 2010 (2 years later) it had sunk ten inches. (Maybe its lifetime was about one year.)

Now it is 16 inches lower. It sank ten inches the first two years then six inches in the last six years.

I’m wondering if they breathed a sigh of relief when work started on the transit center, and there was someone to blame.

Did the sinking slow down because of ground compression,or did the transit center work slow it down? [:-^]

Now what happens ?

  1. Unit values probably are going to drop like a rock ?

  2. Is this like many condo agreements that the owners will have to pay for repairs ?

  3. What can the repairs be ? Pump in grout ? Sink cassions thru basement pad to bed rock ? Would like other ideas ?

  4. Wonder if building developer disclosed to Transbay that building had sunk 10 " ? If they did not will it be very hard to hold Transbay at fault ?

  5. Did Transbay general contractor determine what if any sinking of the building had occurred ?

Number 6 . E Bay stores selling wooden furniture shims will do well

Randy,

Building is kind of heavy, so probably need oak wedges like the wrecker carries, or did back in the day.

Mac