Re: Not the developer's fault.
"So I need to be absolutely clear here: The building's design, including foundation, and the surveying done ahead of time to ensure it would be sufficient, was done to textbook. There were no flaws. The flaw here, is that something was built right next to it right after it went up -- before it had a chance to settle naturally and compact the foundation evenly. All buildings settle, even skyscrapers. There are models to predict how much and how long it will take (Typically, it takes about 20 years before it becomes insignificant)."
Based on what?
1) If you read the articles it clearly states that there was no comprehensive design review done because the developers refused to do one and the planning department didn't think they could for the to.
2) This building is uniquely heavy given its small footprint and the decision to use concrete instead of steel (equivalent to a 150 story steel building).
3) It had sunk almost 12" before Transbay started construction, 50% more than the lifetime projected amount the developer's engineers had predicted.
4) It's tilting AWAY from the Transbay construction, the developer is attempting to argue that the de-watering is causing it to tilt in the opposite direction WTF?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
