The $100M project to fix SF's leaning Millennium Tower stopped as high-rise keeps tilting and sinkin

[Right_in_Virginia]

The $100M project to fix SF's leaning Millennium Tower stopped as high-rise keeps tilting and sinking
USA Today, Sep 3, 2021

The $100 million construction project to halt the sinking and tilting of a downtown San Francisco luxury skyscraper has been suspended as the high-rise continues to sink and tilt.

Work had begun in May to drill down hundreds of feet to stabilize the 58-story Millennium Tower. But engineers suspended the operation last week to assess why the building had sunk another inch during construction, NBC Bay Area News reported.

The tower, which opened in 2009, had been tilting slightly more than 17 inches at the top at the time work began and sinking had slowed. But by mid-August, the building's foundation had sunk another inch since the upgrade work had started and the tilting had increased 5 inches, NBC Bay Area News reported.

Work is on hold for two to four weeks as builders and engineers attempt to understand the "increased settlement rate and available means of mitigating this," Millennium Tower Association spokesman Doug Elmets said in a statement.


More:  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/03/millennium-tower-san-francisco-keeps-sinking-repair-project-halted/5716514001/

[Right_in_Virginia]

Apparently the footings were supposed to anchor to bedrock ---- which is 250 feet below the surface.  They weren't,  so the building sinks in unstable soil.

They'll probably  have to bring down this building.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Poor construction in an earthquake-prone area=disaster.

I do hope money from other states is not used to correct a debacle caused by  California.

[GtHawk]

Poor construction in an earthquake-prone area=disaster.

I do hope money from other states is not used to correct a debacle caused by  California.

First this wasn't 'caused' by California, it was a debacle caused by a developer, architect, engineers and inspectors for SanFranshitco. Secondly pretty darn sure that California taxpayers contributed to the Fed that sends money to repair debacles in other states. But I really don't see the Fed having any responsibility to bail this developer out...unless of course he is a well connected democrat contributor then Queen Nancy will see he is covered from the money she is already stealing from taxpayers in every state including California.

[Right_in_Virginia]

First this wasn't 'caused' by California, it was a debacle caused by a developer, architect, engineers and inspectors for SanFranshitco. Secondly pretty darn sure that California taxpayers contributed to the Fed that sends money to repair debacles in other states. But I really don't see the Fed having any responsibility to bail this developer out...unless of course he is a well connected democrat contributor then Queen Nancy will see he is covered from the money she is already stealing from taxpayers in every state including California.

The architechts can be scratched off this list of screw-ups .... they got it right.  They were ignored.

[Fishrrman]

RinVa predicts:
"They'll probably  have to bring down this building."

As I read into the story, that was how I was going to reply, but you beat me to it!

But WILL they have the nerve and the will to order it torn down?
My guess is... no.

In which case, I'm thinking that no matter what they attempt to do to "stabilize" it, it's going to keep sinking and tilting until... it finally topples over.

THAT's going to be a big news story!

[PeteS in CA]

Before the Gold Rush the land area of San Francisco was significantly smaller than it is now. As SF grew, starting in the Gold Rush years, land was created along some of the shores, to accommodate the growing population. I did some DDGing around a few years ago and found maps that suggested to me that the location of the Millennium Tower is right around what once was the shore. IOW, it's either over the former "beach" or on made-land. IOW, not the most stable land, and possibly spanning a boundary between two areas of differing stability.

As @GtHawk said, this was an SF-caused problem, not a California-caused problem (though all California taxpayers may pay part/much of the costs of SF's F-Up).

[DB]

And what do they think will happen in an earthquake and liquefication of the soil underneath it?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

First this wasn't 'caused' by California, it was a debacle caused by a developer, architect, engineers and inspectors for SanFranshitco. Secondly pretty darn sure that California taxpayers contributed to the Fed that sends money to repair debacles in other states. But I really don't see the Fed having any responsibility to bail this developer out...unless of course he is a well connected democrat contributor then Queen Nancy will see he is covered from the money she is already stealing from taxpayers in every state including California.

A non-sequitur.

That argues doing something wrong because everyone else is doing it.

The building is full of expensive penthouses and apartments.  Let them pay for it.

[Wingnut]

Maybe they should look to the Champlain Towers South for how this will end for SF.

[GtHawk]

And what do they think will happen in an earthquake and liquefication of the soil underneath it?

They are probably thinking that :
A. The tower will level out
B. there will be a number of new basement levels and fewer above ground.
At least that's my take considering the people involved