The Nightmare of San Francisco’s Sinking Tower, Explained

[@architecture_tv]

Hi everyone! If you'd like to work with me 1 on 1, you can now apply to my coaching program www.ashleyeusebio.com/work-with-me.

[@cayrick]

THIS IS HOW THE MILLENNIUM TOWER HAPPENED In mid-2004, the Department of Building Inspection took the extraordinary step of ordering construction halted on a 52-story project at 80 Natoma St. because the building would be unstable with the as planned foundation on the clay and sand soil of South of Market. The then head of the building inspection department, Frank Y. Chiu, said in a legal declaration in October 2004 that he ordered a work stoppage in light of their experts’ warnings that the 80 Natoma St. project would sink far more than the geotechnical designers estimated. At this point in time, The Millennium Tower is still on the drawing board and has the exact same foundation designed by the exact same geotechnical firm - Treadwell and Rollo - that designed the much much lighter 80 Natoma St. project that was just shut down by the Department of Building Inspection for having an inadequate foundation. Treadwell and Rollo are now undeniably aware that their foundation as planned for the Millennium Tower is inadequate and that it will be rejected by the Department of Building Inspection so they simply did not submit it for review and let construction begin. It is of record and is undeniable. This is what happened and it can be easily fact-checked by anybody, everything else that is being thrown around including the kitchen sink is I suspect an intentional distraction from what is a simple truth

[@advancetotabletop5328]

Thanks. Scratching my head why they were allowed *not* to submit the plans for review.

[@marksample6230]

Saved me 15 min.

[@stevenelson3515]

@@advancetotabletop5328It becomes incredibly clear when you understand that Department of Building Inspections is, in a city rife with corruption, the worst of the bunch. Grease the right palms, and it’s a breeze to get inadequate or non-existent plans to get through.

[@billhopen]

you mean you can "just begin building it" without a engineering reveiw?!?!? sounds pretty third world

[@cayrick]

@@billhopen Going to bedrock is an expensive proposiition. If you can convince city bureaucrats that do the permitting that your structure can be supported with shorter (cheaper) friction piles, you can go bigger and higher and if your assumptions are wrong, you have exited the project, closed your corporation and moved onto other ventures with a new financiial sturcture, leaving the buyers holding the bag.

[@sittingindetroit9204]

If I recall, 50-60 years ago in Boston they were “dewatering” a construction site for a new building. This resulted in the cathedral next door leaning after being there for 100s of years

[@standarddeviation6428]

I'm just sad that 'regular' developers in SF can't get permission to build anything practical or economical. But if you're building a skyscraper that brings in a ton of tax revenue, you can cut corners on the FOUNDATION and get away with it. Shameful!

[@patrickvillers6454]

The fact that San San Francisco is prone to earthquakes and now they have this Neo leaning tower of Pisa and all of the other skyscrapers in a row like dominos concerns me.

[@michaelodonnell8209]

Ignoring the huge safety concerns, imagine how embarrassed those wealthy people are to utter, "I live in the Millennium Tower." This is an engineering nightmare, and a lawyer's dream come true.

[@NineInchTyrone]

Lawyers will feast for years

[@Yahoo886]

Even the homeless in SF wont build encampments around Millennium Tower.

[@idog6859]

are u trying to deperately be funny

[@MrGaryg20047]

You forgot to mention about the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 and quite a few homes especially in the Marina District sunk and destroyed because the structures were built on top of mudflats which causes liquefaction, and the owners still rebuilt in that area again and these greedy developers still want to put a heavy condo building on top of landfill.

[@catsupchutney]

The owners must have been ecstatic to learn they could blame the nearby transportation hub.

[@chunksloth]

Imagine hiring a guy named "Ronald Hamburger" to design your skyscraper. 😂😂😂😂

[@Just_Johnnie]

I wonder what would have happened to a tall building during a strong earthquake when it is standing on water logged soil?

[@jaewok5G]

probably nothing … it'll be fine.

[@billmancini7619]

It’s called liquefaction...disasterous

[@michaeld5888]

@@jaewok5G If they were unable to predict how much this tower would start to tilt in static circumstances and repair attempts how on Earth would they know about the results from the entirely unpredictable movements of unknown intensity in an Earthquake.

[@hypsyzygy506]

Vibrating waterlogged soil tends to make it behave like quicksand. Not ideal for anything sitting on it.

[@zackantonio9253]

I imagine that once the soil liquefies the building will implode. Supports are into bedrock on one side and an opposing corner, leaving the middle supported on old bay mud. Hopefully it only takes itself out and doesn't have too much collateral damage.

[@FeelnLikeIDoEveryDay]

It is absolutely insane that thing was ever built, let alone not built down to bedrock on the shore of SF Bay. How is that not considered domestic terrorism? It needs a controlled demo before it uncontrollably demos itself and anything around it

[@thorbjrnhellehaven5766]

I remember a shopping center when I was younger. The building had good foundation, while the parking lot didn't. The asphalt ripped along the building, as the parking lot was sinking between 50-100 cm (20-40 inches). To solve this, they had to use light weight materials to fill up. If they would have used stones, they would just increase the sinking rate.

[@guangxidavidliu]

The salty water vapor from sea will seep through the cracks and corrode reinforcement. Given time, concrete walls reinforcement will be rusted and spalling. Then, this structure will be weakened.

[@svennielsen633]

This is incredible incompetence. Did anyone ever calculate the weight importance of people actually living and working there? In my city we have a high rise building that sunk 10 cm or more just because of that mistake. This is a TOFU construction.

[@TuckaBuck89]

Watched this again. The pics of lower level walls cracking and paint peeling are symptomatic. At best, a little spalling, just paint peeling. At worst, BIG problems.. That the building owner/management didn't even try to remedy these seemingly superficial problems just indicates the complexity of this issue, and the unwillingness for anyone to step up and admit responsibility. My advice to current residents: you probably have another home(s) elsewhere, go live there before it's too late. Let your lawyers duke it out in the meantime.

[@DocNo27]

I saw something last week (wish I could find) where people were complaining sewage wasn't draining and stinking the place up because of the tilt. I don't care how you spin it, that's NOT good!

[@jeffro221]

".....the unwillingness for anyone to step up and admit responsibility." You really think anyone is going to do that?

[@AlistairKiwi]

The Transbay Transit center was being discussed even before the 1989 earthquake. If it was a surprise to anyone involved in the 2005 Millennium Tower - then... ? The Transbay Transit center was was much discussed in the 1990s & many of us were dissatisfied over how long it took for anyone to agree on this thing. It was finally approved in 1999. I think the Millennium Tower got through the SF Planning Commission in 2002, but what they approved was not what was built. I think it is ridiculous to claim that the Transbay Transit center is the cause of the Millennium's problems. The Millennium Tower was not even dreamed up during the much publicized development of the Transit center. How could they not take into account the Transit center's construction in the Millennium's plans? Just, disingenuous.

[@venox3811]

This tower is a perfectly metaphor of the current state of the city of San Francisco.

[@idog6859]

are u trying to be funny becuse ur doing it horribly wrong, Mr. "I love being unfluenced by Media".

[@RFToob]

Even if ever ‘fixed’, who would want to ever be inside the building knowing it’s troubled history?

[@TVHouseHistorian]

As for the building’s vulnerability in the event of an earthquake, the tilt is only part of the issue. The fact that its foundation only goes down to clay (at least the part that isn’t being shored up by rods) plays an enormous factor in terms of the overall performance of the structure during any seismic event. Even with the shoring system in place, I very much question the building’s viability long-term, as well as the system’s own performance during seismic movement. I don’t know anything about the math they’re using, but the sheer weight of the building plus the powerful forces from an earthquake surely would put both immediate and excessive force on those piers, as well as the entire system they are now a part of - to such an extent that it makes sense that the entire pier system would surely fail. If you want one good example of a skyscraper’s performance during powerful seismic activity, look no further than the Japan earthquake of 2011 which was a whopping *9.0* magnitude. To my knowledge, not even one of those skyscrapers fell to the ground. This was due to the competence of Japanese structural engineers who understood building tectonics, and knew to design for powerful earthquakes. The original plans for the Millennium Tower called for a much lighter structure which, in theory, did not require going all the way down to bedrock. The high tech lighter structure was going to cost more than its developers wanted, so the structural “recipe,” if you will, was changed to employ more conventional materials, which, as it turns out, would be significantly heavier than the higher-tech materials originally planned for. A bedrock foundation would prove more expensive than the foundation that was deemed suitable for the lighter structure, so SOMEHOW, SOME WAY, SOMEONE decided the shallower foundation would make due for the heavier structure. It doesn’t take a structural engineer to figure out that this is positive lunacy, and a recipe for disaster. At the risk of stating the obvious, I think the entire project ultimately fell victim to M.O.N.E.Y. The bean counters got their way, and now we have a fix in the works that comes at a gargantuan cost - that is, significantly more than it would have cost just to have the foundation system go all the way down to bedrock. The soil study alone should have told them immediately that the foundation they wanted to go with was completely inadequate. I just hope this so-called “fix” they’re scrambling to employ doesn’t end up costing lives. This entire fiasco was so totally avoidable…

[@brent4073]

As a 'bean counter' myself, it had nothing to do with them and all about architects and engineers. If a cheaper option wasn't safe, it should have never been an option, period.

[@genekelly8467]

Great analysis-and the fact that this inadequate foundation renders the building totally unsafe-a collapse could kill tens of thousands and damage other buildings. It must be condemned and torn down

[@georgevavoulis4758]

Let this be an example of what GREED / CORRUPTION will do

[@gregparrott]

I've heard Hamburger's lame responses for several years. #1) Not only has he ALWAYS pointed fingers elsewhere, or dismissed real issues, based on conjecture, but has also pointed fingers elsewhere and when his 'fix' didn't work. #2) When building a property, its foundations should NOT be so marginally stable that no one else can build on adjacent/nearby properties. (thereby destroying the value of nearby land) #3) It is utterly incredulous that there's even a question about the foundation's design anticipating steel or concrete construction, let alone the structure's weight.

[@gelf1907]

I lived in SF back in the time thry were "getting" this plan approved. Gavin and the board finally approved it and many rumors of what that cost the developers. We all knew that the shallow foundation was a scam. And guess what? It was a scam...

[@xikano8573]

That really bites that they didn't take taking it down to bedrock from the very beginning into account. Making corrections after the fact is 'no bueno', may as well, close shop. Man up, Design Team, this is why you get paid the big bucks! We can not put a price on human safety, seriously! Well done, Ashley! 👏🏽

[@sethmyers5666]

Also, are the buildings nearby at risk of the building falling on them? What about people walking around the base of the building. There could be death even if no one is inside the building.

[@aguynamedscott11]

San Francisco needs to get some advice from Las Vegas. If that tower were in Vegas they would load it full of pyrotechnics and blow it up.

[@larryscott3982]

12:23 the city should be most responsible?? Not a chance. Unless the building department’s job is to certify the engineering of every project by internal or contracted consulting engineers. Third party engineering review and certification should be required by the city. And then the city would still not be responsible for faulty engineering. Fixing a super premium condo project should not be on tax payers. Home owners, and families covering rich people’s mistakes? Don’t think so. This building will fail. The HOA won’t have the millions of dollars to continually fix the building. And it’ll be boarded up and dismantled. Also at taxpayer cost. Every other responsible party will have disappeared into bankruptcy

[@alext8828]

58 stories? Here in NYC, we call that baby stuff. We got buildings that'll make you dizzy. We knock 50-story buildings down when we get sick of looking at them. Knock it down and rebuild it. And this time put some effort into it and stop fooling around.

[@OMNIPHEAST]

Omg, you are so cool

[@jackietreehorn8527]

Hahahahaha.

[@Ari-jm6xx]

@@OMNIPHEAST LOL

[@israel3538]

WHEN THERE’S CATASTROPHE, GUARANTEE EVERYONE INVOLVED IS GONNA BE LIKE “I DON’T KNOW HOW THIS COULD’VE HAPPENED. WHAT A SURPRISE”

[@ddyeo503]

They need to tear this tower down before someone gets hurt. I remember when the Leaning Tower of Pisa was leaning more and more and they put a cable around the tower and pulled it back some, while they repaired the footing. Of course you can't do that with a skyscraper. Plus the nearby buildings might be at risk. Enough money has been spent on this nightmare. Tear it down and start over,,,,,,,,,,,,

[@dondoyle8474]

This building needs to be dismantled now before it kills hundreds of people.

[@eleventy-seven]

Building Integrity a structural engineer on KZbin has followed this and done a series including his recent report that suggests a major flaw in their so called fix that could result in a cascade failure of the fix although it's unlikely to topple. It will increase it's tilt from the current 29" tilt exceeds 40" the gravity fed sewage will stop flowing and it will be vacated and disassembled. Its built on landfill. Hamburger is full of it.

[@justaskin8523]

"Disassembled"? No way. It will be demolished, which will create pollution and toxic fallout. But that's okay, because demolishing it would be the right thing to do.

[@eleventy-seven]

@@justaskin8523 What I meant. Disassembled or demolished. All better then as Musk puts it RUD or Rapid Unintended Disassembly when a rocket blows up.

[@dustingrubbs8636]

If a large earthquake hits this building, I worry it could actually fall OVER not down!😣

[@salt6]

An engineer has posted a video on the design of the support pilings. He is concerned that the pilings will not be able to support the load that will be placed on them.

[@alberthartl8885]

More specifically he discovered that the connection between the foundation and the new piles was inadequate. The steel was to small and it was imbedded in the concrete at too shallow a depth. The whole connection would most likely blow apart.

[@shadowfilm7980]

Your point too about what if during an earthquake is a very good question. It would be extremely frightening to be in that building during an earthquake. OMG! 😵‍💫🫣😵

[@gregc.8040]

This is what you call a Money Pit. A hole in the ground that you throw money into. The more you throw in the more it sinks. I am no expert.

[@uiuc007]

The Millenium Tower is a metaphor for the city of SF today, unfortunately

[@drguffey]

They may say it's fixed but who would trust that. I think it should be torn down.

[@stjohnbaby]

Its safe😀 like the Ocean gate Titan..Lived in S.F.from 1968 thru 2000,and Loma Prita,my husband was at the collapse of the Cypress freeway as a Fire Cpt.,no way I would occupy there.

[@PC-Phobic-Jean-Rene]

Good advice about pre-construction units. --- You don't have to be a trained-professional, to realize something is _seriously-wrong_ if foundational elements of a building are showing dangerous-cracks. Brought to mind the sad case of Champlain Tower South, Surfside! In _San Francisco,_ of all places, a soaring massive tower built on landfill, failing to go down to solid bedrock, seems, pardon the pun, --- the _height of folly!_ And as for the assurance the building is "safe", from the engineer, I think the young lady said, I would take that with a skeptical dump-truck load of salt! --- You could not pay-me to live in the Leaning Tower of Millennium. No way under the sun!

[@rolfstamenov9914]

Beware liquefaction during quake. .

[@sauronthegreat5799]

Did Stockton Rush design the millennium tower?

[@MarloweDash]

Alright already tear the thing down. Its gonna come down eventually. Do it now.

[@rs5801]

add insult to injury residents are now asked to pony up over 6 mill for repairs

[@aegaeon117]

The building is not safe, that is reinforced concrete with cracking with dramatically flawed foundation. It's coming down one way or another.

[@TuckaBuck89]

A good video. Not too technical, covers a thought-out range of issues. I enjoyed it.

[@architecture_tv]

thank you John!

[@ellenbryn]

SF had a Mag 6.9 damaging earthquake in 1989 that killed 63 people, and it has constant minor to moderate earthquakes, which cause fatigue stress. For instance, some aftershocks of a 4.2 earthquake in the area last week, including a 2.9 this morning, were probably felt by residents in the upper floors, since it wasn't built on earthquake dampeners (why?!) and instead is built on fill. The worst damage and all the deaths in 1989 were due to a raised freeway that collapsed and rowhouses in the Marina District that collapsed, both built on fill. Frankly, I don't understand why they keep relying on the advice of Hamburger, whose initial calculations and subsequent ones have repeatedly been disproven by reality, One thing I'm still waiting for is the city or local news to follow up on @buildingIntegrity 's very important question about a potential point of failure which sermes to have been overlooked in the remediation. in an earthquake, it may behave exactly like the weak points on the cypress expressway which collapsed.

[@PC-Phobic-Jean-Rene]

Yea, I saw that episode. Sound like a disaster in the making, but no one is paying attention. ---- Except _Building Integrity,_ --- so lacking in San Francisco.

[@johnvenier4011]

Very interesting! Thanks!

[@architecture_tv]

My pleasure!

[@davidzachmeyer1957]

This situation is reminiscent of the Transcona grain elevator failure.

[@nufosmatic]

3:26 - Old clay can contain a lot of water, and if you pump the water out, the clay will compress, so, fooled you...

[@JoeyBlogs007]

I think that the current method of remedy seems severely flawed and poses a major major danger. They need to drill relief holes on the opposite side of the lean to remove earth. Obviously it has to be calculated. Deep slightly angled vertical holes that extend under the building should do. The holes would extend toward the centre of the building on one side only. i.e. the aft leaning side. It should gradually cause reverse leaning until levelled. The earth on the opposite underside of the building, will naturally move, resulting in a chain reaction of slow earth movement from under the building towards the relief holes. The earth beneath the building would gradually move in the opposite direction of the lean, due to gravity and the additional force resulting from the massive weight of the building. That earth would then backfill the relief holes naturally as a result of its movement over time. I believe that should fix it and comparatively cheap to implement. 😂🤣🤪

[@alistairmcelwee7467]

Good recap but I would point out that plans for the development of the transit station next door were being debated for the last couple of decades, and then approvals were under consideration before the Millennial Tower. The who area has been underdevelopment since the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 did so much damage and caused the clearing of the old freeway system that was previously on that site. Thus, anyone building in that area should understand that there will be excavations near every site. Should the transit people have known that what the city approved for the Millennium was not what the City approved? Should transit have known that the Millennium developers would cut corners with the foundations when other buildings have foundations going to bedrock? How much is anyone development responsible for modifying their own development if the next door development develops problems that their poor design should never have allowed to be problems in the first place? And we all wonder, if there is a big earthquake here, even more than the Loma Prieta was, what would the Millennium fall into? It is surrounded by high rises.

[@architecture_tv]

Thanks Alistair, these are great points.

[@johnnyweb2000]

Ashley, I live hee in SF - you make the best explanation I've seen in YEARS.

[@architecture_tv]

Thank you Robert!

[@matrix-teknologies]

Am not a building engineer but even I know I have fool and future proof my design against idiots or earthquakes. I would have build from the rockbed, not from the clay, just for the sake of saving some millions in my pocket, also this is a tragedy waiting to happen, that building should be desconstructed by this point, no smart person should live there. Some idiot can come and weaken the soil and then the build starts to also sink

[@Keyser-Soze1995]

You referred to a 35 storey building in Dubai, it is the Capital Gate Building that is actually located in Abu Dhabi the Capital of the UAE not Dubai.

[@jcarieri5435]

Of coarse it is all connected. They will say that it is safe even as it is coming down

[@billwong7420]

It is easier to blame your newborn than to accept responsibly. Lousy engineer and city government who granted the building permit.

[@brandonbaker5884]

They will need to condem this property. Human waste is backing up into tentants sinks now. The only thing left are the trials and whom is going to pay up.

[@kgan4733]

. Crazy😮

[@onetruekeeper]

It would be cheaper to demolish it and rebuild on more solid foundation.

[@clem5474]

Great video. I am currently writing a script for a soil settlement video and I came across your vid whilst doing my research.

[@u.p.woodtick3296]

Unless that take this tower down there will be a major disaster costing hundreds of lives. .

[@johnnyweb2000]

Also, I was here in Embarcadero West during the earthquake - and I worked before in the Fremont tower cross corner, what about an earthquake dropping the whole building?

[@TheTeaParty320]

What happens if the big earthquake comes around?

[@jim2376]

Won't be surprising if the mitigation measures fail and ultimately a decision is made to dismantle the entire building steel beam by steel beam and floor by floor.

[@jim2376]

@@GH-oi2jf For good? Or only for now? Stay tuned.

[@RealDevastatia]

Sloping floors are common where I live. I hate it. It messes up my back when I'm sleeping, and I can feel gravity pulling me in unnatural directions.

[@altArchitecture]

Great video! I just found your channel and I am really enjoying the content. SF is the hot topic right now it seems!😄

[@architecture_tv]

Hi altArch! Happy to have you here 😀 It is, I was fascinated by the project and all the issues.

[@michaelpoyntz774]

To me, the issues that prevailed here are greed combined with engineering ignorance! The developers dreamed of making millions and then steam rolled everyone along their way to get on board! Even a five year old playing with a set of wood building blocks soon discovers if you build anything on a unstable surface it goes caboom sooner or later!

[@johnnyrvf]

Seriously? Cracks in the foundation slab is going to reassure potential buyers? What world do you live in?

[@tangobayus]

They will end up taking it down piece by piece. You can't collapse it safely.

[@TheBandit7613]

I don't believe the building is safe when local seismic activity is taken into account. What happens when (not if) a 7.0 earthquake shakes San Francisco? Liquefaction can make it worse.

[@chadglass7705]

The building is already coming apart. This is how it starts. It's not reversible. This building will either collapse or be dismantled.

[@darylmorse]

I would not trust a single word from Ron Hamburger. The "fixes" have not been well thought out. It's more like they are grasping at straws to fix the problem without performing the necessary analysis. The latest "fix" to pile down to the bedrock will put massive load on the perimeter of the foundation, which it was not designed for. I feel a lot of sympathy for the people that bought into this tower.

[@yashar4696]

Very nice explanation. Thanx!

[@frankallen3634]

We have minor quakes all the time mostly in the 4-5 range in magnitude. But being born and raised there I don't get out of bed for less than a 6. Definitely did in 89 when we got hit hard with collapse and fire

[@MarkMclaughlin-qm8kq]

U could install a heavier dapper on opposite side of building to straightened it out it could be temporary until the foundation is fixed.

[@ectomorph_7]

One decent close earthquake is all that building needs to fall.

[@edp2260]

When purchasing property, have everything inspected by professionals. The purchase contract better have an inspection period. The buyer should be paying for the inspections, and selecting the inspectors. It the seller has already had inspections done and has provided them (they must disclose this anyway), it is still a good idea to get your own inspections. If you have to bail out of a purchase based on an inspection, it will be the best money you ever spent.

[@manofwar556]

Maby look at China's Tianjin disaster, that is new and is affecting many buildings at once.

[@michaelmarks1391]

Let's say Ron Hamburger knew for a fact that a magnitude 8.3 earthquake was hitting San Fancisco in 3 minutes and he was located in the lobby of the Millennium Tower. Do you suppose he will stay in his safe, safe building, or will he run as fast and far away from it as he can? Stated another way, is the man sincere in his insistence? I think not. The people declaring that building is safe are the same ones who designed, built, and approved the project in the first place. These people should not be in the position to make decisions about the triage to keep the thing from falling down. They do not have the credibility to be putting out confident statements of safety.

[@edp2260]

Your point about buying pre-construction is good. The property will be 'brand new' when you get it, but there us no 'test of time', or the ability to easily inspect what you are getting.

[@barberdoug6930]

RUN For Your Lives Before The Whole Thing Topples Over 😅

[@campodma1]

Anyone living is that building? Why?

[@wrdennig]

The '89 quake showcased soil liquifaction in S.F. . . . It seems that S.F. would have required that all buildings beyond a certain size would have foundations that rest on bedrock.

[@cschneider9657]

Engineer same guy as titanic sub. There will be a lot of hindsight after this thing falls

[@kuyaarchitect6840]

I'm kind of surprised your Channel is sill underrated. You have great contents on design and Architecture. Very informative. New subscriber here. 😀

[@architecture_tv]

thank you Kuya for becoming apart of the community and for the kind words 🧡

[@michaelmorris4515]

That tower's gone the first 8+ mag earthquake that comes along. It needs to be destroyed now while the destruction can be controlled.

[@fonziebulldog5786]

That tower will probably end up in a really bad situation if they dont start the demolition.

[@smokestrong1000]

I seen almost every house in Sacramento (Sacramento soil is mostly clay) the foundations being f'd up and these were little 1 story houses. Building a whole f'ing skyscraper on that type of soil is outrageous

[@machris4068]

I love your efforts on this channel ❤

[@architecture_tv]

Thank you Ma 🧡

[@pigboykool]

Arrrh, I would not live there if people pay me. lol

[@M13x13M]

My solution 10 years ago was to take it down to 300 ft. That would have been a more workable solution.

[@LTV_inc]

Really? Have you tackled the Mandelbrot problem? How about dark matter?…

[@M13x13M]

@@LTV_inc Non-Sequitur. My buildings in the Bay Area are not leaning.

[@bobnandez]

How much did they “save” by not going all the way to the bedrock ? fixing it would cost $120 Million aprox and still a big doubt.

[@gnarfgnarf4004]

If the elevators stop working, will they have to tear down the building?

[@Erm439]

Wait the dudes name is actually Ronald Hamburger?

[@wrdennig]

Purchasers of SFDs usually have a home inspection done for $3-500 . . . I wonder what a home inspection would cost for a flat in a skyscraper, or if it is even possible.

[@jajajajajajajajaja867]

This estimate has now been uped to $500 000,000.

[@jajajajajajajajaja867]

@@GH-oi2jf the tower is leaning even more after the pile you mentioned and now this plan is being refined.

[@edp2260]

At 6:22 : That amount of settlement is unacceptable. I would never recommend buying a home with that condition. Your ex-home has serious foundation issues. The millennium tower is out of spec a similar amount. The way it is going, I doubt this will ever be corrected.

[@tomzhangus]

why would anyone pay 1.6m for these lol. from what I see it looks like a $700/month apartment at best.

[@rickstrole9634]

why can't they use the new piles that are already to bedrock as a solid pier to be topped with hydraulic or screw type lifting apparati between the building base and the "solid to bedrock" post that's formed by the pile to allow for an in concert raising effort of the low side if the building while the more stable side of the building is outfitted with the same type of devices thereby allowing for a continuous correction of the plumbness of the building and alleviate completely the sinking or leaning of the building

[@shadowfilm7980]

One of the most important points that you made in this video is how you should be careful in buying a unit in a building that is not really constructed yet. Only foundation. Maybe. It’s this presale thing that can get you into a lot of trouble. Of course the temptation to do this anyway is how much lower the price of that unit is. At that stage. That’s what they show off too. The salespeople. But in reality you are going into it blind. Literally. You can’t see it because it’s not built yet. So it’s a big gamble. This building is very very scary. If I was an owner of a unit there I would try and sell it and get out. Take a loss if you have to. But get out. I hope the residents sue the owners and builders of this monstrosity. For all that they can get. This is horrifying. What they did. How they built this. Incompetent. They are. Greedy too.

[@bengraham9427]

.. a general summary of other news and engineering reports which indicates the soil was inadequate to support a heavy building without piers reaching bedrock, that asymmetric foundation walls associated with the parking garage anchor zones of the building in such a way that settling occurs unevenly. The remedial piers have displaced soil and increased the tilt with little if any stabilization. Leave the commentary to the engineers that have been ignored throughout this process and follow the money Ashley.