Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

k1lk1 t1_jbebq9i wrote

> According to the lawsuit, they took the soil improvement route, rather than the piling route like many other nearby buildings. Pizarotti claims details of the method used were not revealed to it before it started building the tower.

I don't know, if I were some fancy NYC skyscraper builder I'd probably figure out how the foundation was built before I started. Still though. If they weren't responsible for the foundation, then it's hard to see how they're responsible for the lean.

Also I think it's Pizzarotti, the article spells both ways.

51

jae343 t1_jbejjv7 wrote

This is more of a developer cutting costs and not listening to engineers unfortunately, the client always wins if they want to save a few million. This is the same developer that owns the very nice Olympia condo in DUMBO right next to the BK bridge.

21

barbaq24 t1_jbem34s wrote

They most definitely had a geotechnical analysis. You need one. And the report provides details to inform the construction. The issue that occurred here is common and more complicated than “the owner cheaped out”. The structural engineer is ultimately responsible for figuring out the solution, and the contractor is responsible for means and methods. The blame will lie somewhere between the accuracy of the geotechnical report, the design by the structural engineer and the work performed by the support of excavation contractor. In the end everyone loses. Because regardless of who is “wrong” there are enough checks and balances that blame is hardly ever one sided, and nobody can afford to take the kind of punch a delay like this delivers.

14

ChocolatePleepleus t1_jbegcdx wrote

It's clearly a group better at the CYA portion of their job than they are a the actual job.

7