Full 14th St Shutdown Cancelled

[Via Garibaldi 8]

13 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Acting.. Temporary A Ship without direction. Come on.

Ferrer has been on the board for quite some time. Now suddenly he is so incompetent? Give me a break... lol

14 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Minus the Pro bono. Bingo!! That's my point!! If your Chief engineer over that project it's a small Community your calling your pals in London and Hong Kong if something out there you'd have a idea. These guys know each other Conferences several times a years.

Well yeah, we both know how small these worlds are. It’s the same in my field. Everyone knows everyone... At the same time, I will admit that at the end of the day, it’s what the  wants. If the contractor doesn’t want to go along with it, they can simply walk away or accept the terms and do what they can to make the project work. I am not saying that the decision made here is the right one, but at the same time if the work can be done successfully without a full shutdown, then you have to look at it. Same thing with my clients. At the end of the day, when I’m at a meeting with money on the line, my response is it’s what the client wants and we’ll do what we can to accommodate their request. I imagine you do the same thing with your clients... Nothing new here...

15 minutes ago, RR503 said:

I have no doubt in my minds that these experts believe that this is the best option. But experts also told us that running the  from Euclid to Court Street was a good idea and that overcrowding was the root of subway delays, so....idk. I want to hear that this will work from someone who actually works with the system beyond the tunnel tour level. I think the discrepancies laid out in the replies above speak to that issue perfectly. 

I also don't trust these claims that they've consulted contractors here. Maybe they sent an email "we're changing the project," maybe they just did it. But given that people at the MTA basically just heard about this today, the notion that their claims of engagement hold any water is laughable. 

Yes. Change orders exist. But this isn't a change order. This is basically canceling the project and rescoping the whole damn thing. 

We have no contractual confirmation that the contractor is on board with this, nor have we seen an official change order from the board. Seemingly no one cares about process anymore, but that is a dangerous disruption of the MTA's chain of command, to say nothing of it being a usurpation of the board's power. 

With the contractor and with the pro bono nonsense, you can't always trust the evidence of your own eyes. There are probably negotiations/deals being made in backrooms that are affecting outcomes. 

Well I’m sorry but there is no way in hell that I’m putting myself on the line as a contractor to be sued if the new scope of work agreed to can’t work. You as a vendor always have to look at risk and the big picture. It’s risk mitigation and risk management. One other thing... The scope of work in any field can change on a dime... That isn’t such a big deal. Hell in every quote that I send to clients we include that to cover our @ss. We would be fools not to. We also don’t know the terms of these contracts. The work was to begin in April. There’s a retainer fee right? I mean we don’t know how much money is lost here...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

Mechanics' adage comes to mind:

I feel like we just got a back pocket "AHA" from the other guy from Queens with a hero complex, and that we're getting the third line instead of the first or second.

The shutdown's already been vetted and contracted out. Terminating those contracts will cost - and with a perennially broke agency about to steal more of our money in 60 days, this act by that CNN Anchor's brother is a gross act of financial malfeasance.

This should've been brought up 6 months ago in order to be vetted before contracts got signed and folks made job changes or turned down work to do it.

And I haven't seen anything saying that the ADA work and entrance rebuilds are still going forward. So yeah, that former Kennedy-by-marriage literally pissed away God-knows how much money just to scratch an itch.

Nice that folks don't have to take  or the M14s, but he really pulled some BS.

ADA accessibility is actually noted in the link I posted.

[RailRunRob]

7 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Ferrer has been on the board for quite some time. Now suddenly he is so incompetent? Give me a break... lol

Well yeah, we both know how small these worlds are. It’s the same in my field. Everyone knows everyone... At the same time, I will admit that at the end of the day, it’s what the  wants. If the contractor doesn’t want to go along with it, they can simply walk away or accept the terms and do what they can to make the project work. I am not saying that the decision made here is the right one, but at the same time if the work can be done successfully without a full shutdown, then you have to look at it. Same thing with my clients. At the end of the day, when I’m at a meeting with money on the line, my response is it’s what the client wants and we’ll do what we can to accommodate their request. I imagine you do the same thing with your clients... Nothing new here...

Well I’m sorry but there is no way in hell that I’m putting myself on the line as a contractor to be sued if the new scope of work agreed to can’t work. You as a vendor always have to look at risk and the big picture. It risk mitigation and risk management.

All of this is Negating the fact that Cuomo totally and Unequivocally runs the show!  Hell for all we know one of his daughters Williamsburg friends could Have changed the whole dam* thing over holiday dinner. Nobody And I mean absolutely nobody is going to war with the Governor at the, not the Board not Byford nobody.

[RR503]

3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Well I’m sorry but there is no way in hell that I’m putting myself on the line as a contractor to be sued if the new scope of work agreed to can’t work. You as a vendor always have to look at risk and the big picture. It’s risk mitigation and risk management.

Sure, but as of yet the contractor hasn’t been tendered a contract. Because the body that’s supposed to deal with this (the board) hasn’t been consulted. Nor do I think they’ll turn away if it’s a bad idea. Say it is — it’ll hold for ten years or whatever, and then will need repairs. Call that maintenance. Or blame the group of engineers that designed this. If the design is at fault, liability gets more complex — esp with the MTAs liability system. 

6 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Ferrer has been on the board for quite some time. Now suddenly he is so incompetent? Give me a break... lol

There’s a generally inverse correlation between being a member of the MTA board and one’s comprehension of the issues of transit. I’d hardly cite that as evidence of his leadership. 

[RailRunRob]

1 minute ago, RR503 said:

There’s a generally inverse correlation between being a member of the MTA board and one’s comprehension of the issues of transit. I’d hardly cite that as evidence of his leadership. 

Couldn't have said it better myself!

[Via Garibaldi 8]

6 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Sure, but as of yet the contractor hasn’t been tendered a contract. Because the body that’s supposed to deal with this (the board) hasn’t been consulted. Nor do I think they’ll turn away if it’s a bad idea. Say it is — it’ll hold for ten years or whatever, and then will need repairs. Call that maintenance. Or blame the group of engineers that designed this. If the design is at fault, liability gets more complex — esp with the MTAs liability system. 

There’s a generally inverse correlation between being a member of the MTA board and one’s comprehension of the issues of transit. I’d hardly cite that as evidence of his leadership. 

Well you have a point but as I said, this is what the  wants because this is what supposedly can work. We talked about risk management here... As I said earlier, you can spend years tied up in lawsuits or you can see if you can appease all parties and get in there and get work done. I think looking at the big picture, this isn’t the worse thing in the world. If there are problems later on you have to deal with them obviously, but the work needs to be done. We’ve already waited what six years now with the back and forth?

[MHV9218]

Can we also not refer to this as some life-changing "new" and, drumroll, "European" technology? Hanging wires along the tunnels rather than under the benches is as old as time, as European as french fries (that is to say, used everywhere), and the polymer solution to protection is neither new nor unprecedented. 

Here's the real question, though: cynically, I think Cuomo knows this will only last 10-15 years (that's why LIDAR is in place, to track decay; they're expecting it to collapse more than a rebuilt tunnel), and I think he doesn't care, since he'll be out of office. But devil's advocate, then: with global warming destroying our climate system and our idiot president and his administration convinced it's a man-made scam, we can expect 100- and 200-year storms to arrive with frequency. It's perfectly likely the tunnel will be flooded and destroyed again within 10-20 years. So maybe it's hardly worth designing tunnels for 100 years anymore, as we used to, since the climate is bound to destroy them anyway. Cynical stance, but I bet you there are a lot of folks in his admin who feel that way.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Can we also not refer to this as some life-changing "new" and, drumroll, "European" technology? Hanging wires along the tunnels rather than under the benches is as old as time, as European as french fries (that is to say, used everywhere), and the polymer solution to protection is neither new nor unprecedented. 

Here's the real question, though: cynically, I think Cuomo knows this will only last 10-15 years (that's why LIDAR is in place, to track decay; they're expecting it to collapse more than a rebuilt tunnel), and I think he doesn't care, since he'll be out of office. But devil's advocate, then: with global warming destroying our climate system and our idiot president and his administration convinced it's a man-made scam, we can expect 100- and 200-year storms to arrive with frequency. It's perfectly likely the tunnel will be flooded and destroyed again within 10-20 years. So maybe it's hardly worth designing tunnels for 100 years anymore, as we used to, since the climate is bound to destroy them anyway. Cynical stance, but I bet you there are a lot of folks in his admin who feel that way.

I’ll answer that. We can’t plan that far in advance because global warming is accelerating. Hell the mitigation measures being proposed right now to stop floods Downtown is only said to last until maybe 2050 or so, which is roughly 30 or so years, so building a 100 year tunnel certainly doesn’t make sense.

[Around the Horn]

The problem here is that everyone on the MTA board are Cuomo yes-men (or yes-women), so even if they know it won't work they're still going to sign off on it to appease Cuomo.

The fact that the senior vice president of Capital Projects "retires" on the same day tells me all I need to know.

 

[RR503]

9 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Well you have a point but as I said, this is what the  wants because this is what supposedly can work. We talked about risk management here... As I said earlier, you can spend years tied up in lawsuits or you can see if you can appease all parties and get in there and get work done. I think looking at the big picture, this isn’t the worse thing in the world. If there’s problems later on you have to deal with them obviously, but the work needs to be done. We’ve already waited what six years now with the back and forth?

I can tell you this is NOT what the MTA wants. This is what the governor wants. 

Look, if this works, that’s great. But the process by which this was announced and designed has set us back years in public trust of the agency, of engineering, and of governmental structure — to say nothing of the actual cost this will incur in change orders and the like. 

If it works.

And that doesn’t seem to be a given. Again, there seem to be aspects of the reconstruction work that aren’t addressed under this new plan; there seem to be questions about whether or not these fixes will actually hold. That worries me. I don’t think ‘innovation’ (and @MHV9218 is right here in pointing out this is hardly revolutionary) is called for in such a high-risk setting. We discarded shotgunning solutions in field settings long ago for proofs of concept in labs/more controlled settings. Where is that here? If this is such a good idea, how is it that no one has run a test? Again, I don’t have the authority to say this is a bad idea, but gah!, what happened to methodical caution in engineering. And again, there are certain aspects of this (moving from benchwalls to cables hung under walkways) that are objectively good ideas. I just am skeptical that the package translates into a solution for the Canarsie issue. 

(Also: on a boring contractual level, it isn’t like there aren’t downsides to saying no to MTA here. Breach of contract, severance fees — all of that comes into play.)

[Around the Horn]

Another question: don't they have to do another environmental analysis since the scope changed?

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, RR503 said:

I can tell you this is NOT what the MTA wants. This is what the governor wants. 

Look, if this works, that’s great. But the process by which this was announced and designed has set us back years in public trust of the agency, of engineering, and of governmental structure — to say nothing of the actual cost this will incur in change orders and the like. 

If it works.

And that doesn’t seem to be a given. Again, there seem to be aspects of the reconstruction work that aren’t addressed under this new plan; there seem to be questions about whether or not these fixes will actually hold. That worries me. I don’t think ‘innovation’ (and @MHV9218 is right here in pointing out this is hardly revolutionary) is called for in such a high-risk setting. We discarded shotgunning solutions in field settings long ago for proofs of concept in labs/more controlled settings. Where is that here? If this is such a good idea, how is it that no one has run a test? Again, I don’t have the authority to say this is a bad idea, but gah!, what happened to methodical caution in engineering. And again, there are certain aspects of this (moving from benchwalls to cables hung under walkways) that are objectively good ideas. I just am skeptical that the package translates into a solution for the Canarsie issue. 

(Also: on a boring contractual level, it isn’t like there aren’t downsides to saying no to MTA here. Breach of contract, severance fees — all of that comes into play.)

Yes, just like a lawsuit from the  lol... It works both ways. I come to you as the client and say RR, this is the project. You tell me you can meet the scope of work. I say GREAT. We shake hands and sign on the dotted line...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, Around the Horn said:

Another question: don't they have to do another environmental analysis since the scope changed?

 

They may have to perform another EIS, but I think there is still time for that. It’s only early January. That shouldn’t be that big of a problem at this point.  Certainly not something that would set the project back years...

[RailRunRob]

2 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Another question: don't they have to do another environmental analysis since the scope changed?

 

I was wondering the samething. 

[Calvin]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/03/nyregion/l-train-shutdown-changes.html?smid=fb-share&fbclid=IwAR0G494kwN-ZLGohJFmXz3ZmlUeWGgo7PlTFi_7hYd6fIenbOAj6uE0EH48

 

The breakdown of the plan 

[RR503]

3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yes, just like a lawsuit from the  lol... It works both ways. I come to you as the client and say RR, this is the project. You tell me you can meet the scope of work. I say GREAT. We shake hands and sign on the dotted line...

That’s the thing, though. There’s a difference between the work being achievable and it being lasting. You can install a bandaid with insane precision and care...but it’s still a bandaid. This is why I’m a bit wary of this faith we’re placing in the contractor to correct matters.

Re: EIS. A new EIS takes months/years to complete. The relevant document here, though, is an EA, or environmental assessment, which is basically a mini EIS used on smaller projects. I’d imagine that, at most, that will be the maximum requirement for the project. Even that I doubt, though, as this basically disappears surface level impact.  

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, RR503 said:

That’s the thing, though. There’s a difference between the work being achievable and it being lasting. You can install a bandaid with insane precision and care...but it’s still a bandaid. This is why I’m a bit wary of this faith we’re placing in the contractor to correct matters. 

I agree, but as I said we’ve had numerous stalling tactics used to delay this project and I think at this point you want this project to start and not be held up any further in red tape at the last minute. This likely quashes any other pending litigation...

[RR503]

Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I agree, but as I said we’ve had numerous stalling tactics used to delay this project and I think at this point you want this project to start and not be held up any further in red tape at the last minute. This likely quashes any other pending litigation...

This project was never delayed. They said 2019, and it was gonna be 2019 until today.

You’re most certainly entitled to your own opinion here, but I think most of us would rather this be analyzed and debated thoroughly rather than be forced down the civic throat at lightning speed by an attention seeking excuse for a governor. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Just now, RR503 said:

This project was never delayed. They said 2019, and it was gonna be 2019 until today.

You’re most certainly entitled to your own opinion here, but I think most of us would rather this be analyzed and debated thoroughly rather than be forced down the civic throat at lightning speed by an attention seeking excuse for a governor. 

I would argue that has been delayed to a degree. We’ve had tons of back and forth and you can’t sit here with a straight face and tell me that you think this project would go on as is without someone trying to throw a curve ball at the last minute to hold it up... You aren’t that guillible now... The same crap happens in my area. You tie up the project in red tape and make it difficult to move forward until you get what you want. You have people that have money here that didn’t want this project moving forward, and I have no doubt that they played a hand in this in addition to Cuomo’s own agenda.

[RR503]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I would argue that has been delayed to a degree. We’ve had tons of back and forth and you can’t sit here with a straight face and tell me that you think this project would go on as is without someone trying to throw a curve ball at the last minute to hold it up... You aren’t that guillible now... The same crap happens in my area. You tie up the project in red tape and make it difficult to move forward until you get what you want. You have people that have money here that didn’t want this project moving forward, and I have no doubt that they played a hand in this in addition to Cuomo’s own agenda.

Oh, plenty have tried. There were a whole set of lawsuits by the NIMBYs on the west side—IINM all but one was thrown out. At this point in the process, I would have seen additional lawsuits as being unlikely. Action usually comes with announcement and with the publication of detailed documents, not with the start of construction. Why? Judges weigh impact when making decisions about when massive undertakings like this will begin. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

4 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Oh, plenty have tried. There were a whole set of lawsuits by the NIMBYs on the west side—IINM all but one was thrown out. At this point in the process, I would have seen additional lawsuits as being unlikely. Action usually comes with announcement and with the publication of detailed documents, not with the start of construction. Why? Judges weigh impact when making decisions about when massive undertakings like this will begin. 

I have to believe that some backroom deal was made here... We had something similar with my neighborhood. Suddenly the owner walked away from the project like that... Yeah right... lol

[RR503]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I have to believe that some backroom deal was made here... We had something similar with my neighborhood. Suddenly the owner walked away from the project like that... Yeah right... lol

Oh absolutely. NIMBY money + developer gratitude + political stunt — what is there to say no to?!?

[QM1to6Ave]

I'll play devil's advocate for a minute. This new approach sounds similar to the medical approach of active surveillance for possible cancer. In the past, they would always cut out the cancer, but now they will monitor it for growths, and only remove it is growth happens. 

 

It's a riskier approach, but much less invasive. If you are good enough as a doctor to know when cancer is likely to spread, you can save a lot of pain by avoiding unneeded surgery 

 

Perhaps these experts are willing to bet on the overall structural integrity of the tunnels, and think it is just the cables that need replacing. If they are right, they will save a lot of headaches for riders. And even if benchwall needs to be replaced 10 years down the line, all the electronics will have already been replaced, thereby saving time. 

[RailRunRob]

42 minutes ago, QM1to6Ave said:

Perhaps these experts are willing to bet on the overall structural integrity of the tunnels,

The word Bet should never be uttered from anyone in the Engineering field period point blank.. Science is built on what's been tested and proven. This isn't some CERN lab in Geneva nothing experimental about it.  It's a 95-year-old tunnel that carries 225k people a day.  It's not a game precision to the inch matters and could determine disaster. Definitely, would hope it's more than a Bet or a hunch.  

[Trainmaster5]

I seem to recall a recent photo op in the Amtrak Hudson River tube 😁. Although it was a tacky stunt I thought the prince drew some attention to a needed replacement job. I personally thought that every Sandy damaged tunnel should have been replaced with new prefabricated ones. This Canarsie job appears to be a quick fix bandaid at best. I don’t pretend to have the expertise these new experts bring to the table but as someone who worked in the construction field for a decade I’d say that anyone who believes that the  board, individually or collectively, has a clue about  what the work entails should probably put the pipe down. There are some good people in the agency but doubt that they were consulted on this new proposal. This new version may be successful but a last minute rework of a project seems rather extraordinary to me. The original plan has been publicly known for some time. At the very least I’m happy that my fellow posters and the public at large can see what I’ve known for years. The  board is useless and is a rubber stamp doormat for the governor of the state. I can take Lance, Deucey, VG8, Rail Run Rob, BrooklynBus, B35, and any number of my fellow posters from Surface, RTO, and CED, with some signal and track people and I guarantee collectively we can do a better job than the present board. Just my opinion. Carry on.