Critical Failures at new MTA Bus Command Center

[BrooklynBus]

https://nypost.com/2022/05/24/study-finds-critical-flaws-in-mtas-90m-bus-command-center/?utm_source=facebook_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site+buttons&utm_campaign=site+buttons&fbclid=IwAR1wXq0tyNZZ-WA2jfRv6Vbk1-u0Br5plgY0EqO2upJ6lP5sgoTRpXOZ3hU

They are blaming the contractor. But it's the MTA's job to oversee the contractor to make sure the work is being done correctly, not to just let the contractor proceed on its own without any supervision. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

30 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

https://nypost.com/2022/05/24/study-finds-critical-flaws-in-mtas-90m-bus-command-center/?utm_source=facebook_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site+buttons&utm_campaign=site+buttons&fbclid=IwAR1wXq0tyNZZ-WA2jfRv6Vbk1-u0Br5plgY0EqO2upJ6lP5sgoTRpXOZ3hU

They are blaming the contractor. But it's the MTA's job to oversee the contractor to make sure the work is being done correctly, not to just let the contractor proceed on its own without any supervision. 

Don't you see a recurring theme with the ? Pick the lowest bidder... Contractor provides shoddy work.  says oh well it's not our fault. We'll have to sue the contractor for the shoddy work. Rinse and repeat. Then they claim that they are not good with overseeing construction projects. Well how about hiring a competent General Contractor to oversee such projects?

[Future ENY OP]

Wasted resources.  Could of used the money to build more depots. Aging infrastructures cannot withhold new technological advances. Especially with the electric buses coming in.   

[MHV9218]

Did anybody actually read the article? Typical know-nothing Post article churned out by some consultants getting seven grand an hour. The complaint here is that the system of redundancy exists, but they don't think the back-up generators are hypothetically strong enough? So they can improve them, big deal. It's good they looked into this having learned their lesson from the old system. Anyway, everybody knows the reason the transition to this new site has been slow has been because of covid. Take away the global pandemic, yes, things would have moved there. But generally speaking there's no reason not to invest in modernizing and centralizing DOB infrastructure. 

[BrooklynBus]

14 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Did anybody actually read the article? Typical know-nothing Post article churned out by some consultants getting seven grand an hour. The complaint here is that the system of redundancy exists, but they don't think the back-up generators are hypothetically strong enough? So they can improve them, big deal. It's good they looked into this having learned their lesson from the old system. Anyway, everybody knows the reason the transition to this new site has been slow has been because of covid. Take away the global pandemic, yes, things would have moved there. But generally speaking there's no reason not to invest in modernizing and centralizing DOB infrastructure. 

No one is saying they shouldn’t be investing to modernize. And if Covid was the major reason, the building would have been fully occupied and functional by now, just delayed by a year or two. The ribbon cutting was before Covid and the building was not occupied, so blaming Covid doesn’t cut it. There are major problems with this facility preventing it from being functional. Only one month remains until the projected opening. We will see if the problems can be solved that quickly. I highly doubt it. 

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Don't you see a recurring theme with the ? Pick the lowest bidder... Contractor provides shoddy work.  says oh well it's not our fault. We'll have to sue the contractor for the shoddy work. Rinse and repeat. Then they claim that they are not good with overseeing construction projects. Well how about hiring a competent General Contractor to oversee such projects?

I worked in Contracts for three years so I know a little something about this. There is nothing wrong with picking the lowest bidder. Many times the lowest bidder is disqualified and the next lowest bidder is chosen. Is your solution to pick the highest bidder? That is no guarantee the work will be any better. 

The MTA personnel supposed to have the expertise to oversee and supervise the work, so there is no need to hire additional contractors to oversee the contractor. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

I worked in Contracts for three years so I know a little something about this. There is nothing wrong with picking the lowest bidder. Many times the lowest bidder is disqualified and the next lowest bidder is chosen. Is your solution to pick the highest bidder? That is no guarantee the work will be any better. 

The MTA personnel supposed to have the expertise to oversee and supervise the work, so there is no need to hire additional contractors to oversee the contractor. 

And I have actually bided on projects, so I know something about it as well.  The  is required to ALWAYS pick the lowest bidder by State law. That begs the question of the vetting process in the first place when it comes to  bids. Some bids are written to favor certain vendors (I'm sure you know this working in Contracts) and so my question is what is the vetting process to ensure that even though they are required to pick the lowest bidder, they are still getting a quality product? It seems to me that there are too many incidents where the vendors do shoddy work and then the  has to deal with trying to get the job done right. There are many many examples of this too. Now I also know having worked in construction and been involved with hundreds of projects that there can be issues with projects that cannot be avoided, but some of the issues in my mind can be with some of these projects.

You are right, there is nothing inherently wrong with low bids, but some vendors DO cut corners in order to put in lower bids, and that could be anything from the subcontractors that they chose to use, to insurance (or lack there of) and so on. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Did anybody actually read the article? Typical know-nothing Post article churned out by some consultants getting seven grand an hour. The complaint here is that the system of redundancy exists, but they don't think the back-up generators are hypothetically strong enough? So they can improve them, big deal. It's good they looked into this having learned their lesson from the old system. Anyway, everybody knows the reason the transition to this new site has been slow has been because of covid. Take away the global pandemic, yes, things would have moved there. But generally speaking there's no reason not to invest in modernizing and centralizing DOB infrastructure. 

COVID is not the only reason that people aren't working there, as this is not the first time articles have been written about this facility. Some people simply refuse to work there, citing safety concerns among other things, and so the place sits largely empty, and this was before COVID. At the end of the day, the  has spent almost $90 millions of dollars on a facility is that is not being used and considering how they continue to cry broke, it's yet another example of waste, similar to the $30 million they blew on that existing staircase for the Times Square station. They love to talk about how it is ADA accessible, but the elevator that was installed at $10 million was not monies spent by them, but by a private entity, so in essence, they really didn't spend any real monies to make the station ADA accessible. They spent monies mainly on cosmetic things like artwork. Sure they added cameras, turnstiles, etc. None of that should've added up to $30 million, as there was no real structural work done.

This is what the inside of the place looks like. Would you want to work in a place with constant leakage issues and other problems? I certainly wouldn't.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Via Garibaldi 8

[BrooklynBus]

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

And I have actually bided on projects, so I know something about it as well.  The  is required to ALWAYS pick the lowest bidder by State law. That begs the question of the vetting process in the first place when it comes to  bids. Some bids are written to favor certain vendors (I'm sure you know this working in Contracts) and so my question is what is the vetting process to ensure that even though they are required to pick the lowest bidder, they are still getting a quality product? It seems to me that there are too many incidents where the vendors do shoddy work and then the  has to deal with trying to get the job done right. There are many many examples of this too. Now I also know having worked in construction and been involved with hundreds of projects that there can be issues with projects that cannot be avoided, but some of the issues in my mind can be with some of these projects.

You are right, there is nothing inherently wrong with low bids, but some vendors DO cut corners in order to put in lower bids, and that could be anything from the subcontractors that they chose to use, to insurance (or lack there of) and so on. 

I am not aware of any law requiring the MTA to always pick the lowest bidder. If that were the case, there wouldn’t be any qualification hearings. I conducted dozens of them in Contracts, and I would say be bypassed the lowest bidder at least 25 percent of the time. Occasionally we even bypassed the lowest two bidders. The major reasons triggering suspicions were a great difference between the lowest bid and second lowest. For major projects the bidders had to show experience and expertise performing similar projects. The potential contractors are asked dozens of questions to make sure they are qualified. Yes, some low bidders cut corners, but it is up to the MTA to discover that in the vetting process. 

And yes, sometimes a contract is written to favor certain vendors.

Occasionally, a bad vendor does get through the vetting process. One was Newport News Shipbuilding chosen to Overhaul the R44 SIRTOA cars. They defaulted be because they couldn’t perform the work, and the project was then given to MK.

And yes some problems are unavoidable, but that is mostly for projects that require renovations like station rehab or car overhaul, because you never know what you have until you open up the patient. Water problems or asbestos problems cannot be predicted.

But with totally new construction like in this case, incompetence is the only reason for the problems like those being found.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

45 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I am not aware of any law requiring the MTA to always pick the lowest bidder. If that were the case, there wouldn’t be any qualification hearings. I conducted dozens of them in Contracts, and I would say be bypassed the lowest bidder at least 25 percent of the time. Occasionally we even bypassed the lowest two bidders. The major reasons triggering suspicions were a great difference between the lowest bid and second lowest. For major projects the bidders had to show experience and expertise performing similar projects. The potential contractors are asked dozens of questions to make sure they are qualified. Yes, some low bidders cut corners, but it is up to the MTA to discover that in the vetting process. 

And yes, sometimes a contract is written to favor certain vendors.

Occasionally, a bad vendor does get through the vetting process. One was Newport News Shipbuilding chosen to Overhaul the R44 SIRTOA cars. They defaulted be because they couldn’t perform the work, and the project was then given to MK.

And yes some problems are unavoidable, but that is mostly for projects that require renovations like station rehab or car overhaul, because you never know what you have until you open up the patient. Water problems or asbestos problems cannot be predicted.

But with totally new construction like in this case, incompetence is the only reason for the problems like those being found.

Yeah, and that's the problem... Too many bad vendors are getting through the vetting process. Aside from their in-house project managers, do they ever hire consultants to help them oversee projects to manage things like cost overruns and other particulars on these projects?

[BrooklynBus]

49 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yeah, and that's the problem... Too many bad vendors are getting through the vetting process. Aside from their in-house project managers, do they ever hire consultants to help them oversee projects to manage things like cost overruns and other particulars on these projects?

I would guess they would for very major projects like the Second Avenue Subway, but I do not know. 

[MHV9218]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yeah, and that's the problem... Too many bad vendors are getting through the vetting process. Aside from their in-house project managers, do they ever hire consultants to help them oversee projects to manage things like cost overruns and other particulars on these projects?

Constantly, and then everybody complains that they wasted money and hired consultants lol...

[bobtehpanda]

On 5/25/2022 at 2:50 PM, MHV9218 said:

Constantly, and then everybody complains that they wasted money and hired consultants lol...

I mean, we have long since sailed past the deregulation-era "but the private sector can do it better!" nonsense.

CAHSR was, for the longest time, a consultant-led operation, and look at how well that went.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

On 5/25/2022 at 5:50 PM, MHV9218 said:

Constantly, and then everybody complains that they wasted money and hired consultants lol...

You hire a consultant when you actually need one and there are some instances where it makes sense. Other times, yes, it can be a waste of money if the firm is incompetent. They claim that construction is not their forte and so in those instances, yes, they should hire a GC to ensure that the project is on budget and that the trades are not milking them for more than they should and not taking advantage, and that definitely happens too. When I used to work in the industry, I worked on a number of projects where we were hired as the consultant specifically for that purpose.

Now I often times work in a similar managerial role where a client will hire us to coordinate certain aspects of projects to ensure that they run smoothly because they simply don't know. Now too many consultants can also be a problem. Speaking from experience, some people really are clueless as to what is going on and create more problems than anything else.  Unfortunately, some people in managerial roles do not think ahead and forecast issues, which is what good project managers are supposed to do and get paid well to do.