Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  October 11, 2018 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT

6:00 pm
>> all right. good morning, everyone. like to call our october 11 meeting for the tjpa. [roll call] >>clerk: mr. chairman, you do have a quorum. >> thank you. next item, please.
6:01 pm
>>clerk: item three is communications. directors, i'm not aware of any. >> next item. >> next item is new and unfinished business. >> seeing none, we'll move on. >> item 5 is public comments. >> we share our sadness at the closure of the if the, and we look forward lo lo look -- of the if the -- sales force transit center. you will hear a little bit more about the
6:02 pm
[inaudible] salesforce transit cent . >> -- as we must determine the cause and finalize the -- the permanent fix and peer review it before we do so. once we do that, we can provide you with a construction schedule. but please be assured we are working thorough but ensuring a construction schedule and clear path forward. mayor breed and mayor schaaf has requested the -- [inaudible] >> -- that are needed to confirm the structural integrity of the transit center. we share their goal of reassuring the public that the transit center is safe and secure. i would like to thank mayor greed and mayor schaaf for their
6:03 pm
leadership. i would also like to thank m.t.c.'s leader steve heninger. we have provided m.t.c. for the pertinent information that will be neededtor the peer review panel and will continue to provide it to them as long as they need it. moving to phase two, in regards to the supplemental internal documents for the downtown extension, we received initial comments for the final supplemental environmental impact report statement from the federal transportation administration on october 2, and we continue to work with them to address additional comments as they are transmitted to us. we have planned on october 15 to finishing addressing all the comments.
6:04 pm
we wi if the f.t.a. returns the document signed on or before october 24, we will be able to bring it to the tjpa on the november 3 board meeting. for the r.a.p. study -- [inaudible] >> -- the next step is for the city and county of san francisco to approve the recommendation. once that's done we will bring it to the tjpa board for consideration and possible inclusion to the d.t.x. project. this concludes my report. >> vice chair gee: thank you. any comments for the executive director? we can have a discussion now or construction presentation issues? >> construction presentation. >> vice chair gee: okay.
6:05 pm
any other questions? i guess one question. you said for the board to be able to consider the final environmental for phase two at the november meeting, you would need response from f.t.a. by the 24 of this month. why? what's driving that date? >> we need them to sign the document by the 24th. we're going to give them the document with all the responses addressed and ready for signature on the 17. >> vice chair gee: that date's a couple of weeks ahead. >> yeah. we need to put it forward to make sure the document's available. and they're aware of that. >> vice chair gee: any other questions? okay. item six. >> item six is advisory committee update, and we have bruce aggett. >> good morning. directors, executive director
6:06 pm
zabaneh. my comments this morning are focused in the following areas: to address the staff report. we are pleased to hear the c.t.a. approved the residence dugs to adopt the pennsylvania alignment extension as the optimal alignment recommended by the san francisco planning department. we look forward to understanding the next steps leading to final approval by the city. we were also pleased to hear the project team received the additional feedback from the f.t.a., and although there are a few finishing touches needed, it's anticipated as executive director zabaneh just mentioned, that it could come to the board in november for aful pro. we look forward to an update and potential presentation at our next c.a.c. meeting.
6:07 pm
regarding the transit center update, the main topic of our c.a.c. meeting last tuesday was update on the closure of the center. as you would expect, the c.a.c. shares the same disappointment the project team, the board, agency, and city stakeholders, transit riders, and community feel. with that said, the c.a.c. unanimously applauded and commended the project team and this board for taking the appropriate actions of closing this center immediately out of an abundance of caution in access to making and keeping building safety the number one priority. we also appreciate the efforts the project team to keep us and the public updated with the latest information. during our meeting, the project
6:08 pm
team went through slides in detail and provided us with ample time to ask varietied and ample list of questions. we appreciate the level of detail provided outlining what is known to this point with no speculation and the next steps to determine the cause, design of the associated fix, associate timeline, which will lead to the eventual reopening of the rooftop park and the transit center. it was articulated clearly throughout the presentation, the reopening will occur only when it has been demonstrated appropriate repairs have been made and the center was safe. we were also pleased to here about the various peer reviews of the permanent fix over fremont street and the facility. in addition we're pleased to hear that the overall design of the peer review was a sign to the m.t.c. one last item, and we are looking ahead to the reopening
6:09 pm
of the center. our c.a.c. did recommend that consideration be given at the appropriate time to plan activities to celebrate the reopening of the center so we may recapture the energy and enthusiasmtor the activation for the activities of the park and the center, welcoming back the staff, workers, and visitors. thank you for the opportunity for this update. >> thank you, mr. aggett. any questions for bruce? all right. >>clerk: next item is item seven, public comment. this is an item for members of the public to address you on items not on today's calendar, and we do have roland lebrun who would like to speak to you regarding d.t.x., and another item. >> good morning, directors. so the first thing i want to bring to your attention is that if you go to the tjpa website, and you look at the environmental section, nothing has been posted there since the
6:10 pm
draft seir in december 2015. now, the reason i bring that to your attention is as far as i recall, there's a 30-day comment period prior to your approval of the seir, and i'd be really interested in seeing what the replies were to the comments i made, the 15th of february 2016. there are two items that really need your attention, is the turn backtrack from 16th street. how could that possibly work? how could it possibly have -- be able to operate, anything across 16th street with a third track? another thing that's in there -- that actually was very, very rae clearly identified in a r.a.b.
6:11 pm
study, is the traction box extension, once it's built, it's going to require the condemnation of in excess of $2 billion of san francisco prime real estate, including the enti entire rankin center. as far as i know, none of that has been addressed. the f.t.a. is not aware of this, and the sooner we get down to the bottom of that, the better. >> okay. madam clerk, any others? >>clerk: mr. lebrun includes other items? okay. that concludes members of the public that wish to address you. >> vice chair gee: next item, please. >> next item is a report on the
6:12 pm
update of the salesforce transit center. >> good morning, board members. dennis tershon, senior construction manager. i will give an update to the temporary supports. this will be a continuation of last week's presentation, but i will also -- i'm also including original slides from last week for knowing that there are different members here today than were last week, so i've included all that as a short recap. i will be covering fremont street status first, then, i will layer in first street. >> vice chair gee: could you hold on for a second? our screens -- oh, there we go. us rookies don't know which button to push on the screen. okay. thank you. thank you. all right. thank you. my apologies to the interruption. we were looking at the san
6:13 pm
francisco seal. >> i have the sales force and first street and updates, and following up with what mark had mentioned, the next steps and expand a little bit on those items, as well, too, as we wrap up the presentation for today. starting with fremont street, this is a graphic that was good to use as a reference point to show where we're at. if you look at the bus deck level, you see that there is a yellow rectangle with the two lines. that's exactly where the girders are. as i expand that out, i will mention -- and you've probably seen in other reports -- you see three -- the middle one is actually a hangar beam, and that is what is holding up the bus deck. and then, similar moving onto
6:14 pm
the bus deck there, this is a blow up of the bus deck. as you move up to the girder, you see where the hanger beam is in the middle. this hanger beam is directly in the middle of those girders that are approximately 80 feet long, spanning over fremont street, and the northern one is the one that has the crack in it. with the stiffener, you can see above the ironworker's hard hat. so what has happened at fremont street since? one of the first items out in the field and was resolved, we call it the phase one initial stablization. these were gantry jacks, in cooperate with bigy and shty were installed to take loads off
6:15 pm
of the girders. they are happen to sit on a wood -- a wood mat, and also, the steel girders underneath is are part of the actual temporary support design, so we're able to get some of that temporary support in, and with we put these gantry jacks in immediately. since then, all of these have been removed from fremont street. where these blue ones are are where the temporary support system has been installed. to talk the temporary support design, this is a four-level temporary support system. these are two major girders
6:16 pm
withholding not only the roof deck but also the bus deck below them, so there is a significant load that we're good night to go transferred. that had to be transferred not just to the ground level or the bus deck, it can to be transferred all the way down to the deck slab. so that's why the design and analysis getting to all the details has -- that activity on my schedule slide has moved out a little more because it has taken time to get those four levels matured and peer reviewed to get in place. and today, we have the design. you know, the design has been finalized. thornton tomasetti has had the design. all four levels have a jacking system accompanied with it, so that's one of the other challenges that we'll -- i'll get into that'll be happening very shortly here, but i wanted to point out that this is not
6:17 pm
just a single-level shoring system, it's a different nature to that. and i've included a 3d which shows that the original gantry jacks, they were pulled at the ground level, and this shows how the levels of beams that are taking this support all the way from basically the ground -- from the rooftop all the way down to the mass slab. some of the beams they're using, they were all readily raebavail at herric's yard. some of thesum ises, they're w-14 systems, which are fairly low, but they're 740's, which are 740 pounds perfoot, so they're extremely stout beams, which was another factor that was built into the design of this system. this is what the -- at fremont street what it looks like today,
6:18 pm
those gantry yellow jacks in blue have been removed, and now we have it sitting with the bus deck, engaged. basically, the weight of the bus deck has still been taken off of the two girders, waiting for the rest of the two levels to be installed, and that's been going -- progressing. material now for all the lower is in place or has been delivered. those two lowers in the train box, and the lower concourse, those two levels there, all the materials here and should be installed today. and then, they will be moving to the vital bus deck level shortly there after. this is a view if you're looking along fremont street towards mission. the footprint is about 10 foot wide, and it's -- you can see, it actually looks pretty --
6:19 pm
that's all -- as the traveling public will see, that's all that'll be out there on fremont street. and as -- this is the precursor to the bus deck that'll start to be installed starting tomorrow. once the bus deck is in, the ground levels are in, the two lower levels of are in, then, the sequence of taking the load off will begin. you want to impose certain a lot of load, there's a sequence that will be done. to do the repair, we have to take oath of both girders all weight and transfer all load. this is a drawing that just depicts what fremont street will look like shortly when opens. there is three existing lanes, and we still are able to match that. we're able to get three lanes
6:20 pm
through. our traffic control designer, in coordination with the m.t.a. traffic team, have come up with this, and it's k-rail, which is concrete barrier that totally protects this, in addition to a very large crash cushion array, a sand barrel crash cushion array is in front of it, as well to ensure safety of that temporary support system. the schedule now, where we're at with fremont street, we did have the initial destablization on october 1. since then, we're continuing to have the final design. in conjunction, we have a peer review looking at this temporary support system. that process has matured to all design has been delivered to him, and his review is to be finalized, anticipated by tomorrow, with the expectation of no more comments at that
6:21 pm
point, and then, fabrication and delivery has been ongoing with some of the last pieces of delivery to happen within the next day or so for all pieces for all four levels, and then, installation. we are -- we have identified wednesday as the date to open by, so that's where we're carrying at this point, and we are tracking. also, so this thing, i want to note that phase three, as we call it, are the next steps. i do have a slide that goes into it more extensively, but i show it starting on the 8th, which is when the testing and sampling procedures were starting to be drafted, and all the elements that were starting to be put in place, so when we had the load transferred to -- from the girders to the temporary support, that we have a procedure in place, it's been
6:22 pm
reviewed, and then, now, as we're bringing the peer review, the m.t.c. peer review update, we'll have something for them to review in very short order. hope to have that finalized by the end of today for the m.t.c. peer review, so there's many steps happening. we're not waiting for the transfer load to prepare for the next steps. now i want to step over to first street. first street has those two same -- a -- we determined it was prudent, and it was efficient, and the right thing to do to look at first street as the same -- as a redundant enhancement to first street.
6:23 pm
they're slightly different shoring and temporary supports that go into it, but the plan at this point is to have the same type of activity. that's what we're going to do for the permanent fix at fremont, also at first street to ensure there's continuity there. so this has a similar where it has a hanger beam in the middle. early preparation happened almost immediately after last thursday's decision, clearing the way, basically, getting rid of ceiling panels, scraping fireproofing, analyzing to ensure rights down the middle -- right down the middle where you drive on first street is the beam of the train box. that is why we're in the middle, that there is an actual support beam right there in the middle, that we have to lineup our temporary support system on. that was all confirmed where it was at. installing -- i mean,
6:24 pm
fabrication and design started -- the design was pretty straightforward because it was -- we've utilized the similar jacks, these gantry jacks from fremont street were able to be utilized over at first street. and then, those were able to be engaged, they were engaged monday night -- sunday night, and traffic was -- has been diverted all week, so we did actually that traffic -- split traffic over there and reopen it. we've only been closing 9:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. there's absolutely no affects to the traffic. c.m.c. is doing our traffic control for detour. you can see that the same k-rail, concrete barrier system, crash cushion array will be implemented and is in position
6:25 pm
on first street. there is the delineator striping. this one, we were able to turn the jacks in a 90° angle, so our wooden mat is only 5 foot wide as opposed to 10 foot wide on fremont street, so this shows the configuration. the thornton tomasetti confirmed to take the load off that we do want to takeoff of these girders, we do have to put some support in the train box levels, so those levels will get some supports, as well. we don't have to take all the load off because we have a girder that is carrying its own load, so it's a slightly different. we're taking the bus deck load off of it so as we go through the redundant -- at the point in
6:26 pm
time where we're able to install that redundant fix -- and to do that, it was felt that support beam directly under fremont street needed some additional shoring, and hence why we've gone all the way down to the mat slab over there. those two will be installed next week, and then, which is well ahead of time of when the actual redundan system will be installed. similar to fremont street, we worked hand in hand, webcor, they had their traffic control person working with m.t.a. on traffic handling. it's a similar type, just in the opposite direction. we're able to get three lanes through, and it's been working well over at first street. so i've referenced the next steps.
6:27 pm
compared to where we were last tuesday, the design and shoring's completely matured, and just a matter of implementation in the field. the sampling and testing and the cause and the potential fixes actually do have a synergy together. in some ways, it's a little bit of a chicken and the egg, what comes first? you need to know your fix before you can determine what your sample is, so thornton tomasetti has been working with skepticcol fixes, and that has led us to a procedure that should be finalized possibly as soon as today to have what we can take as our sampling. that's going to be -- that's the important next step 'cause once we get the offload of that, we can get in there. once all the parties have confirmed, including the peer review, that that's the right -- we're not waiting for the peer
6:28 pm
review, but they will be layered in immediately, and we're preparing for them to add in additional comments, probably additional maybe testing, so enough sample will be taken to accommodate theirs as they get up to speed here shortly. and then, from that point, a fix where right now, the team is agreeing on a metallurgical lab in new york that is completely independent of any of the labs that have been used previously for not only the constructive sampling and also the actual metallurgical testing itself will be outside entities that will be doing that, and that will be part of the package, along with plan sheets, design comments, all the shoring, a very large packet that will be readied and put in place for the peer review when they're ready to receive that. and then, they'll review this
6:29 pm
very large packet. then, once that's all in place, then, we'll implement the permanent fix, and you get the milestone of opening the facility in conjunction with any kind of peer review comments that may relate to the entire facility. so the -- i'm calling it the 2018 m.t.c. peer review because we have had a peer review on the project from, you know, for -- for quite a long time. at the making of this presentation, i -- i thought there was going to be seven members, but i believe m.t.c. is going to finalize with six members, and they're in the process of finalizing this today. and then, a kickoff meeting with them, which would include many presentations to them, and a very large, thankfully, helike tronnic file for them starting tomorrow. also in that group, it'll be the
6:30 pm
six panel review members. beside us, we will have the m.t.a. members in the room, and hearing the same thing that the panel hears, as well. our structural and seismic review committee, the original one, has been involved in this process. certain one of the members, when -- based on availability, have been included and will continue, as well. so with that, that concludes my update. if you want to add anymore, we're ready for any questions. >> vice chair gee: very good. director reiskin, want to start us off? >> director reiskin: yeah. thank you for the update. i apologize. i was not at last week's meeting, so if some of these things, you've already covered,
6:31 pm
please accept my apologies. first of all, up until monday, we were working on a date of opening tomorrow in terms of fremont street, so now, it sounds like we're off by about another five days or so. it's -- and i think you made reference to the fact that maybe you didn't anticipate having to go below ground, but if you could just help us understand why that change and what level of confidence we and the public should have now and to the october 17 date. >> as we were holding and had identified the 12th as the opening, the -- the design of this entire shoring system hadn't been matured yet, and that scope was evolving, which did include additional elements being added as it went through, whether it was the peer review or the coordination between our -- the engineer and also the fabricators and installers. so it was an evolving process.
6:32 pm
since the design ended up being more significant than originally was projected, i think there was from a -- there's a -- a much more conservative approach that now is our final product, and that's why it has taken longer to get to that point. if you compare to my schedule from last week to this week, it's really mostly the design and peer review, and then, the installation and fabrication following suit. with the larger amount of steel, there was obviously more fabrication, and then, the install, so there was a ripple effect that affected the 17th. the 17th is a no later than date, but we will be opening as soon as we get to that point of transfer, and the team is working hard to beat that. >> director reiskin: okay. so that -- the next question has to do with the shoring. fremont is not a regular city street, it's a bridge that the project built that serves as the
6:33 pm
roof essentially of that portion of the train box, so it looks like or it sounded like you said that the supports are already in place, already taking the load without the under lying supports on the bottom two levels in place yet. so i'm wondering what confidence we have that that bridge can absorb the load that it has. when the full shoring is in place, the mat slab and that second level below, what insuran assurance that we have that that can absorb that load. >> the shoring system that's really at this point on the ground level has only a -- a certain level of -- that up
6:34 pm
turned bridge, the original temporary bridge that we've put in there has been removed, so we actually have the beam on -- that's basically the roof of the train box itself. it has a certain capacity. a lot of that had to have live load, and additional loads that would have been on it, so those kinds of loads are now being accomplished with all that removed, now we're able to put a certain load into that girder, knowing that there's nothing else. once we open it -- that's why we had to put the lower supports in, so that very beam that's -- that's carrying some load right now, to get it up to the capacity to transfer it all, it -- that -- that beam could not handle all of it, so that's why we're having to take everything down to the mat slab level, which is exactly what all the other -- the columns that support that girder, that's what they do. now we're taking it through
6:35 pm
these temporary supports as opposed to the outer two columns. so that's why we're able to do, like, a two-step process because of -- there's no other load on it at this time. >> and that lower level and the mat slab, they're confident that it'll be able to absorb the load of the shoring, that, again, it was not designed initially to hold? >> well, they're setup so it transfers the loads directly through. it's all lined up. >> director reiskin: right, so at the bottom, the mat slab is a bunch of force that was not anticipated in the design. >> it's the same exact force that would be just 30 feet over. >> director reiskin: okay. >> the mat slab is designed to take this load, yes. especially -- and it comes down to how much you spread it out. there's a mat down there that spreads every load based on what -- what it can handle.
6:36 pm
>> director reiskin: okay. and then, i get there's sampling to come once the load is off, but what's the -- other than visual, how have you all been investigating these beams to date? >> so at fremont and first street both, they did magnetic particle testing, which is a nondestructive test that allows you to get in there and identify it you can see any -- if you can see any cracks. it's similar and different than ultrasonic testing. it allows us to see the same thing, but a little different and in a different area. this has been done both at first and fremont street. we're going to do some additional magnetic -- we call it m.t. -- that will also be involved. we've monitored it, as well, put strain gauges on it, as well. i believe if they get it cleaned
6:37 pm
up, as well, we're going to do dye penetrative testing. it identifies maybe any other cracks that they can't see, and accelerometer -- we have a tool box of nondestructive testing. >> director reiskin: okay. and are there any other parts of the center where we're doing any kind of investigation or are we waiting to understand the cause and peer review recommendations? >> yeah. we're waiting for the results to see based on the causation, what caused it to see what other elements in the transit center that we need to look at. we did identify first street because we have similar designs. there was no other area in the transit center that has similar design to fremont besides first
6:38 pm
street, so that was our focus. but once we know the cause, we'll be looking at other elements to make sure that the transit center is sound and structural integrity is sound and safe. >> director reiskin: and then with regard to first street, you're not going to be removing all of the load off of that beam, and you mentioned there was kind of a chicken and egg in terms of getting sampling results. i guess i don't understand those. if you don't yet know the cause, i don't know where the -- it seems like you need to do the sampling, then, you identify the cause, then, you identify the fix, and until you've done that, you wouldn't know whether or not you need to remove the load off of the first street beams or whether or not you know to fix it under partial load. >> let me answer that.
6:39 pm
so it's true that we first need to take the samples, get the results, and then, implement the fix. but we need to make sure the sample is not too small or large, so we need to figure out what possible fixes there are. >> director reiskin: so these are solutions based on potential identified failure loads? >> or based on these numbers, what are potential fixes? so conceptually, they're doing that to make sure that the sample is taken, but not too much or too little. we don't want to take too much of the girder so we don't have to replace the girder. but that's in parallel, and it's a possible list of fixes.
6:40 pm
for -- that's for -- for fremont street. for first street. we don't have to take -- we just want to take a little bit of the load of the girders so -- it's not a fix. whatever redundacy we take, the additional girders can take additional load itself. [inaudibl [inaudible] these are going to push it up a little bit. >> director reiskin: no, i understand that. i guess i don't know without knowing what the cause or how the fix is, how you know now that you don't need to remove all the load from first street the same that you're removing it from fremont street. >> our test results show the
6:41 pm
girders are sound and there's no issue with them. so based on our assumption, the plan is to introduce that. >> director reiskin: it seems like a less conservative assumption at this point. i appreciate that you'll -- you'll need to make a change if the test results and the recommended fix requires that we take all the load off first, as well. i find given that it's the exact same or very similar configuration, whatever we end up doing on fremont, we should probably end up doing on first. just a couple more. i think earlier with regard to restoration of service to the center, the bus plaza, the bus deck, partially or fully, and
6:42 pm
the park, i thought there was some thinking that there might be different milestones that would trigger opening of different parts. am i hearing now that everything is closed until all the work is complete? >> not necessarily. we're just waiting for the test results and figure out what the fix is, and at that point in time, we could look at possibly opening the park. >> once all the shoring is in place and all the load has been adequately transferred to a safe support system, what would be the reason, at that point, not to open the park? >> we just want to know the test results to see what caused it first, just out of an abundance of caution, but the shoring system is designed to carry the full load. >> director reiskin: and the bus plaza? i know it was thinking that when
6:43 pm
fremont street was reopened, the bus plaza could be reopened? >> initially, we thought that the shoring system on fremont could handle that load, but again, we want to look at the test results and find out what the cause is. >> was the shoring design to the bus plaza could function? >> the muni bus plaza -- not all bays can function. i think maybe two of the five days, dennis? >> two of the five would not be able to make the turn, so it was a decision to keep the service -- >> director reiskin: so it probably doesn't make sense. >> we wanted all options, available, director reiskin, but i'm not willing to commit -- >> director reiskin: yeah, no, that makes sense. and then, the last question, i know until we understand what the cause was, we won't know where the accountability lies for this, but we know that there's a lot of different entities that are incurring lots of costs, and for the tjpa,
6:44 pm
also, foregone revenue during this period that the city, my agency, police department, lots of folks are incuring costs. now the m.t.c. will be incurring costs. do you have a system in place to track these costs? i think for the city and certainly the other transit agencies, there's certainly an expectation that these will all ultimately be reimbursed. >> yeah, we have a system in place to track their costs. i have no doubt that the other city agencies are tracking their costs and will share them with us very soon. >> director reiskin: it may be proactive to track that. it's not just the tjpa, but it's the foregone revenue. we had visions of ramping up the revenue, and ultimately, i
6:45 pm
expect that the tjpa will be made whole for all of that. >> this is our intention, and to make the point, monday, we started advertisements in the transit center, and the transit program. tuesday, we closed the transit center, so we lost some advertising revenue that was already committed, so all of that will be taken into account, director reiskin. >> director reiskin: thank you. >> vice chair gee: thank you, director reiskin. who would like to go next in director harper? >> representative harper: i think that it really bears a lot of looking at. the other thing that i had was just sort of procedural, which was the -- the peer review committee i -- you know, there's a lot of media interest in this,
6:46 pm
of course, and understandably so, and i would like to get us ahead of the issue of whether those meetings would have to be open to the public or not because i think the media's going to want to be there. and just for myself, i mean, i know that, you know, the catchall for closing a meeting is anticipated litigation and stuff like that. but just for me, i would hate to have to use that to keep -- if that's the reason that we wanted to keep those meetings closed because there will be intense interest in what the peer review -- that's just my review on this, any way. >> i could offer a comment on that. so as you know, the m.t.c., rather than the tjpa is forming the committee. the brown act only applies to bodies that are created by a
6:47 pm
lae legislative action, even if it did take formal action to establish a formal committee, the brown act doesn't apply to temporary committees, sometimes called ad hoc committees that are established for a certain period of time that are made up of less than a quorum of the legislative body that serve a limited purpose and will be dissolved at the conclusion of that purpose. i anticipate that's what m.t.c. is expecting of the committee or any peer review committee that it establishes. >> and whether it's advisory, that's something. but any way, i think we really need to get that written up and be ready to deal with media inquiries on it.
6:48 pm
>> vice chair gee: director pearl? >> i just feel like we should probably consider some sort of monitoring. maybe not as deep an evaluation as would be required once we know what happened just to keep, you know, public confidence and safety in mind, especially if we're considering reopening the park or the bus deck. certainly, i want that, but i want to make sure that the rest of the building is okay. the other point i would ask if you could go back to the peer review's role. i saw there was a bullet, maybe second to last slide, dennis -- yeah, so their role is to look at the recommended fix, and i assume that encompasses the cause of the crack in the first place? >> yeah. so they're -- they're going
6:49 pm
to -- the cause is going to be determined by the test results. they will peer review the cause and confirm that this is the cause. the designer will determine the fix, and then, m.t.c.'s peer review will approve the fix, and we'll also -- based on the cause, we want to be looking at evaluating some other members, maybe in the transit center, in the structural members, so we'll be looking for guidance from the peer review, what other members we evaluate and so forth. >> that's the design related to the crack. and the second review, is that -- >> no, the second step. we wanted it to be the same review that would peer the cause, give us a fix, and guidance on what other investigations we need to do or evaluation we need to to confirm
6:50 pm
the structural integrity of the transit center as a whole. >> okay. as a whole. because there's this piece, and i think there's another piece that you mentioned about designs, the structural and seismic review committee. >> that is the committee that helped us during the design review process. that committee is no longer meeting, but what dennis tried to highlight is we did have a peer review during the design phase, and they reviewed shop drawings in construction, as well. the m.t.c. review panel was totally independent of the original peer review >> okay. but that -- they'll -- the second review group committee will be reinstated to sort of relook at the design potentially -- >> we want the m.t.c. -- >> oh, i think come back. >> yeah. >> i think that's fair. you've sort of mentioned in the media that there could be any
6:51 pm
number of causes, relating to the steel itself, the steel beam structure, or the design, so you want to be thorough in the review scope. >> so it could be a welding issue, could be a function issue, could be a design issue, depending on the cause, we want the peer review committee to let us know what other investigations, evaluation we need to do in the transit center to confirm the structural integrity in the transit center. >> and i'm hoping that funding partners would be well come? >> absolutely. >> thank you. >> vice chair gee: thank you. director sesay? >> director sesay: thank you. all of the members asked the questions that i was going to ask. but to clarify, what is the next plan of opening fremont street
6:52 pm
that is the 17? then, you have the peer review and all that that comes with it? we're not comfortable with saying what it would take -- determining the scope -- what does that look like? what is the expectation of terms of when -- i know we don't want to go there, but just to give us an idea -- >> no, it's a fair question. the m.t.c. peer review is going to have a kick off this friday. we're gathering documents so we can get them up to speed so first review the sampling methods, share with them conceptual design ideas, and so that -- and then, so that we get their agreement on this is what -- this is how many samples where the samples should be taken. then, we will do the sampling, and when the results come out, and we determine the cause, we share with them the results of the sampling of the constructive
6:53 pm
testing and what we think the cause is, and we have the confirmation on that. once we have that, we could have the confirmation on what the fix is >> so the phasing of the facility would commence after all that is done? >> if we were to consider to open the park, it would be done after the test results come in, which would be the first week of november . that would be the timeline where we get all the results, know what the timeline is, and know whether it's appropriate to open the park up to the public. at that point, we would know when it's time to implement the fix, and release it it to the public. so we're looking to start sharing with you some solid schedules. i realize the disappointment that we can't give you a date right now, but we just don't know. we don't know what the cause is,
6:54 pm
and based on that we don't know the appropriate fix, where the materials are going to come from, and the appropriate timeline. >> once the cause is determined, we will have some discussions with the operators, and that also depends on when the test results come in, when do we anticipate to open the transit center? if we're talking about few weeks, it may not be worth it for them to move their operations. it may be worth it to stay in the temporary terminal. >> director sesay: are there be any new additional resources that you're looking to? >> yeah. the additional resource is that we want to contract with the testing lab that will do the constructive testing. we want to do that through us or
6:55 pm
our consultants, so we're working that on place. also, we want to take the sampling ourselves. we want to -- once everybody agrees on what samples to be taken, we want the tjpa or the tjpa consultant to do that, so that's the stuff that we're lining up right now to make sure we have somebody lined up to take samples, and we want to -- we want to fund and test for the testing, and we want to be present during the testing. >> vice chair gee: director lipkin? >> director lipkin: you covered my question about the timeline, what was going to be the path forward. i had one other question. in terms of the investigation process that's happening, you know, obviously, you can't start the testing until you have the 17th, and you take it from there, but the part you can do is testing the beam's process, how they got there, for both first street and fremont street.
6:56 pm
has that been happening? >> we have that information already. >> director lipkin: okay. >> we -- we want to start -- put outline altogether and be ready when the test results come in to start -- what the mill search say, what the test results say, and the u.t.c. test, and the testing shop. >> director lipkin: and will you provide those results to the peer review panel? >> oh, absolutely. it's going to have to be a comprehensive package for them to understand, and we will provide also our -- the contractor and the personnel and the -- our designers to them so they can explain it so that the peer review panel understand how the building's designed, all the intended loads, and so forth. >> director lipkin: okay. thank you. >> again, i'm sorry, i don't have a whole lot of answers for
6:57 pm
you. >> vice chair gee: director harper? >> representative harper: yeah. in follow up to the scheduled thing, we had planned at ac transit, to add a good bit of service in december with the new sign up and everything. so i think we are going to need at much advance notice as possible to -- i'm sure -- i can't say this for sure, but we probably would not want to do that without the major terminals being in place, and the scheduling and everything would have to change. so as soon as we can get some definition to this, it would really help us for our planning. >> yeah. we'll definite inform a.c. transit, and director harper, another point that i want to make is while we're doing the permanent repair, we're going to be doing that on the bus deck, so even if we wanted to open for bus operation, some days will be be available. so i think a lot of things have to go into place before we decide to operate the buses
6:58 pm
while shoring's in place and we're doing repairs, but we're keeping options open until the results come out. >> vice chair gee: director reiskin? >> director reiskin: i have a follow up to one of director sesay's questions. this whole body of work was not planned or anticipated. you have a tiny staff, and i guess some of your support consultants are in the mix here. do you think you have the resources you need in terms of staff and band width and capacity and expertise to manage this process? is there anything more that you need? >> no, i think we're in good shape now, especially that m.t.c.'s undergoing the peer review. initially, we started that we were going to do the peer review, and that would have demanded quite a bit more effort on our part to do that. now that m.t.c. has greed to take it on. i think between our consultants and our construction
6:59 pm
administrative managers and our design team, we're able to do it. and i'm not shy on reaching out. i'll definitely reach out to some other agencies to get some help. >> vice chair gee: all right. fair. good. any other questions from the directors? mr. shawn, thank you for the update. i think chair nuru said at the last update, that we were very disappointed with the situation we have, six weeks after the ribbon cutting to find this, as well as frustration of our riders. at the same time, safety of the public is number one, safety of our transit operators, and safety of our transit riders are all equally important. we begin the forensic work, i think i said it last time, is just to be cautious, because we don't know yet where this is going to take us. and so while there is a sense of
7:00 pm
urgency on reopening, we do need to take the right amount of time to make sure we do the right homework to find the right cause and to have the fix and make it peer reviewed and to make sure we do open it next time, it is safe for everyone, and we don't have to do this again. and so while, again, everyone wants a date when it's going to happen, i just put out caution until we know, we really don't know. so i like what you're doing. i appreciate what you're doing. i like the members of the first panel, seismic review panel will find out the members of the second panel that m.t.c. is putting together. as the engineer said last time, it is -- engineer of record said last time, it's unfortunate, but steel does crack, and it does happen luckily often, not too


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on