Frank I bet the reason Pike did not speak out is because the city threatened to sue if they speak out. This would not be the first time that the city gagged the contractor on this project. There is a serious problem at the site. More information on the issue will come out after the bid conference on Tuesday.
Geeze, how difficult can it be to dig a hole in the ground? Is this is any indication of how the rest of the project will go?
What are the chances of finding a replacement contractor that wouldn't think exactly like Pike? The whole thing is in a state of limbo that could last years.
The only contractor interested in completing this is Edgewater as they have a special interest in having boats to bring in people to their disaster ridden hotel. Unless someone is completely transparent about the how and why Pike was let out of a contract with no consequential damages, I don't believe we will find another interested general contractor.
The city needs to provide more details. Why wouldn't they be more transparent?
The problems and additional cost of tax payer dollars that are apparent with this ill-thought out marina project are nothing compared to the problems and additional cost to tax payers that will occur unless someone or something can stop the City from proceeding with their current plan for development at the Port. There is no way the unstable, water-logged (and did I mention contaminated???) soil will be able to support 10 story buildings over an extended period of time.
It's because Pike couldn't hit bedrock and they deemed the project unsafe. So they walked off the job. Is there even another contractor that will touch this disaster of a project? I haven't heard of one. This whole thing is a huge mess and it will just get worse.
This is one of the very best articles on this subject I've read from any news outlet in the region! Is a great resource for anyone who wants a good overview of the future of healthcare.
I did ask repeatedly, Frank. The only explanation I was given was that the disagreement had to do with the continued excavation and the de-watering of the basin.
Could you please explain the "disagreement" over how to approach the project? I would think that when the city contracts with a firm do to work for the city, the firm does the work that the city asks. If there is an ethical reason to object - for example, the city's approach would be structurally unsound and a danger to citizens - then the firm has an obligation to speak up. Otherwise, the city is paying you, so shut up and do the work. Now, the city has to pay multiple firms for this job, and there is no way that two firms will cost less than one for the entire project. This wasteful spending deserve an explanation, Christine.
I could make money using my home as a brothel, but the state won't allow it. The state owes me compensation for the money I could have made as a pimp, if not for that pesky government interference. Otherwise known as "Public Assistance for Me, but Not for Thee."
The fracking ban is, in a way, a do over. Earth Day 1970 was a definitive event that marked a turning point. We decided not to turn. With NY's fracking ban, the future of energy has a new chance to start. What will we do?
Website powered by Foundation