05-14-2018, 10:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-15-2018, 07:06 AM by Pheidippides.)
(05-09-2018, 06:14 AM)Canard Wrote: Yes, they are focusing on the bridge area. With an infinite size of team, anything is possible. But it is finite.
They don't need an infinite sized team, they need one that fulfills their end of the contract. In taking the contract the contractor is agreeing that they can complete all of the specified work with the required 6 month time period in the budget/bid they have supplied; if the contractor is just low-balling their bid to ensure that they get the contract and has no intention or ability to actually meet the deadline they should be held accountable/penalized. It begs the question, why isn’t there more accountability in these construction contracts?
Work was started at the beginning of September 2017 and was expected finish about approximately 6 months later (end of February 2018), but let’s give them March as well; so that is 7 months to finish the work.
Now, we have a little thing around here called winter, so, baring a construction dome or a freakishly warm and snow free winter, progress will be slow at best for at least 3 of those months (say December, January, and February). Let’s also assume the contractor was overly optimistic in their hopes of a short and mild in winter ensuring their progress toward meeting their timelines, and because real winter set in pretty early and hard this past season we cut the contractor some slack and tack those three months on at the end to extend the deadline to the end of June 2018. We now have a 6 month project stretching out to 10 months; even that seems optimistic at this point.
I will be very pleasantly surprised if the central promenade is completed before Canada Day and that’s with adding 66% more time to the original deadline.
My point is, the City/Region should put more penalties in their RFPs related to timeliness and quality. I don’t blame the contractors for taking advantage of the situation. If they can make more money using fewer staff and equipment, and cutting corners on materials and methods (which also generates new work because rebuilt infrastructure breaks down faster) while still getting new work than why not take advantage of that situation? (I am not implying poor methods or materials were used in this specific project, but in a general sense)
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.