Report: Fixing Waller Creek Tunnel design flaw could cost millions (2015, insurance)

[10scoachrick]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek
Are those city staffers Professional Engineers?


scm53 What part of

Quote:
city staffers had reviewed the design and concluded that it wouldn’t obscure Capitol views.
don't you get? Let's assume your point is valid. Then they are just as wrong for making that call - incorrectly - without being PEs. And now we are out multiple millions.


How long have you two been married?

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Komeht

In this case, it's not necessary because, the view is from a park, oh, and that view doesn't even exist. The State constructed a parking garage. In this case, we have a 45 Million dollar protected view of a parking garage.

Oh and if you actually bothered to read the article you posted you're realize that the intake facility actually created views that did not exist before. Perhaps the state of Texas should bestow 45 Million upon the city for doing so.

You are the one with the selective reading problem. The Lorenzo de Zavala State Archives and Library Building is the one blocking the view - and is exempt because it predates the CVC ordnance. The parking garage is low enough to not obstruct the view.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

What part of


don't you get? Let's assume your point is valid. Then they are just as wrong for making that call - incorrectly - without being PEs. And now we are out multiple millions.

Interesting selective quoting, literally cutting off the two words in front "suggests that". We don't even know if city staffers did review the plan, and if so, if they relied on the report of engineers.

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

This is totally ridiculous. One of the best views, from the LBJ Library, gets completely trashed by the expanded stadium without a peep and this is a showstopper?

One of the BEST views EVER of the Capitol - from the I-35/Riverside area - was almost totally blocked by the construction of the old downtown Post Office on E. 8th Street four decades before the stadium expansion. Before that ugly box was built, when northbound drivers rounded that Interstate curve the majestic view of the Capitol was amazing & beautiful.
After the Pickle building went up, only the cupola of the Capitol could be seen - just peeking over the federal box.

When that travesty happened without a peep from the CoA, the State, or anybody IIRC, then the Capitol View "Corridors" law/ordinance was a couple decades late.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Interesting selective quoting, literally cutting off the two words in front "suggests that". We don't even know if city staffers did review the plan, and if so, if they relied on the report of engineers.

Do you regularly approve things you didn't review? At our company, do that and get caught, you get fired. For less than a $45M mistake.

What government agency do you work for?

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by scm53

Do you regularly approve things you didn't review? At our company, do that and get caught, you get fired. For less than a $45M mistake.

What government agency do you work for?

Both companies and government agencies VERY VERY VERY OFTEN rely on outside expertise of all kinds. If the city hired the engineering firm to determine, among other things, whether the structure conformed to state and local laws and the engineering firm failed to do so, then they are at fault. Period.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Both companies and government agencies VERY VERY VERY OFTEN rely on outside expertise of all kinds. If the city hired the engineering firm to determine, among other things, whether the structure conformed to state and local laws and the engineering firm failed to do so, then they are at fault. Period.

I completely agree. We routinely use outside counsel. BUT WHEN WE DO, it is VERY clear that the approval was on the advice of outside experts.

Which the agenda annotation - for some reason - doesn't indicate.

[CarnivalGal]

Whether the law is stupid or not is irrelevant. The city knew what the law was and dropped the ball and now their shortsightedness and general idiocy will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.

But it's pretty par for the course for the city. Kind of like how they built a new $3.5 million boathouse 2 years ago which may now be torn down to construct a bridge for light rail. Genius.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by mm57553

Whether the law is stupid or not is irrelevant. The city knew what the law was and dropped the ball and now their shortsightedness and general idiocy will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.

But it's pretty par for the course for the city. Kind of like how they built a new $3.5 million boathouse 2 years ago which may now be torn down to construct a bridge for light rail. Genius.

Actually, you have no idea that it will cost the taxpayers anything. Liability will be assessed, the City may very well, in fact, likely recoup much if not all expenses, including attorney's fees.

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Actually, you have no idea that it will cost the taxpayers anything. Liability will be assessed, the City*** may very well, in fact, likely*** recoup much if not all expenses, including attorney's fees.

Wow! Is it an election year or WHAT?