A San Francisco Civil Grand Jury report on answers questions on why the Van Ness Improvement Project is taking so long.
SAN
FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Why is the Van Ness Improvement Project taking so long?
That's the question a new San Francisco Civil Grand Jury report released Monday
answers.
The
project from Mission Street to Lombard Street will create San Francisco's first
bus rapid transit system with dedicated bus lanes, improvements to boarding,
and technology to keep buses moving. It will also replace a 100-year-old water
main and sewer.
Businesses
up and down the 2-mile stretch of San Francisco have long had a different name
for Van Ness Avenue.
"It's
a mess," said Farzin Kaveh who owns Audio Symphony.
The
mess also caught the attention of San Francisco's 19 person civil grand jury.
RELATED: SF's Van Ness
Improvement Project has some calling it 'Van Mess'
"You
can imagine with 5-6 years of construction a lot of us and including our
friends and acquaintances asked the question why is Van Ness taking so
long," said Simone Manganelli, Juror and Committee Chairperson for the Van
Ness Investigation Civil Grand Jury.
The
Civil Grand Jury's newly released report found that the cost of the project has
increased to $346 million dollars, $37 million dollars over budget. Also that
bus service is slated to begin in 2022, three years later than promised.
The
City has said the delays were driven by unexpected findings under the surface
of Van Ness, but the Jury found that the SFMTA could have lessened delays and
cost overruns had it done more prior to the start of construction.
"In
terms of the design, the planning, the contracting, the pre-construction
process," said Manganelli.
The
Civil Grand Jury found deficiencies on both the city side and contractor side.
On the city side, the jury found that while putting bus rapid transit lines down the middle of the lane will make transit times more smooth, it created delays because existing utilities like water and sewer needed to be moved to the side of the street.
The
jury also found a lack of exploratory potholing by the city.
"Exploratory
potholing would have helped them realize how different the official utility
maps under Van Ness Avenue were compared to reality," said Manganelli.
RELATED: SF businesses
facing losses during Van Ness construction project
On
the contractor side, the jury found Walsh may have cost less up front, but not
in the long run.
"Walsh
and the city weren't working together on this contract in the way that they
were supposed to," said Manganelli.
"They
were all focused on resolving these issues of delays and timelines meticulously
instead of trying to innovate and get the project proceeding," he
continued.
Something
which has not been lost on businesses suffering on Van Ness. I interviewed
Kaveh in 2019 and again today.
"It's
not a welcoming neighborhood anymore, people avoid it so as a business owner
and other businesses, people are not coming this way and you can't blame them
either," said Kaveh.
In
an emailed statement, the SFMTA said, "We appreciate the work of the San
Francisco Civil Grand Jury on the Van Ness Improvement Project. It raises
certain issues identified in prior internal audits and we are actively working
on incorporating lessons learned from those issues into successful projects
throughout the City. The SFMTA has resolved multiple contractor claims relating
to the issues in the report, including several where the contractor
acknowledged its shortcomings. We regret that the report does not properly
reflect the roles and responsibilities of a Construction Management General
Contractor on a capital construction project as complex as the Van Ness
Improvement Project.
Now
that the underground work is done we are nearly on-time and on-budget for the
surface component of the project. Our teams are applying lessons learned from
the Van Ness Improvement Project to other projects in our SFMTA
portfolio-including the successful Geary Rapid Project. The recent pace of
construction for above ground work reflects the lessons learned by the
contractor as well, and we look forward to working with them toward a
successful final stage of this project."
Walsh
did not respond to the I-Team's request for a statement.
Agencies
identified in the Grand Jury's report have 60 or 90 days to respond. The Board
of Supervisors will conduct a public hearing once those responses are
submitted.
ABC
News
By Melanie Woodrow
June 29, 2021
No comments:
Post a Comment