My apology to Amy Archer for the PARE to Nitsch switch

 I am going to start going through my files and posting for historical reasons.  Soon I will post what is really happening with the Belmont Community Path and all the associated lies.  But here is a blast from the past.

 

After the town decided to switch from PARE to Nitsch unexpectedly, I wrote Amy Archer. To me it was an unfair decision.

 

To Amy Archer, PARE engineer

July 20, 2019

 

I am sorry that this town won’t be working with Pare to develop the commuter path.   Besides stonewalling residents, it would seem there are other undercurrents at work that I find very upsetting.


The choice, as far as I understood based on the discussion I heard the Friday of the presentations, had nothing to do with your credentials or quality of work.  As a matter of fact, your competitor’s presentation was subpar and seemed to reveal that they had not even read your feasibility study.  What I observed was a group of people trying to come up with reasons not to hire Pare.  The most often repeated pro for your competitor was simply that it was a “fresh, new face”.

Since there was not a solid rationale for choosing your competitor,  I assume that was why the vote was delayed until Monday.   Then on Monday, the rationale was primarily that your competitor would be better at securing TIP funding.  The reasons for that conclusion were not at all clear to me.

So Belmont loses in not having your expertise.  I hope you have a better type of client in your future projects.  Best of luck!

 

 

 

 

 

Popular posts from this blog

Project still at 25% not 75% - how to fool the masses

SCHEDULE DELAY   I have the thread of emails and docs on this matter from MassDOT public records ( link to docs ) so my suspicions about the fact they have been stuck at 25% have been confirmed.  In addition, Nitsch engineers came before the town and admitted it  twice ( link to 3/24 SB video - Nitsch at 1 hr 30 min; for the 3/19 CPPC recording, ask CPPC Chairwoman Muson). The project is still stuck in the first step. The 25% design plan has not been approved.  Nitsch still needs to do  the Subsurface utility survey - Class B (SUE) which is essential for the sketching and structural design of the tunnel.  Hence, they don’t have a clue as how to design the tunnel at this point.  Cutting corners, they submitted plans for a 75% for the rest of the path in the absence of a 25% revised and approved plan. Wisely, MassDOT rejected it because the 25% was missing.  In their own defense, Nitsch argued that,as they saw it, the tunnel was a “minor spur” an...
Read more

Tunnel jacking is MBTA's fault ... NOT

 I keep hearing town hall people blame the MBTA for the switch from tunnel jacking to cut & cover.  From the sequence of events that I witnessed, it was the town's own fault that the project started off with jacking. PARE vs NITSCH   It all started with the PARE to Nitsch switch at the design stage which was a very unconventional move. It's all described here  FIRST MEETING WITH NITSCH  At the first meeting after being hired, Michalak made mention of tunnel jacking. The committee members expressed some surprise saying they had expected cut & cover. Their surprise surprised me since the Nitch bid was so  much about jacking.  Michalak made it clear that the method to be used was jacking. SECOND MEETING WITH NITSCH At this meeting, Michalak talked about jacking but now he implied that he was obeying the town's wish to use jacking. This was quietly accepted by the committee members.  I was slack jawed at how responsibility for jacking had...
Read more

The Miracle of the Sketchily Scheduled Public Hearing

I've been on hiatus fron this blog after Nitsch's submission of the 25% design plan at the end of 2021.  All that time, I've continued to observe the CPPC meetings; they have been as interesting as watching paint dry. Nitsch's Michalak seemed to avoid the CPPC but, a few times, the CPPC succeeded in having Michalak show up to give a report of ... non-progress. This was confirmed by someone with knowledge of the project within the MBTA who complained to me of how Nitsch was not delivering the necessary engineering plan although 1 year had lapsed since the request made in 2022. Engineering plan vs design sketch  My MBTA interlocutor explained that an engineering plan is different from the design plan. The latter is a sketch; the former is plan that shows location of items and structures in the subsurface and surface of the project area.  The subsurface items include pipes and cables because you don't want to start digging - for example - to build a wall and then fin...
Read more