Dear Editor:
This letter is in response to Scott Gibson, member of Hoboken Common Sense Mr. Gibson, if you had “Common Sense” you would do a little research before putting your name to a letter that is not factual. Or you would at least try to determine if the information is/was factual.
First, not one cent of taxpayers’ dollars pay for anything at the HPA.
Second, whenever the HPA had extra funds we gave it to the City, thereby helping the taxpayer.
Third, 916 Garden Street.
1. The contractor (including the subcontractor) were given the go ahead on December 15, 1998.
2. The contractor (and the subcontractor) agreed to the terms of the contract to complete the building and the technology in 365 days or December 14, 1999.
3. The subcontractor returned their sub agreement with the contractor on February 8, 1999 with a statement. “As you know we have had substantial difficulty in negotiating this Agreement primarily because of the particular nature of the new technology to be developed in this project.” A Master Schedule as developed by RP was submitted with the agreement. The Master Schedule had a new time line for completion, March 2000.
4. The subcontractor then advised that the final schedule would be July 21,2000.
5. The subcontractor then advised that live testing would be started on September 30, 2000.
6. Nothing happened on any of the dates. Only excuses, the steel, the power, the carpenters, the painters, the General Contractor and the HPA. Not once did the subcontractor advise that they had any problems.
7. On October 5, 2000 the subcontractor was fired.
8. Then after many weeks of negotiations Surety agreed to bring back the subcontractor. September 10, 2001 the subcontractor agreed (their schedule) to complete the garage in 180 days. Included in this time were the six (6) weeks of live testing that they needed.
9. The subcontractor took 275 days and they are still doing tests and the May 3, 2002 test failed, as did the second test they performed.
10. Yes, there was a press conference, where all of the commissioners were not notified. I had nothing to do with trying to stop the press conference. I made one inquiry. Was Surety notified and did Surety give their OK?
If the system works, 100 percent automated, and the jury is still out on this one, then all the parties will stand to be winners. Not until the subcontractor has performed all of the required contractual and actual live testing (phasing in) will we have an answer to the 100 percent automated parking garage.
Remember, they complain that they are ready. Are they? when they still require six more weeks to continue their phasing in portion of their work schedule?
Make the garage work safely, efficiently, without delays and with nominal on site requirements. It’s to be 100 percent automated and therefore should not require any technicians on site 24/7/365 to make it work.
Donald J. Pellicano
Commissioner
Hoboken Parking Authority