MBTA Construction Projects

themissinglink said:
www.bostonglobe.com

MBTA violated state bidding laws to complete Foxboro station improvements in time for World Cup, state AG says - The Boston Globe

Gillette Stadium will host seven World Cup games next summer, starting June 13.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...
The most relevant quote in the article:
Despite determining that the MBTA violated the law, the attorney general’s office did not stop or terminate the Foxboro project. The office agreed with the MBTA that successfully transporting droves of fans to and from Gillette Stadium served the “public interest,” and depended on the project’s timely completion.
Click to expand...

The article implies that this letter was acquired either via a leak or public records request. It seems likely the AG wanted to note that this is probably illegal, but a reasonable action under these circumstances. However, this is another piece of evidence that the state's procurement laws need updating.
 
BeansTheCat said:
The most relevant quote in the article:


The article implies that this letter was acquired either via a leak or public records request. It seems likely the AG wanted to note that this is probably illegal, but a reasonable action under these circumstances. However, this is another piece of evidence that the state's procurement laws need updating.
Click to expand...
The question I wanted an answer to (and that was missing from the article), was did the MBTA overpay because of this or was the price reasonable? Hard to know what would have resulted from a competitive process, but if the AG is letting this slide, it would be nice to at least know if we were ripped off or not.
 
sm89 said:
The question I wanted an answer to (and that was missing from the article), was did the MBTA overpay because of this or was the price reasonable? Hard to know what would have resulted from a competitive process, but if the AG is letting this slide, it would be nice to at least know if we were ripped off or not.
Click to expand...
Overpaying is a relative term.

Speed and timeliness is one of the things you pay more for in construction (and most projects). A low competitive bid that takes 3 years to complete is inherently worth less to the T ( and the State and taxpayers) than a higher bid that can be completed in time for the FIFA matches.
 
Let me rephrase. What I'm interested in is what was the cost and time difference in quotes from Suffolk vs the other handful of contractors that are all actively working on MBTA contracts? Why add it as an irrelevant change order to Symphony Station vs the others ongoing? I'd have to imagine the mason, electrician, etc. are still getting the same state-mandated prevailing wages, so in reality the only 'issue' is the competitive bidding process, which is to ensure that bids are reasonable (profit not excessive) and that the MBTA is fair in how work is distributed (not favoring specific firms, etc.). It's a fairly easy documentation to show you had the taxpayers interests in mind. Could even be a one page memo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HBH
sm89 said:
Let me rephrase. What I'm interested in is what was the cost and time difference in quotes from Suffolk vs the other handful of contractors that are all actively working on MBTA contracts? Why add it as an irrelevant change order to Symphony Station vs the others ongoing? I'd have to imagine the mason, electrician, etc. are still getting the same state-mandated prevailing wages, so in reality the only 'issue' is the competitive bidding process, which is to ensure that bids are reasonable (profit not excessive) and that the MBTA is fair in how work is distributed (not favoring specific firms, etc.). It's a fairly easy documentation to show you had the taxpayers interests in mind. Could even be a one page memo.
Click to expand...
I mean, reading the actual letter the AG wrote - LINK to actual letter being referenced - that is exactly the point of the complaint - the MBTA awarded it to Suffolk without any competition at all, without soliciting additional bids from any of the other contractors.
... other CMR firms were not provided an opportunity to compete for the Foxboro Project. Second, it remains unclear whether the MBTA obtained CMR services for the Foxboro Project at the lowest rate competition among responsible contractors could provide because the MBTA only received pricing from one CMR firm, Suffolk.
Click to expand...
That's kinda textbook circumventing the public procurement process - there are no additional proposals from Consigli, Middlesex et al for the T to put in that memo, because the T didn't get that from them. Why this Suffolk symphony contract, and not ond the on-calls or other contractors? Kinda the point of why you're not allowed to do this by change order. Apparently, someone only told the T they would have to move more than 4000 passengers this February, despite having been selected as host in 2022, and the planned improvements scheduled for 2027... 🙄 Either way, T apparently couldn't get through a full new public procurement that fast, which given the multiple multiple week processes... is facially plausible.

(In terms of numbers, the T is paying some additional 14.8M to Suffolk to actually build the station.)
1000042865.jpg

The risk here is that the complaintant to the AG is one of the spurned contractors, who could litigate and force an injunction to stop work, on the basis of this AG ruling - they specifically declined to rule on merits of the claim that the public interest is in the change order being allowed to stand on the basis that there isn't any ongoing litigation.
Screenshot_20251226_225310_Chrome.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 1000042871.jpg
    1000042871.jpg
    92.3 KB · Views: 29
  • 1000042868.jpg
    1000042868.jpg
    259.5 KB · Views: 34
Last edited:
“A key component of the agreement is a commitment to advance a full-service, full-time commuter rail stop adjacent to Encore Boston Harbor, a long-sought transportation improvement for the Lower Broadway area. Wynn has agreed to fund up to $25 million toward required studies and construction of the commuter rail stop, subject to approvals by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and an agreed-upon project scope.”

Mayor DeMaria Finalizes Agreement with Wynn for New Hotels and Commuter Rail Stop

Mayor DeMaria Finalizes Agreement with Wynn for New Hotels and Commuter Rail Stop
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com
 
Presumably this has to be right near the waterfront around the "South Lawn" right? The bridge is still on piers as it approaches the shore, so maybe that's more of a challenge? The tracks behind the casino go right to the property line, and north of there is a pretty bleak industrial zone and MBTA property. East of Broadway is being planned as I recall, but I don't think there's anything on the docket for west of Broadway. It would also be nice infill between North Station and Chelsea
 
Justbuildit said:
Presumably this has to be right near the waterfront around the "South Lawn" right? The bridge is still on piers as it approaches the shore, so maybe that's more of a challenge? The tracks behind the casino go right to the property line, and north of there is a pretty bleak industrial zone and MBTA property. East of Broadway is being planned as I recall, but I don't think there's anything on the docket for west of Broadway. It would also be nice infill between North Station and Chelsea
Click to expand...
Any station need to be much further beyond the Mystic River bridge to meet regulatory requirements. The bridge approach is about 3% grade, and you need to get down to 2% nominally for an ADA compliant CR platform. More likely siting is near Sweeter Circle, or perhaps around the MBTA Everett Shops (nowhere land). Main point: siting is complicated there.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Any station need to be much further beyond the Mystic River bridge to meet regulatory requirements. The bridge approach is about 3% grade, and you need to get down to 2% nominally for an ADA compliant CR platform. More likely siting is near Sweeter Circle, or perhaps around the MBTA Everett Shops (nowhere land). Main point: siting is complicated there.
Click to expand...
I think the only place they can put it is just north of the maintenance vehicle crossing and signal at the switch behind Encore. The grade really starts to steepen right around there but there's ~1200' to work with before the curve under Sweetser, which has quite the superelevation to it, making it infeasible unless they did a track reconfiguration since they wouldn't need to take it at speed anymore with a station there.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
I think the only place they can put it is just north of the maintenance vehicle crossing and signal at the switch behind Encore. The grade really starts to steepen right around there but there's ~1200' to work with before the curve under Sweetser, which has quite the superelevation to it, making it infeasible unless they did a track reconfiguration since they wouldn't need to take it at speed anymore with a station there.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert in railroad design, but a realignment like this might work at Sweetser Circle to accommodate a CR station.

1768172908995.png
 
No photo needed, but the Kendall head house has been static for multiple weeks now. Did they need to hand build a generator for this?
 
Charlie_mta said:
I'm no expert in railroad design, but a realignment like this might work at Sweetser Circle to accommodate a CR station.

View attachment 70004
Click to expand...
Why even bother if it's that far out of the way? That location is about the same distance down the tracks from the casino's main entrance as Sullivan Square is, barring an exclusive busway, gondola, monorail, or pre-2006 Wellington Station style Wonkavator, shuttle buses would sit in the same traffic as everyone else, and it's almost exactly a mile to Chelsea Station. I guess I can see the advantage of having a straight shot down Broadway to the casino, and it is closer to Everett's downtown, but a commuter rail station at Sullivan would connect the Orange Line to both the Newburyport/Rockport and Haverhill lines and serve as a much more useful transit hub for the whole area.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
I think the only place they can put it is just north of the maintenance vehicle crossing and signal at the switch behind Encore. The grade really starts to steepen right around there but there's ~1200' to work with before the curve under Sweetser, which has quite the superelevation to it, making it infeasible unless they did a track reconfiguration since they wouldn't need to take it at speed anymore with a station there.
Click to expand...
Any one of the siting alternatives is going to be extremely pricey. At Encore-proper has the steep grade that has to be flattened out and distended with fill, which is going to make maintaining service during construction way harder and more expensive and also breach thorny questions about possible soil contamination under that stretch of trackbed that used to abut the ex-Monsato complex on both sides (which was very expensive to remediate on both the Gateway Center and Encore halves when those parcels were redeveloped). Anywhere on the (mostly) tangent track from the MBTA Everett Shops to the outskirts of Sweetser carries considerable extra cost for relocating the critical Everett Jct. complex of switches away from the would-be platforms. At Sweetser-proper you've got to regrade the track superelevation (though if all trains are stopping there it won't matter much if the superelevation goes away and trains are overall more speed-restricted), re-space the freight lead to create room for platforms, do a lot of drainage work, probably need to relocate some power line towers a few feet like SL3 had to, likely blow-up/rebuild both 1956-built Broadway overpasses because the sidewalks are too hilariously far from ADA-compliant to serve even the general vicinity of any station entrance, and pay more in materials for precision-cut curved platform slabs (though the curve itself would probably be within-tolerance for full-highs).

For what we're paying for renovated/not-new stations in these crazy times I would think all 3 of these new sites would be pushing upper-end 8 figures with tangible blowout potential to $100M. When more overall ridership to these sites' catchment is still going to be heavily tilted towards Orange<->bus in any universe given the innate ridership disparities between very frequent vs. much less-frequent modes, it's going to be hard to justify the pain threshold after the study tallies up the estimates. At any of the sites. Everett has to really want it BAD and be prepared to advocate like hell to overcome the surefire sticker shock for any of these sites. More than just an "Oh, Kraft and Wynn got our back so Y.O.L.O." sentiment, because clearly the private investment is not going to be nearly enough relief at the likely prices.
 
RandomWalk said:
I don’t doubt that. This would be longer than the holidays.
Click to expand...
It doesn't look like a lot of any construction is going on anywhere given the temps, weather, and the holidays as of the last month or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top