The half-ass work that Turner Construction did throughout this city is apparent; The Arena, the Duval County Courthouse, and I'm probably leaving some others out.....And now the latest Everbank Field?
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/money_makers/2013/05/turner-construction-to-do-4m.html
I don't think that I'm being unreasonable here. Why does Jax continue to remain persistent in dealing with these people? Are they the only construction company in the world? Get ready for some follow up repairs to Everbank Field about a year later....SMH.
Quote from: I-10east on May 06, 2013, 03:10:10 PM
The half-ass work that Turner Construction did throughout this city is apparent; The Main Library, The Arena, the Duval County Courthouse, and I'm probably leaving some others out.....And now the latest Everbank Field?
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/money_makers/2013/05/turner-construction-to-do-4m.html
I don't think that I'm being unreasonable here. Why does Jax continue to remain persistent in dealing with these people? Are they the only construction company in the world? Get ready for some follow up repairs to Everbank Field about a year later....SMH.
This happens because of inside relationships at City Hall that direct information about jobs to certain entities, work to see that they get it and then later defend the awful job that is done. If you want to understand the courthouse, take a look at who was subcontracted via Turner. You can start with Gate Co. doing the concrete work. Follow?
^^^Was the concrete substandard concerning the Courthouse? Gate can't be any worst than Pittman & Sons (Berkman 2 disaster) or can they? That still doesn't let Turner off the hook though. That's the reason why the city is trying to recoup (VIA lawsuit) alot of money from the leaking Main Library. Yet they want them to do Everbank Field; Talk about sleeping with the enemy. Whatever 'buddy buddy deal' at City Hall with these companies seems like a detriment to the city.
It's like I said on another thread, All of the decision makers are all friends with each other.
Quote from: I-10east on May 06, 2013, 03:47:47 PM
^^^Was the concrete substandard concerning the Courthouse? Gate can't be any worst than Pittman & Sons (Berkman 2 disaster) or can they? That still doesn't let Turner off the hook though. That's the reason why the city is trying to recoup (VIA lawsuit) alot of money from the leaking Main Library. Yet they want them to do Everbank Field; Talk about sleeping with the enemy. Whatever 'buddy buddy deal' at City Hall with these companies seems like a detriment to the city.
Actually it was substandard I-10. There were problems with the prefab stability as well as other issues.
Yeah that the citys doing. We need to stop dealing with Turner. Luckily they are not building the stadium or Id be worried. LOL!! I think Im OK with them doing the renovations. But I agree, we need to stop using them.
If you remember Turner also got into trouble repeatedly for hiring illegal workers during a time and place where our own local contractors were hurting for work. It was lousy all the way around. IMO
Quote from: I-10east on May 06, 2013, 03:10:10 PM
The half-ass work that Turner Construction did throughout this city is apparent; The Main Library, The Arena, the Duval County Courthouse, and I'm probably leaving some others out.....And now the latest Everbank Field?
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/money_makers/2013/05/turner-construction-to-do-4m.html
I don't think that I'm being unreasonable here. Why does Jax continue to remain persistent in dealing with these people? Are they the only construction company in the world? Get ready for some follow up repairs to Everbank Field about a year later....SMH.
Just one correction, Turner did not build the library, that was a joint venture between Elkins, Auchter, Lodestar, and The Parris Co.
^^^My bad, thanks for the info.
I saw on the news last night, that the Jags are paying for the renovations. It worries me that Kahn would hire these idiots. Is he in danger of becoming a good ol boy? Jacksonville has a way of doing that to most people who move here.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 06, 2013, 04:02:44 PM
If you remember Turner also got into trouble repeatedly for hiring illegal workers during a time and place where our own local contractors were hurting for work. It was lousy all the way around. IMO
Those illegal workers worked for subcontractors not Turner. While you do have a valid point about Turner not using local subs, claiming the workers were on Turner's payroll is not accurate.
I too would have preferred seeing more local contractors get work on the project.
Quote from: carpnter on May 07, 2013, 12:52:46 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 06, 2013, 04:02:44 PM
If you remember Turner also got into trouble repeatedly for hiring illegal workers during a time and place where our own local contractors were hurting for work. It was lousy all the way around. IMO
Those illegal workers worked for subcontractors not Turner. While you do have a valid point about Turner not using local subs, claiming the workers were on Turner's payroll is not accurate.
I too would have preferred seeing more local contractors get work on the project.
I understand your point, but Turner was the entity responsible for choosing those subcontractors.
Right out of college and for several years my 1st husband and I co-owned and operated two sizable contracting businesses that took on huge projects like shopping centers, apartment complexes and the like. When we hired sub contractors for our jobs, they darn well knew we expected them to do quality work and that their business practices were to be ethical and lawful. When the initial reports of illegal workers hired by subs was made Turner should have taken action with those subs as well as monitor their subsequent hiring practices to make sure they behaved lawfully. As it turns out those subs repeatedly violated the law by using illegals. Any Turner representative or project manager could have easily seen and monitored who was working on the courthouse job. Turner was ultimately responsible for hiring companies to work on the project and in that way those companies were an extension of Turner on this job site. It looks to me that Turner did not cover themselves regarding their subs business practices with contracts that spelled out they could void their contract if they failed to deliver on time or used illegal workers. Still is on Turner in my view.
Quote from: urbaknight on May 07, 2013, 12:28:01 PM
I saw on the news last night, that the Jags are paying for the renovations. It worries me that Kahn would hire these idiots. Is he in danger of becoming a good ol boy? Jacksonville has a way of doing that to most people who move here.
apparently the folks in Orlando have also decided to hire Turner for their staium renovations...and the compnay recently built the new Amway arena there
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 07, 2013, 02:17:14 PM
Quote from: carpnter on May 07, 2013, 12:52:46 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 06, 2013, 04:02:44 PM
If you remember Turner also got into trouble repeatedly for hiring illegal workers during a time and place where our own local contractors were hurting for work. It was lousy all the way around. IMO
Those illegal workers worked for subcontractors not Turner. While you do have a valid point about Turner not using local subs, claiming the workers were on Turner's payroll is not accurate.
I too would have preferred seeing more local contractors get work on the project.
I understand your point, but Turner was the entity responsible for choosing those subcontractors.
Right out of college and for several years my 1st husband and I co-owned and operated two sizable contracting businesses that took on huge projects like shopping centers, apartment complexes and the like. When we hired sub contractors for our jobs, they darn well knew we expected them to do quality work and that their business practices were to be ethical and lawful. When the initial reports of illegal workers hired by subs was made Turner should have taken action with those subs as well as monitor their subsequent hiring practices to make sure they behaved lawfully. As it turns out those subs repeatedly violated the law by using illegals. Any Turner representative or project manager could have easily seen and monitored who was working on the courthouse job. Turner was ultimately responsible for hiring companies to work on the project and in that way those companies were an extension of Turner on this job site. It looks to me that Turner did not cover themselves regarding their subs business practices with contracts that spelled out they could void their contract if they failed to deliver on time or used illegal workers. Still is on Turner in my view.
Sure Turner could have voided the contracts, put the project even further behind schedule and incurred a financial loss getting a new contractor on the project to replace the old one. Most times it is better to use a problem sub and monitor them more closely than it is to replace them and then litigate to recover any losses or fight the contractor who thinks he is entitled to more money for the work completed.
I've had problems with subcontractors on projects that had done excellent work for me on previous projects and I had to evaluate replacing them or dealing with the problems and just providing extra supervision to make sure they get the job done correctly and on time. I've also had to supplement contractors who were not performing.
^ I hear you. lol What really blows my mind is that the city also hired Sam Mousa to oversee this courthouse and deal with Turner, how we ended up with a building that could not open due to a malfunctioning fire sprinkler system and front doors that do not meet code is way beyond me. I think Sam made a cool six figures for his involvement. Bottom line is that some folks will let things slide and go a bit weak on due diligence if they think there will be little to no push back when things are not going as they should. The city got taken to the cleaners on this deal for a structure projected to last 50 years and it was all of us taxpayers who will be paying for that mess as it starts to deteriorate. Kinda like the Main Library, which of course was another contractor who clearly did not deliver quality work.
^Mousa was brought in to try to rope in a mad elephant that had already been on a rampage for five years. He managed it as well or better as anyone could at that stage. And I highly doubt he was paid six figures a year as a consultant. Another issue the city has is removing maintenance budgets, which were included in all these projects when they were planned but were removed to "save money" later. We can see how smart that is.
Quote from: Tacachale on May 07, 2013, 04:19:24 PM
^Mousa was brought in to try to rope in a mad elephant that had already been on a rampage for five years. He managed it as well or better as anyone could at that stage. And I highly doubt he was paid six figures a year as a consultant. Another issue the city has is removing maintenance budgets, which were included in all these projects when they were planned but were removed to "save money" later. We can see how smart that is.
I know and like Sam, he is generally very good at what he does and he knew he was stepping onto a runaway train when he stepped into this deal. Stopping those trains is generally what he does best. Not sure why so many things went unnoticed on this job however. Tach, check the figures if you like. Sam was paid very well and in the end it was more than six figures. ;)
I wonder if you noticed that you just made excuses for a well known player in politics and city hall. Kind of gives a bit more steam to the argument that if you are an "insider" you have way more latitude to perform or not cause your buddies will back you up regardless. lol Sam is overall a sharp guy, which is why the Turner interaction is a bit off in my eyes.
One thing to keep in mind is that in many cases an argument can be made that problems with a building can be directly related to poor design. Sometimes these design problems might show up when it is too late to change them and then you end up trying to fix them as best you can.
IIRC the problem with the Courthouse was not the sprinkler system but the Smoke Evac system and alarm system. If a sprinkler system holds the proper pressure it is working, water will flow when the proper temp is reached at the sprinkler head. I've never been directly involved in a project that had a smoke evac system but I have spoken to other contractors and owners who have and I am not surprised that they had problems with that system in the building.
That being said, Turner not knowing the building would be finished on time is inexcusable. They had complicated systems in the building and they had not been tested, assuming that you would pass the first time with no hiccups is not realistic, they should have made the city aware that they would be cutting the deadline too close and they should delay the move.
Quote from: carpnter on May 07, 2013, 04:50:39 PM
One thing to keep in mind is that in many cases an argument can be made that problems with a building can be directly related to poor design. Sometimes these design problems might show up when it is too late to change them and then you end up trying to fix them as best you can.
IIRC the problem with the Courthouse was not the sprinkler system but the Smoke Evac system and alarm system. If a sprinkler system holds the proper pressure it is working, water will flow when the proper temp is reached at the sprinkler head. I've never been directly involved in a project that had a smoke evac system but I have spoken to other contractors and owners who have and I am not surprised that they had problems with that system in the building.
That being said, Turner not knowing the building would be finished on time is inexcusable. They had complicated systems in the building and they had not been tested, assuming that you would pass the first time with no hiccups is not realistic, they should have made the city aware that they would be cutting the deadline too close and they should delay the move.
I would agree!
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 07, 2013, 04:29:04 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on May 07, 2013, 04:19:24 PM
^Mousa was brought in to try to rope in a mad elephant that had already been on a rampage for five years. He managed it as well or better as anyone could at that stage. And I highly doubt he was paid six figures a year as a consultant. Another issue the city has is removing maintenance budgets, which were included in all these projects when they were planned but were removed to "save money" later. We can see how smart that is.
I know and like Sam, he is generally very good at what he does and he knew he was stepping onto a runaway train when he stepped into this deal. Stopping those trains is generally what he does best. Not sure why so many things went unnoticed on this job however. Tach, check the figures if you like. Sam was paid very well and in the end it was more than six figures. ;)
I wonder if you noticed that you just made excuses for a well known player in politics and city hall. Kind of gives a bit more steam to the argument that if you are an "insider" you have way more latitude to perform or not cause your buddies will back you up regardless. lol Sam is overall a sharp guy, which is why the Turner interaction is a bit off in my eyes.
At the same time, we see that people will also take you to task for problems you didn't create and money you weren't paid, so perhaps it evens out ;) I'm just pointing out that the courthouse monstrosity was hardly Mousa's fault and I really doubt he got a "cool six figures a year for his involvement".
^ I didn't say that it was Mousa's fault but what I am questioning is why after he was on board the train remained out of control. He was paid to look after the interests of the taxpayer on this job? I guess whether or not he did that is up to interpretation. I won't continue to argue the salary, but I know it was six figures. Feel free to verify that with City records if you like or have the contract pulled. That will show you what was agreed to when it came to payment. Even if it was a buck two eighty, he was responsible for some oversight here. ;)
Here, I will make it easy for you. It was $154K over the period he worked on the project.
Quote
“Current city project management staff and others now have this project well under control,†he said in the letter to Chief Administrative Officer Kevin Hyde in which he terminated his contract with the city.
Mousa was paid $154,000 over the four years he worked on the courthouse project.
The consultant had been part of the John Delaney and John Peyton administrations and was brought on in 2008 after the project cost ballooned to more than $400 million. That’s more than double what voters had approved when they passed the Better Jacksonville Plan in 2000
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-02-09/story/sam-mousa-resigns-duval-courthouse-project#ixzz2SdwC3D32
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on May 07, 2013, 05:04:24 PM
Here, I will make it easy for you. It was $154K.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-02-09/story/sam-mousa-resigns-duval-courthouse-project
Unless I'm reading it wrong, that's over the entire four years he was on the project.
Whatever that broke down to be by year or over the period of his employment Sam was put in place to provide some oversight. Whether or not the 154k was well spent is hard to say as well as his statement to the effect that the courthouse project was well under control. I just wonder what kind of control he meant. lol My point in mentioning Mousa in the courthouse equation really is meant in tandem with commentary about folks working for the city and what level of performance is considered good enough when tax dollars are being spent. That's what is underneath it all for me here, the reality that the oversight taxpayers deserve isn't always taking place in Jacksonville.