Many of the pro-Measure P letter writers seem to be concerned with potential delays and/or cost of the Central Park Plan.
In Loretta Kaskey’s letter, “No Need for Lengthy Delay,” she questions the timeline from city staff that estimated a delay four or more years should the initiative for the Central Park Plan pass. She states that “the timeline allocates for many unneeded activities,” one of those activities being planning and outreach. I agree. Outreach workshops have already been done.
Ms. Kaskey’s statement that “various activities listed could occur concurrently, and none of those were noted” is also a valid point. I administered the contract for the half-mile extension of Stanford Linear Accelerator Center’s Linac Coherent Light Source accelerator housing. This accelerator extension included an injector facility, beam transport hall, undulator tunnel, near experimental hall, photon transport funnel, far experimental hall, service buildings, and a central plant, totaling approximately 120,000 total gross square feet. It took three years (2006-2009) to construct these amazingly complex scientific facilities. Construction precision was critical, with numerous activities occurring concurrently for the work to be completed in this time frame. The beam transfer hall has 6-foot-thick walls, 4-foot-thick concrete ceilings, 1,550 feet of tunnel, and 350 feet of tunneled research catacombs. Some areas are over 100 feet below the surrounding surface. The floor had to replicate the curvature of the earth. Both floor and temperature stability were critical.
Also, as the contract administrator of the Design/Build LCLS office building (22,143-square feet with walled offices, including a parking lot, the building’s construction had an aggressive schedule of 10 months, with contractual incentives for schedule, safety, and budget. The office building was completed more than 30 days ahead of schedule and within budget.
My opinion is that the city’s timeline for the Central Park Plan is to discourage voters from choosing one of the two plans in November, specifically the Central Park Plan. I am tired of the city council/city staff continuing to create obstacles to prevent the voters from deciding what they want. Please vote “No” on Measure P on March 3, so that voters have a choice of plans in the upcoming November election.
Please don’t let the city council’s scare tactics discourage you from voting for the best plan.
Contracts and agreements can be created to optimize desired results, but in addition to including contractual incentives, strong leadership, good communication, and cooperation between all parties is important. I believe the Central Park Plan is the best plan and its contracts can incorporate schedule, safety, and budget incentives.