tv Government Access Programming SFGTV October 21, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PDT
transbay joint board meeting is called to order. it is a special meeting that i have called to hear about a plan to reopen fremont street and the sales force transit center. as we all know, a fissure was found last week in the beam. out of abundance for caution that, led to the temporary closure of the transit center. i know everyone joins me in expressing our disappointment at the closure, and we fully support the agency taking action out of abundance of caution and
that the public safety always comes first. the goal of this meeting and future meeting is to fully be transparent with the public about the cause, what our fix will be, and why this has happened. i understand from agency staff that the issue is localized to the p area and fremont street. we know the inconvenience to transit riders and the general public. today's hearing will focus on hearing how fremont street and the transit center will open as soon as possible. we are grateful to the crews who discovered the issue so that we can take necessary make-a-wi me make the repairs.
with that said, i would ask my fellow board members to speak, and then i would like to hear from the staff and the contractors who are working on this. >> go ahead and call roll. >> roll call. >> we'll go ahead and call roll and note that sheryl brinkman is here. act transit is here, and deputy ac acai is not present. [ roll call ] >> i understand that director tavares is enroute. [ roll call ] >> you do have a quorum. >> yes. so at this time, i would ask if any board members have any questions or statements they would like to make, and then we would like to hear from the
executive director on a step-by-step on all the actions that have been taken since we heard of this issue and what to expect. >> do you mind if we ask the questions after the presenting? >> that's fine, yeah. >> all right. with that, before going into your special calendar, you have public comment. that's the time for the public to address you. we have no folks on that item. we can move into your special -- >> okay. let's go ahead. >> good morning, director and board members. thank you for calling this board meeting so i can update you and the public on the events that led to the temporary closure of the sales force transit center. i would like to state that while serious, we have determined this is a localized issue at the
fremont street location. as you know, the transit center is composed of three separate buildings, and the location we're discussing today related to the area of the center around fremont street, which is that particular building we call the east building. it starts west of fremont street and ends at bill street. the building itself is safe. it's the area around fremont street that's not safe at this time. we believe the issue is localized to the transit center and no conditions to the neighborhood area or adjacent properties. while this is localized, we thought it would be best out of an abundance of caution, as mentioned, to close the entire center, and we'll open it as soon as it's safe to do so. this situation is disappointing to us, and our highest priority is to ensure public safety and open fremont street when the
repairs are completed as soon as possible. opening the transit center for bus operations will not take place until after the fix is in effect. and we'll discuss that later on. this is for safety reasons. for some background, on the morning of tuesday, september 25th, work crews discovered the fissure on a steal beam on the ceiling of the deck near fremont street. four crews at the time were installing the ceiling panels, and they saw a crack in the fireproofing. after an inspection of the beam by the engineers and an analysis of impact, they're determined to temporarily shut down the transit center and fremont street near howard. a second fissure was located in an adjacent beam. that was done after the fireproofing was removed from that beam and we did an initial
inspection. initially, we could not see any cracks similar to the one that was adjacent. again, this is a localized issue. we conducted virtual inspections and conducted testing and monitoring of similarly designed locations and found no fissures. the similar location would be on first street. we immediately inspected first street and saw no cracks in the fireproofing. we immediately removed the fireproofing and did an initial inspection. we found no cracks. we did testing, and we have no signs of tracks. we continue to monitor that location. it is similar design to the fremont street area. agencies are operating out of the temporary terminal at howard and main street while the transit center is closed. we're working with our partners to minimize the impact to commuters who are urged to call 511 or go to 511.org for updated
information or contact the bus directly. we apologize for the temporary closure. it's an inconvenience, but we're committed to reopening the transit center as soon as possible. i would like to invite our construction manager to present you with the details and the steps ahead. i do want to note that we have bruce gibson. he's a managing partner and has been involved handson since day one. peterson has been involved and hands-on since day one. harrick provided the steel for the building and has been involved hands-on from day one. we're working to make sure the public safety is met and to
reopen as soon as possible. we can answer questions afterwards. >> good morning, board members. i'm going to run through a presentation that will show you where we're at, what the location, how it's being accessed. schedule next steps. and ultimately, processes of peer review, future and proposed, as we go through the steps. to assist in questioning, i will be utilityizing web core and if any questions come up during the process, we'll handle that. i've used this before. this is the asymmetrical view, showing the street level, the second-level bus stack, and roof park. i also want to note first street and fremont street, keep your eye on fremont street. that's where we're talking about
as the director and mark had mentioned, that's the focus on the localized issue. there's a rectangle and two red locations. those are our two girders. those are directly above fremont street. they span over across fremont street. as you would be driving under the transit center, it would be over you. that's where you would -- if you're on the bus deck, those would be on the roof portion of it. it does show it on the bus stack, but it's on top columns. those are tapered girders. they' they're 8 feet deep where the cracks are. and they taper out as the columns support on either side. i want to note in that picture, it shows a column in the middle. that's not a support column. it's a hanger column. it's unique in that it's holding up the bus deck.
so these two red girders are holding up the bus deck as well as being supported from below. i will note that because that comes into play when we're talking about the shoring. if you're standing on the bus deck, this is the pedestrian island. you can see the worker there on scissor lift that's accessing where that is. that hanger beam is right there by his shoulder. if you look closely, that's where -- this is the northern girder where the crack on either side of that hanger beam is located. there's a similar singular crack on the southern girder, the other of the two, it also has a crack that looks similar. it's not on both sides. so i want to move into knowing where we're at. what has been out there and how is it getting shored up. then i will get into schedule. this shows all four levels in
that particular location of the transit center for the supports. the very bottom would be your slab, the train platform level. the one up is the concourse. and fremont street, that's the ground level. then the bus stack. the very top one is showing essentially when you walk on the park, that's the roof supports. so what this is showing is what was installed as an initial stabilization. this was something that was put in in a short-term format. we call this phase one. this was important to get in as the cracks were in place and to ensure that there was a stabilization to the structure prior to the actual shoring, which is getting designed still. the different coloring becomes important because -- so we have the four yellow jacks and then the two blue ones.
the yellow ones are actually pushing up on the bus deck to take off, essentially, a good portion of the bus stack way off the two girders that have the crack in them. that was the initial stabilization element so we could continue on. then the two blue ones are a redundant system that was put in place just as a precautionary to have that touching those girders. what happens now is we're going to move into phase two very quickly, within the next couple of days. off-site, there's been a lot of fabrications. there's been a tremendous amount of effort in getting to a design of a shoring system. i want to note the green lines on this are the shoring system that's going to be installed. the girder, if you look at the top, those are the two points where the girders are, they're circled in red. those are where those points are
that we have to put a jack up to, but you can't -- you have to take the load all the way down to the lab. so we actually have four levels of shoring that has been in the works of being designed to ensure that the load of those two girders are safely taken to a point where the structural engineers feel comfortable with that. so that's why it's been taking the time of design. it's not just what -- if you walk down fremont street, that's not where it's at. all four levels has been designed in tandem. they have to all work in sequence, and there's a sequence to that with all details of how they're going to connect at each level and where the jacks are going to be to get to that point so that we can -- with the goal of once we get the actual shoring system in place, then we
can remove those yellow girders because then this system, which we've been working on, is fully taking the load that's off of those two girders with the cracks. that's that point of safety that mark referenced. so how do we get to that point, and what is the timeline to get to that point of safely having all of that weight and all of those loads off those two girders. we have the phase one that has the initial stabilization that happened over the weekend. and we're in that current state right now. what's happening off-site and on site continuously, there are many things such as clearing the ceiling panels out of the way to any kind of mechanical, electrical plumbing that happens to be in the way. also preparing the girders to prepare and take actualeventual
jacking system. we've also implemented a peer review just for this temporary shoring. it's separate from the other peer review of the fixed that i'm going to reference. to we have actually two peer reviews being implemented as we speak, completely outside. also, at the shop, the fabrication has been continuing. it was very important to utilize what available material was to expedite the process and the shop that harrick had out there in the central valley area, actually had a significant amount of material that was readily available to be utilized into the shoring design. so that fabrication will continue on and will be delivered as it is readied. so we do have some out there already. there are wooden mats that are on fremont street. also, there are four large
girders, 36-inch deep girders, four of them tied together, that are part of the permanent shoring system that those six initial stabilization jacks are sitting on. so we do have some partial work out there done already. there's a significant amount of welding that went into those four girders, a lot of stiffeners. as those get delivered, mainly, starting on thursday, we'll see the towers on fremont street showing in earnest and then that will take a couple of days, and they will be doing the other levels at the bus deck level and also below ground. there will be a lot of work that won't be seen but actually happening. we'll share pictures as that's progressing because you will only be able to see from a safe distance the fremont tower. so i want to make a note that at all four levels, there will be work going on. that will continue up to the 11th.
so we have that in the schedule right now. we have a contingency. we're stating that fremont street, with the shoring in place, would be up to the 12th but no later than the 12th to open fremont street. that's an important milestone because that's the milestone where the structure would be deemed safe and all the weight has been taken off those two girders. now, with that, i want to get into the phase three part, which is the next steps. once we get to that point in time, then what happens. so we all understand -- at least assuming it's the 12th -- what happens at that point. immediately, as soon as it's safely shored and we can safely have workers get in there and do sampling and get in there and test, basically, that's a very important milestone.
right now, we can't go in there and touch it right now. it takes pieces out of that girder around that crack so we can determine what the cause was. so, at that point, the sampling and testing would be up to two weeks. within that time frame, anticipating what the cause is, and then a permanent fix can be confirmed. once we have the permanent fix, then we'll be able to install, but the most important point i want to note in there is that there will be a peer review that will be assembled now, hopefully by the end of this week, in place so that they will be really the ones that will be the clearing house of taking all the information. they will be the outside entity that will make that ultimate look to the ensure for public safety. that's where we'll probably talk more to that after this.
once the peer review determines is the safety, then the facility can be opened, but then also that peer review will also then continue their review as a prudence to review the entire facility as well. i figure that was important, as part of the process, to answer that question as well about not only this specific location, just to make sure that it's an oversight group looking at the entire structure to ensure that everything else is okay. >> we have already had a peer review done on the design and the shop drawings and all
pertinent elements. this says structural and seismic committee has been on board since november 2008 for structural engineering assumptions, and they reviewed the structural plans, and they've looked at all these elements from ground motion to all the finite analysis that a structural engineer as an oversight role would do. it was a very exhaustive peer review done previously. i did want to know what those experts were, various experts from industry and also academia. they've been assembled and been on for pretty much most of the project.
what we're proposing for this new seismic group is a slightly different make-up which would involve a structural steel design and engineering expert in that field, specifically we're looking for someone with forensic experience that has been involved with these kinds of issues in the past. and then, of course, a meta lurch cal -- metalurjical. the person who takes that sample will be told what test to take and what to do with that information will be led by a metalurgical person. that lays out the steps. we've got some process here, laid out some schedule. i would image there's many questions. so at this point, at least it's graphics to what has been
happening for the last week and what we plan to do going forward. so, with that, thank you. >> board members? >> are we going to have more presentations? >> not at this time. i think it's mostly going to be questions and answers, if needed, at this point. >> okay. first, let me say we appreciate your help in moving us to the temporary terminal and the operations to continue to provide bus service. acs transit remains concerned about the safety of the riders and employees. so i think i saw someplace that you were going to have an ongoing review or test, i
assume, of the structural soundness of the permanent repairs, especially considering that we're in earthquake country. and the two beams that you found that support the bus. so for us, that would be very important. also, it might not be what you're talking about, but what we would like to request from the tgpa, that it continues to provide us with a support system at the temporary terminal that you have provided us thus far. i'm not clear on your peer review composition, the latest one. what we would like for ac transit, to be part of -- to be at the table when you are reviewing, when you are
providing solutions or something because we need to feel faith. we need to feel that if and when we move back to the south fourth transit center that, the safety concerns have been dealt with. >> thank you. can you go back to the next step slide, if you don't mind, please? director, we're fully committed to providing all the assistance needed for the temporary terminal. we realize we were not able to provide enough notification to any of the operators, and there were circumstances, and everybody had to rush because we felt, out of abundance of caution, that we needed to close the facilities. at that point, we were not sure what the area affected was. so, definitely, we were working
with the general manager and the staff, all the needs were met at the terminal. the peer review, we've been in communication with as transit. they've provided us with four peer review members. one of them would be included in the peer review. we communicated that to ac transit. i'm personally in contact with the various professors, academia, to put the peer review together. i feel it's very important for know personally do that. even though this is the second peer review we've been doing, still, even though we had a system in place that should have caught all of these things and obviously did not, so we'll be doing a second peer review, and ac transit will definitely be at the table every step of the way. >> any questions? >> so from the graphic you showed, it looks like where the shoring is going to be done is
in the middle of fremont street. did i look at that correctly? >> correct. >> are you going to open the street with the shoring in the middle of it? >> yes. we have our traffic engineers working on it right now. the pad, there's a wooden pad that's in the middle that parallels, basically, the flow of traffic on fremont street. it's about 10 feet wide, 60 feet long. we have our traffic engineers designing with k rail and crash cushions and restriping to see what can fit. they will even be out there today. by the end of the week, we really want to have that in place ready so that if the installation is ready sooner, we'll have that in place. they're also seeing what can be taken care of because the various different ways and what can get in and what can have access. there will be a middle area but we'll be going around it. >> thanks.
>> so basically, we'll lose one lane. >> we may not, director. fremont street is three lanes. fremont street aways a little bit wide because it allows for the turning from the muni bus plaza. we're not going to be operating buses until the permit fix is done, so we were able to utilize three lanes on fremont street. obviously having a barrier in the middle reduces flow inherently, but we will provide three lanes on fremont street. >> there'll be full access to natoma street, and of course 81# fremont will have full access to the driveway. >> so just to clarify, there's three lanes on fremont. we expect to have all three lanes.
>> we expect to have all three lanes. >> okay. but it's possibly we'll reduce it to two? >> possibly. lane width may be reduced, but we're shooting -- the goal is to have three. >> is it important for there to be three? >> no, we're trying to maximize capacity so we can minuimize impacts. it's something we have to work with the m.t.a., and we have to put the crash cushions in front of the concrete barriers. it seems like from our measurements, we have enough room to fit in three lanes. >> we have been working with m.t.a. staff, both us and traffic coordination. >> well, mark, thank you for the update and presentation.
safety is number one, so the team responded very quickly once the discovery was made, and that's to be acknowledged and appreciated. you spent sometime talking about the process about special inspections, also, because whether it's the plant or on-site, in addition to the pier reviews, there's special -- peer reviews and special inspection on the welding. can you take a moment and talk about that? >> we have slides for that. our quality control-quality assurance program -- there is a q.c. and a q.a. process for that which includes suppliers, fab indicat indicators, and installers. we have four different levels that are setup in place
percontract. on these particular girteres, we did have the steel element convalescent control element on that. each girter, the plate came from different mills, but then, that plate went to harac, and then, they do their inspections that are required by code, and then, also, i.s.i. who is the owners or quality insurance, is also in the shop, as well, so for any fabrication, any welding that's done on the shop, you actually -- you still have a q.c.-q.a. just because it's offsite doesn't mean it's handling on both steps of the process.
and mag testing depending on the situation, if they have to get at the angle, depending on the situations. usually, u.c. or ultrasonic testing is the format. you can see utok written on these girters today. so that's a part of that process, and actually, had a slide that i forgot i had a picture. it shows -- they mark -- besides having paperwork to all that testing and visual inspections, there's reports done by q.c. and q.a. every test that they've done is packaged up. and even to an added level of
insurance, they write -- they put a chalk or, you know, a wax crayon basically to ensure that people downstream from a visual as to what testing has happened on that particular girter. >> director, if i could just point out, and dennis, is that -- these particular girters, the welding was done under a controlled environment in the job, not in the field, so these are supposed to be robust welds. >> very good. thank you for that update. going forward, when you talk about the next steps after temporary shoring and opening the facility, just imagine everyone's expectations, that is not going to happen overnight. in looking at my slide, rough guess, it could have taken three to six months. it's not something that once you start the material sampling, we're going to figure out in a
couple days what's the permanent fix. we want to make sure it's done right. peer review, but it's not going to happen in days. >> no, we're not talking days, but maybe weeks. can we put up the step slides, or do you have it up there? >> we have it up there. >> so we expect after the girters are unloaded, on october 12, two weeks later, we would have the results of the testing, and the testing would include removing a portion of the girter, taking a steel sample, taking it to the lab and doing various testing on it. at that point, we should be able to know what caused it, and what the permit -- my goal is weeks, not months. i'm not saying it will be four weeks. it'll be more than four weeks. >> i think the team needs to take the right amount of time to
make sure it's right. >> i agree. i agree. >> yes. >> thank you. you talked about how those two beams are quite unique in that location. in order to reassure the public that the integrity of the entire building is there and that the entire building is safe or will be safe once the fix is done, has there been inspection of other beams or are those beams unique in the way that they were fabricated that perhaps make them more null verbal to that cracking. how do we assure the public that the rest of the beams in that building are not impacted. >> these two specific girters that are over fremont street, are over first street. we went over there, we tested it, instrumented it as well to ensure that there are no issues in the similar situation that's over first street, so that was
the first thing we did. and we have all that documentation, and we'll continue to monitor it. and then, too, the larger picture discussion, that's where the peer review will be setup. not only will there be staff ensuring a methodical review, but the peer review will actually look and make a determination that they -- not us, that they feel that the rest of the structure is safe. >> director -- >> i'm sorry. and along with director gee, i'm concerned about the safety, but i'm most concerned about all the bus passengers that were happily going in and out of that terminal. i just want to make sure that we're going to be doing everything we can to make sure that more lanes on fremont street are open to make sure that they are impact as less at
possible. i don't want all the bus passengers for the various agencies to be more and more negatively impacted as this goes on. so hopefully, we'll be able to work on something to keep that bus traffic moving quickly. we can't lose sight of how many terminals we're moving out of that terminal correctly. >> director, you have my assurance that we're going to would be with staff to make sure that inconvenience to passengers is minimized as much as possible. we'll do our utmost to make sure that's alleviated as much as possible. >> i just have a couple of additional questions that actually just follow up with director gee and brinkman's questions? so admittedly. this is not anywhere close to my area of expertise, so i'm just going to ask the questions as best as i can. but you know, we're getting a lot of questions, of course,
about what happened, what went wrong. and you know, it's my understanding that the steel for these two beams were rolled in different places. it -- okay. and just these two beams, along with the -- over fremont and the one on first, is that what makes them distinct from the others, when you say that they were similar or do you mean that they're similar just kind of structurally in terms of how they were -- >> they were -- they're the same structurally. they span over the whole -- the whole road way, eight feed wide. they have the same -- they're four-inch-think plate steel. that's significant. you tend not to have four-inch-thick steel, but that's not unusual. if needed -- anyone in the city can talk to how that's not
unusual. >> i guess, director, they're similar loading conditions. fremont street and first street are similar loading conditions, the beams themselves are not unique. >> supervisor kim: they're just different than the regular steel beams. >> yes. because their loading conditions are different on fremont street and first. >> supervisor kim: so i hate to ask such a basic question, but why were these beams rolled or fabricated in a different location than the other steel beams? >> i think it's a matter of availability. >> dennis, we rolled -- our steel supply came from seven locations, is that right? >> well, we had seven different fabricators, but we were using two -- two different plate -- two different mills from the east coast that were supplying it.
most of it from one and just some came from the other. i think it's just a matter of availability at that point. >> we had 22,000 tons of steel. >> 25,000. >> that we had to furnish to the transit center, and one supplier in one fabrication cannot do that. >> we had every supplier on working with us on the west coast. >> and how is the q.a., quality insurance, how is the quality insurance done with steel being fabricated from seven different locations. >> we had quality in every location. when we were running through 2015, that was some of our -- some of the budget items that we brought back then. as we never -- we did not have the -- anticipate to have so many, but we had to keep up with them, and we had -- we had people in seven locations.
some of them were going around the lock. so we had i.s.i. in every shop, whenever they were welding. >> supervisor kim: is it possible that the key way was inconsistent when we had them at seven different locations? >> i would say no just because -- it all rolls up to -- we had one company doing that, so that helps in its consistency and the view of the reports. >> supervisor kim: so one company did the quality insurance at seven different locations? >> that's correct. >> and our company was i.s.i. that we hired directly, and i'm sure you remember, director kim, in 2005 -- 2015, we came with a cost budget augmentation for that reason. when we budgeted for construction, we assumed one or two locations. when we received the bids, realized that the fabrication's going to be at seven locations, that's when we added the budget and staffing to being able to go
out tot seven different locations to be able to do the inspections. so we're confident that we had the inspectors. the program itself would not allow a beam to come to the job site before it's been tested, but that's program level. something happened with the execution, obviously, because we have some cracked beams, and that's something we're going to be looking into to find out exactly what happened. it could be fabrication issue, it could be an installation issue, could be a design issue. once we get the results of the testing, we will dig in, find out exactly what happened. >> supervisor kim: and when do we expect the results of this. >> two weeks after -- beginning of november , we're expecting to get the results of the testing. october 12, at that point, we can take samples of the beam because the beam has been unloaded. two weeks later, we can expect the results. at that point in time, we should know what the cause is, and what the fix is, and what other assessments we need to do.
as dennis pointed out, i'm putting a peer review panel together to look at the fix itself, but also to give me another overall assessment of the building. >> supervisor kim: i understand that we had many levels of peer review, and you know, through the process of sitting on this board, it always appeared that we were crossing every t and dotting every i, but of course that's not comforting to members of the public because this is a very unusual incident in my mind at least to have something like this happen especially so soon after the opening of the terminal. it's not that i want to play the blame game, but i think members of the public would be comforted in knowing that we could at least pinpoint the issue so we would be able to prevent it or identify any other potential weaknesses in terms of the integrity of the building. so you know, i think the main
thing is we should just continue to be as transparent as possible regardless of what information comes forward so that the public feels that you know we're looking out for their interests first. i feel like we've been doing that. i'm glad we closed the term knowledterm -- terminal as quickly as we did. it's incredibly disappointing to the neighborhood and to many of our transit riders, but i agree with director gee, that we should take the time to make sure that we're doing this correctly, and i'm glad that we still have the temporary terminal. >> that is -- >> so dennis, thank you for the presentation. that's very informative. i understand you're assembling
the peer review committee right now? >> yes. >> i am, actually. >> okay. great. and you'll have the names by the end of the week, perhaps? >> yeah. i'm talking to people, have the names by the end of the week, but they're building experts, not bridge experts. >> no, that's fine. is it possible to speculate what the potential permanent fixes might be at this time and the timeline? >> yeah. it's very difficult to do that because we want to get what the cause is and what the fix is, so we'll need to get the test results back before we're able to do that. >> thank you. >> i'd just -- i would ask now that the two beams have been isolated, and the loads off of them, in your discussions has there been any conversation about the park beam now that we are substituting that beam being opened to the public if it's
safe? >> yeah. potentially, director nuru, we could possibly be able to open the park after we get the test results back to know what the cause is, and so that would be the first week of november , we will -- we may be able to do that. it's just hinges on getting the results back and know what the load is. the people on the park is not something significant, and the short design can handle live loads on the park as well as the busloading, so it's designed to handle the full capacity of the girters. obviously, we don't feel it's safe to operate buses while the temporary shoring is there, but i think that opening the park is definitely a possibility. >> okay. and then, my second question is testing those beams, obviously, you're going to be doing something. can you take a little bit about what that is, at least just so the public have a better sense of what that testing is involved
on that floor of the bus deck. >> yeah. in general, i can tell you that we're going to take -- cut out -- dennis mentioned the steel plate 4 inches thick. we're going to cut a piece out and take it to a lab and do various testing -- mechanical and property testing. bruce, is that something -- or bob, something you could elaborate on on more details on the -- how do you see the testing, what kind of tests? it's been a while since i've been out of college. >> yeah, good morning, members of the board. the sample will take a section cut out of the flange, and it'll be sent to the lab. they'll take samples, and they'll do tensile tests on them. they'll look at the actually
structure of the material under a microcoscope and look at what happening in the matrix, the sort of micromatrix of the field because they can tell them how the actual frackture occurred, whether it actually yielded, whether it was pulled in a fatal frackture. i think this period of two weeks also enables time to interpret what those results are. >> having known what we have, have you seen something like this before, or this kind of crack? >> it -- it has happened in the past, i mean, there are -- this is not the first time that steel has cracked, so -- but in each case, the factors can be totally different, which is why there's the need to look at all the different factors to understand what the cause might be.
>> if the problem is the design versus the material, how much time will the design -- >> so the design will be checked inherently by the peer review, so they'll be looking at the loading on the beam that was in place versus what you see on the drawings. and just -- and doing checks concurrently. so they can then -- we've done the same thing, so looking at also with doing some coordination with the landscape architects, just validating what was placed on the beam, and what we've seen so far is it does glee. >> but my question is there will be a different time to do a permanent fix if it's material versus design. >> not necessarily. i mean, the permanent fix
itself, whether it's -- whether it's the -- if it's the design, for instance, it'll still involve adding potentially extra material to the beam. i mean, i think that's -- there are different ways of looking at it, but i don't think it necessarily takes longer design process, actual material. >> i realize, director, there's a lot of speakers to the questions that i assure you we'll be working on. >> thank you. i think it's difficult for the general public who, of course frks has , as no -- as director kim pointed out, no structural engineering background to understand that. and correct me if i'm wrong, that this can be fixed in place. that this is, as you said, although unfortunate, not totally unusual in a large infrastructure project and it actually can be fixed in place. >> it absolutely can be fixed in
>> -- and be able to provide that fix, but of course, we really need to figure out why it happened, and as much as everyone else is curious, we'll have -- there's a time for that. but right now, we still have to finish that second round of shoring, get that in place in order to get people up there so they can start seeing all aspects, and we can start deriving from it what the individual pieces are that were there. regardless of whether it was manufacturing, construction, erection, design, the team right
now is focused on really getting it to a point to where we can finish with the highest level of confidence and even a redundant capacity within the shoring and be able to really start finding out why. >> all right. questions? thank you. any other questions for mark or...okay. go to public comment. >> one member of the public has indicated he would like to address you. bruce? >> yes. thank you for listening and thank you for the opportunity to speak on this matter. as a member of the public, i'm very interested and concerned about this. it's my understanding the two girters actually structurally failed. there are wide cracks, and that
caused a redistribution of load in the remaining structure. it is very curious to me how it stood because the 4 inch by 30 inch wide flanges are the majority of the support, and they both cracked, which means there's a weak point. what i'm trying to say is the published articles and the news conferences have detailed the failure and the partial failure of the two principle -- sole independent principle beams -- excuse me, girters over fremont. they fail, the thing comes down. that was what appeared so far in the news. they fail, all the other framing that go nooz it does not have any strength, somehow, the building stood of -- that goes into it does not have any strength, somehow, the building
stood. the bus barn below and garden above has something, a mystery, that allowed the terminal to stand. my sole idea is to bring up an issue that would bring out how in the world the structure stood when the principle beams were collapsed -- collapsing and saggi sagging beyond their limit. the workers have initially demolished the structure and fire structure. the whole idea is there's some unknown not publicly demonstrated, no experts, no input on what is the damage to the structure above. everybody is getting we'll just
weld a bead on the beam, but structurally, the load has been passed, and it's been modified by this failure. i'd like to expand the report to understand that by independent exhibits and hearings that the clearance letter that you publish on your website, the report that evaluates what i've just said, the related load paths overstretching. and also, you published the clearance letter that allowed workers to go underneath the structure and work when it could have collapsed at any minute. the second thing is the notion of the traffic. well, i realize this meeting has to do with the beams. i hope you hold a second meeting, and i don't understand
the beams -- i know the amount of time. i'll hold a second meeting showing a congestion report and a footprint well beyond fremont. what the buses go, the impact, and how people get there. this public report would assure the public that someone is dealing not behind closed door but in the public cycle. thank you for allowing me to speak. >> that concludes the members of the public that indicated they wanted to address you under that item. >> okay. again, i just want to thank the team for working. i think as much information as we can get out, i think that would be very helpful to the public. i know we have an october 12 date to open fremont, and so as you do your inspections and as we -- you know, those conditions change to opening in a safe manner, it would be appreciated. did you want to say anything in.
>> i just want to thank the board for holding the meeting and thank you for your experience. i also wanted to address something to the commission that i failed to address in my opening remarks, we've created a website with the documents that the public wants to look at. we'll provide test results and plans and everything else. i intend to make sure that the link has all the documentations that we have that we're able to share. all the things that we may not be able to share are closed documents. i just wanted to let the public know that we've got the documents. >> okay. on board of tehalf of the board you very much, and our meeting is adjourned. >> okay. thank you.