Crooked rails, epic fails

A confluence of corruption, gross negligence, design defects, safety issues, and budget controversies was responsible for the 14-year delay in the construction of the Unified Grand Central Station.

The Department of Transportation (DoTr) is pulling the plug on the deal with the consortium composed of BF Corp. and Foresight Development and Surveying Co. due to “unacceptable” delays in completing the project.

The P2.8-billion infrastructure was designed to connect the LRT-1, MRT-3 and MRT-7 lines.

Transportation Secretary Vivencio Dizon said last week the DoTr is finalizing the termination and considering alternative solutions to restart construction, including invoking the Government Procurement Act or the Public-Private Partnership Code to fast-track the project.

In 2011, the government hatched the ambitious plan for the Common Station to provide seamless connectivity to alleviate traffic and reduce commuters’ travel time.

Unfortunately, 13 years later, it remains in a state of suspended animation.

The project was divided into three areas: A, B and C. The DoTr was set to develop Area A with a platform and concourses for LRT-1 and the MRT-3 North Avenue Station (near SM North and Trinoma).

The previous DoTr administration conducted a public bidding for Area A and awarded the project to BF Corp. and Foresight Development Surveying Co. on 13 February 2019 at a contract price of P2.783 billion and a completion date of 4 January 2021, or a 600-day construction term.

It is 2025 and the project has stalled.

According to many rail experts, BF lacks the capability and experience in railway construction and electromechanical works which should have been a cause for its disqualification from the bidding process.

BF’s tender price was also abnormally low considering the Common Station project included a comprehensive railway system works and signaling system.

The unreasonably low tender price was simply not sufficient to cover the scope of works, raising concerns about BF’s ability to successfully and compliantly fulfill the Common Station contract.

The most glaring among the issues raised concerning BF was that it insisted on a viaduct structure made from all-steel material.

This is a worrying deviation from the recommended and industrial standard design which should be a combination of concrete and steel.

BF was only concerned with prioritizing its main line of business, which is steel fabrication, over the safety of commuters.

Experienced engineers will confirm that changing the viaduct design to an all-steel column poses a risk of instability and even collapse of the railway station.