Looking for Someone to Blame
Ah, what twists and turns can occur when questions are asked. If you read today’s Main Street column, you know that as of yesterday the city wasn’t even so sure anymore who was responsible for the NE 2 sidewalk.
Well, today we now know the answer – it’s the city that did this, not a utility.
Speaking to Debbie Regan in the city’s water department, I learned that the grate covers a water meter. Apparently the water meter was installed as the adjoining 2nd Street Lofts were being built. Regan says the contract changed the plans for the underground garage construction, causing the meter to be at a level where the grate had to be raised higher than the sidewalk.
I asked – why can’t the meter be lowered or moved? She responded the meter was installed first, and the contractor caused the situation. I asked if the average pedestrian really cares as to how this happened. Is it impossible to move the meter and fix this sidewalk? She again responded the contractor was to blame – an answer, quite frankly, I doubt makes a difference to most of you.
So now Ragan is looking into whether it is or is not possible for the meter to be moved. My question remains the same: in the post Jeff Speck era, is this acceptable? Is this something that would be permitted in front of Devon tower or City Hall? If not, why is it acceptable on NE 2?
By the way, YOU PAID FOR THIS. This was part of a Tax Increment Financing district project.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
the fault with the contractor ends when you pay him the final check. government contracts always provide for a retainage to ascertain satisfactory performance. if the contractor was paid in full, the owner (the city) has indicated satisfaction with the work.
what you are hearing (as pointed out in the name of this thread) is: don’t blame me! it’s not my fault!
Attempting to decipher Debbie Regan’s response, it sounds like she might be saying that the thing was designed correctly in the initial stages, but then the developer modified his building plans (after the water meter had already been set).
If that’s the case, the developer should bear responsibility for resetting the meter, and the City should refrain from granting a final certificate of occupancy until the offending condition is addressed.
Keep on it, Steve– it’s stupid stuff like this that kills a City (the accumulation of 1,000′s of stupid mistakes like this).
Hard to tell from the picture, but looks like the fence is twice as wide as the meter cover. Why is the fence taking up so much space? Couldn’t it be reduced in size (at least until they can get the meter height fixed)?
Ran across another pic that shows the situation much better…won’t do any good to reduce the fence as it abuts the raised concrete slab (where the utility covers are).
[...] as to whether anyone sees this sidewalk as a source of pride for our city’s water department. Two weeks ago I posed the following [...]
Keep hounding them Steve. I may not be calling the city and complaining, but things like this need to be addressed. I’m glad you’re getting to the bottom of this. If it is the city’s responsibility to fix it, then they should fix it. If the contractor (or developer) is responsible, the city should hold them accountable and make them fix it.