[Spinalman]

http://www.shorehamh...rce=twitterfeed

It appears the footbridge is going over it's £5.8million budget already, so has been put on hold.

Mmm... at around £10,000 a foot - that was an expensive bridge. I heard they have already blown a big part of the money on consultants to design the logo and host the Facebook page. Perhaps they can apply a cut-down design to save money... maybe dispense with the annual contacts for cleaning, maintaining the glass and low lights, and the licence to print money.

[Billium]

Spinalman, on 23 April 2012 - 14:19 PM, said:

http://www.shorehamh...rce=twitterfeed

It appears the footbridge is going over it's £5.8million budget already, so has been put on hold.

Mmm... at around £10,000 a foot - that was an expensive bridge. I heard they have already blown a big part of the money on consultants to design the logo and host the Facebook page. Perhaps they can apply a cut-down design to save money... maybe dispense with the annual contacts for cleaning, maintaining the glass and low lights, and the licence to print money.

I once watched a programme about the West Pier in Brighton.
Apparently, one man designed it, supervised it's construction, controlled the Budget etc.
At the end of the programme they said nowadays it would take a team of 30 people to achieve the same result.
Mind you, that was a few years back, probably need 50 now.
A Quote a friend of mine uses, bang in a Nail and ten people hang off it !!

[PeterW]

[quote name='Billium' date='23 April 2012 - 14:51 PM' timestamp='1335189081' post='47338']
I once watched a programme about the West Pier in Brighton.
Apparently, one man designed it, supervised it's construction, controlled the Budget etc.
At the end of the programme they said nowadays it would take a team of 30 people to achieve the same result.
Mind you, that was a few years back, probably need 50 now.
>>>
We have computers now.

[green angel]

Spinalman, on 23 April 2012 - 14:19 PM, said:

http://www.shorehamh...rce=twitterfeed

It appears the footbridge is going over it's £5.8million budget already, so has been put on hold.

If this is the case it typical Government/Council situation its bad enough to find things go over budget what pisses me of no one get blamed, sacked, or disciplined they all hold their positions and will probably do it again.

[thermo]

[quote name='PeterW' date='23 April 2012 - 14:54 PM' timestamp='1335189288' post='47340']

Billium, on 23 April 2012 - 14:51 PM, said:

I once watched a programme about the West Pier in Brighton.
Apparently, one man designed it, supervised it's construction, controlled the Budget etc.
At the end of the programme they said nowadays it would take a team of 30 people to achieve the same result.
Mind you, that was a few years back, probably need 50 now.
>>>
We have computers now.

the west peir was built by hand screwing the iron piles into the chalk see bed through a samll boat with a specially built hole in it. It was all lined up from land. When it was survyed by the team that started the restoration work in the 90s it was found to be virtually perfect. Put that into perspective that they were at sea when they did the work, thats very very impressive.

[Spinalman]

maybe it would be cheaper to build a canal across Beach Green to the sea (for the few pleasure craft that need access to upriver) and then block the Adur at the footbridge with a causeway?

The created spoil could be dumped in front of Coronation Green to fill the capped river and build the level of reclaimed land, earmarked for new parking for 350 cars and doubling as an Open Market at weekends. The rejuvenated High Street could then be a haven for retailers and the parking issues of the rest of Shoreham solved in one go. Ferry Road parking would also be cured.

The Yacht Club would then have it's own basin... and a public hard, of course.

[Cheese Rolls]

green angel, on 23 April 2012 - 16:43 PM, said:

If this is the case it typical Government/Council situation its bad enough to find things go over budget what pisses me of no one get blamed, sacked, or disciplined they all hold their positions and will probably do it again.

I really have no idea what you are talking about here. The cost projections are coming from Osborne a private company and the Government/Council has decided not to proceed until the cost situation is resolved. Who exactly do you want to be sacked/disciplined ?

From my limited understanding of this project, the unknowns were the state of the existing bridge and the condition of the riverbed. If the issue is with the condition of the existing bridge we may be faced with a long period without a viable crossing.This would have cost implications for the council who would have to fund alternative transport.

[richard]

Cheese Rolls, on 23 April 2012 - 17:37 PM, said:

From my limited understanding of ...........

So why are you holding forth?

[Spinalman]

We are some way down the road already...this was to commence in spring... and now they put it on hold.

£5.8 million is a lot of money for a footbridge. We can assume that price has come from the selected contractor and is for the bridge design heralded last year. Now that price has changed so much the council decide to halt the project. Either they have discovered something fundamental they hadn't anticipated (in which case the original price was was not worth the pdf it was printed on) or the goalposts have been moved by a change to the brief and the contractor sees that as a green light to charge what they want for extras.

Why can public works rarely be brought in on budget?

[green angel]

green angel, on 23 April 2012 - 15:43 PM, said:

If this is the case it typical Government/Council situation its bad enough to find things go over budget what pisses me of no one get blamed, sacked, or disciplined they all hold their positions and will probably do it again.

Cheese Rolls, on 23 April 2012 - 17:37 PM, said:

I really have no idea what you are talking about here. The cost projections are coming from Osborne a private company and the Government/Council has decided not to proceed until the cost situation is resolved. Who exactly do you want to be sacked/disciplined ?

From my limited understanding of this project, the unknowns were the state of the existing bridge and the condition of the riverbed. If the issue is with the condition of the existing bridge we may be faced with a long period without a viable crossing.This would have cost implications for the council who would have to fund alternative transport.

Firstly Cheese Rolls W/S gave out the contract to Osbourne so someone on on W/S pay rollover on over £100,000 a year (plus pension) it was their choice, I do understand the Councilors agreed the contract but under advice from a W/S official, so you understand who I am referring to to get roasted its the over £1000,000 a year official we pay to get thing right, but didn't. and to repeat, nothing happens to them for getting it wrong, in which case my cat could have done that for nothing.

And if the foot bridge closed why would the rest of the Adur residents have to pay to get Shoreham residents over the river

[Cheese Rolls]

green angel, on 24 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

Firstly Cheese Rolls W/S gave out the contract to Osbourne so someone on on W/S pay rollover on over £100,000 a year (plus pension) it was their choice, I do understand the Councilors agreed the contract but under advice from a W/S official, so you understand who I am referring to to get roasted its the over £1000,000 a year official we pay to get thing right, but didn't. and to repeat, nothing happens to them for getting it wrong, in which case my cat could have done that for nothing.

And if the foot bridge closed why would the rest of the Adur residents have to pay to get Shoreham residents over the river

There is a lot of concern locally around the ability of the elderly and the infirm to manage, when the trip to town is extended by a couple of miles and the timescale for no bridge varied from 6-9 months worst case scenario to a couple of weeks, best case scenario. The best case scenario involved joining the two bridges at the town end during the construction phase. It is likely that a detailed study has highlighted the complexity of this task.

If there is any criticism of council officials, it is that the budget underestimated the true cost of the replacement, which is a genuine risk in the circumstances. It is not practical or cost effective to ask multiple companies to undertake this study work in advance of placing a contract.

[Cheese Rolls]

richard, on 23 April 2012 - 19:21 PM, said:

So why are you holding forth?

In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

[johnjohn]

green angel, on 24 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

And if the foot bridge closed why would the rest of the Adur residents have to pay to get Shoreham residents over the river

Realising the cost and time considerations of transiting the Adur when a bridge crossing is not available,the johnjohn R&D team have been working for some time to alleviate the situation.
A previously submitted proposal for a transit robot will be offered again plus other more speedy solutions.
The thought of having to rely on a bumpy old bus that has to go to the borders of Lancing is not a pleasant one.

Attached File(s)

•  Adur Transit robot.jpg (64.22K)
  Number of downloads: 20
•  Rapid transit 1.jpg (124.3K)
  Number of downloads: 21

[Doug Attrell]

johnjohn, on 24 April 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

Realising the cost and time considerations of transiting the Adur when a bridge crossing is not available,the johnjohn R&D team have been working for some time to alleviate the situation.
A previously submitted proposal for a transit robot will be offered again plus other more speedy solutions.
The thought of having to rely on a bumpy old bus that has to go to the borders of Lancing is not a pleasant one.

Excellent!

[Ferryman]

Surely, the contractors were appointed after submitting a quote or is this another ridiculous East Street fiasco where prices aren't agreed up front?

[shorehambeach]

green angel, on 24 April 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

And if the foot bridge closed why would the rest of the Adur residents have to pay to get Shoreham residents over the river

Because we (on this side of the bridge) pay taxes so you (on the other side of the bridge) can claim your benefits !

[Cueball]

Ferryman, on 24 April 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

Surely, the contractors were appointed after submitting a quote or is this another ridiculous East Street fiasco where prices aren't agreed up front?

Sounds more like another ridiculous East St fiasco where work begins before they've bothered to do essential things like check with the water companies and look at the blueprints for nearby buildings. It'd be interesting to see the figures - afaik the plans were changed after pressure from the Shoreham Society et al to incorporate a cheaper design for the bridge itself.

[Spinalman]

Cueball, on 24 April 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

Sounds more like another ridiculous East St fiasco where work begins before they've bothered to do essential things like check with the water companies and look at the blueprints for nearby buildings. It'd be interesting to see the figures - afaik the plans were changed after pressure from the Shoreham Society et al to incorporate a cheaper design for the bridge itself.

Better be safe... we don't want them building 90% of it and then they find the centre bit over the river was previously owned by the Franciscian Priory and nobody had checked with the land registry.

[Cheese Rolls]

Cueball, on 24 April 2012 - 13:41 PM, said:

Sounds more like another ridiculous East St fiasco where work begins before they've bothered to do essential things like check with the water companies and look at the blueprints for nearby buildings. It'd be interesting to see the figures - afaik the plans were changed after pressure from the Shoreham Society et al to incorporate a cheaper design for the bridge itself.

I really don't think this is the same thing. A few months back they bought in that impressive looking dredging platform ( I wish I had made the time to take a photo), presumably to test the riverbed's ability to support the foundations.

If the council had paid for this task, they may have been better placed to determine the budget for this project. It may not have actually reduced the cost, but it would certainly increase the risk to the council (WSCC).

Imagine two years after completion the bridge develops a serious fault. Blame sits with the contractors, who then argue that there designs were based on information provided by the council, who can then be held jointly responsible for the cost of rectifying the fault.

My point is that it did make sense to appoint a contractor without full knowledge of the requirements, because of the specialist nature of the task.

[Spinalman]

When you put in a bid for a tender, the tender document is normally drafted by consultants- but often is still a weak document that you could drive coach and horses through...or so onerous for the contractors that their either walk away to avoid the hassle, or mark up the bid to cover themselves because of all the legal ties they are potentially signing up to. When they bid there will be unknowns... in this case maybe the state of the bed, or indeed the state of the old bridge and if it can be retained until the last moment. So any competent contractor will have a best and worst case scenario... if the piles are on solid ground it will cost this, if we drill a further 50 feet then it will cost that. No-one bids in the hope that the job turns out to be best case scenario, unless they know they can welch out of the deal because the tender doesn't have provision for such a variable such as a riverbed, or corroded old bridge.

So now that the costs are "spiralling" out of control it makes me think that either they have wriggled out of the original contract or they didn't anticipate the worst case scenario.