"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:53:59 on Wed, 12 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up those
professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or whatever)
notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told one day that
they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working on the project,
spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15 Million,
when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was 15 million -
including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought to
be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has already been
spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of misuse
of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen of
them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally negligent
to do so.

tim

In message , at 10:39:27 on Thu, 13 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:
I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably)
construction before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working
on the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15
Million, when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was
15 million - including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought
to be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has
already been spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of
misuse of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen
of them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally
negligent to do so.

So much that you don't understand

Start with the simple fact that the garden bridge is a much more
complex, innovative and large project than the wobbly bridge.

Costs more to design? Who'da thunk it.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:39:27 on Thu, 13 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:
I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working
on the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15 Million,
when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was 15 million -
including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought to
be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has already been
spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of
misuse of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen of
them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally
negligent to do so.

So much that you don't understand

Start with the simple fact that the garden bridge is a much more complex,
innovative and large project than the wobbly bridge.

Costs more to design? Who'da thunk it.

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

tim


--
Roland Perry

In message , at 17:14:22 on Thu, 13 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 17:14:22 on Thu, 13 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the design
work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just some
holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they have
completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually build to the
design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

tim

In message , at 15:06:47 on Fri, 14 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the
design work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just
some holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they
have completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually
build to the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work (see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM
Nuttall delivering the Guided Busway).
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 15:06:47 on Fri, 14 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the design
work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just some
holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they have
completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually build to
the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work

don't be silly

architects fees for overseeing build works are usually 5% of the build costs
(and the retainer is going to be a percentage of that)

(see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM Nuttall delivering the
Guided Busway).

This was a major project undertaken by an authority that didn't usually
undertake such major projects

That it went wrong proves nothing

tim

In message , at 17:32:17 on Fri, 14 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:
The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they
have completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually
build to the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work

don't be silly

architects fees for overseeing build works are usually 5% of the build
costs (and the retainer is going to be a percentage of that)

It's most of the work done by the architects.

(see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM Nuttall delivering
the Guided Busway).

This was a major project undertaken by an authority that didn't usually
undertake such major projects

That it went wrong proves nothing

It proves that you need to spend years monitoring the build and the
snagging, not after you've spent not very long drawing up enough plans
to get the project funded.
--
Roland Perry