Discussion
So the cost of completion to haymarket is the same as the cost of cancellation! Or is this just 'spin'? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...
Have they factored the cost of ongoing operations and maintenance over the following years where the revenue will be the sq rt of SFA?
s!
Have they factored the cost of ongoing operations and maintenance over the following years where the revenue will be the sq rt of SFA?
s!If they cancelled you would also have the cost of reinstating the track infrastructure, the bridges out by the Gyle and Stenhouse etc, the depot at Maybury aand of course the track itself on Princes Street and the like. Unfortunately the only practicle answer seems to be to complete, at least then you have something for the money.
G
G
Complete incompetence of the highest magnitude, I really think there should be public flogging for this gross waste of council tax payers money (mine!!!!)
Why this even got started is beyond me, this only reaffirms that public management of infrastructure projects like this should never be done or get the Chinese to do it - we seem to have lost any ability to competently manage and deliver in this
here.- sigh*
Famous Graham said:
>Aghast!< Who's actually going to use it? Every tram system in Europe is subsidised, but fairly well utilised. I don't think shoppers heading to the Gyle will generate enough to cover even running costs.Famous Graham said:
sherman said:
So where is going to and from then if its going to St andrews square?
The Gyle I think?Ingliston Park and Ride
Gogarburn where the big depot is. There is also supposed to be an interchange station on the Edinburgh-Aberdeen line there.
The Gyle
Edinburgh Park Central
Edinburgh Park Station
Bankhead (Makro)
Saughton Road
Balgreen Road
Murrayfield Stadium
Haymarket
Shandwick Place (in the middle of the oval bit, not where the shops are let alone Princes Street or Lothian Road)
The Mound
St Andrew Square
Everyone seen the photo of Lib Dem councillors that floats around PH? Well here's our own collection.
Can there be any reason other than hiding corruption for commercial confidentiality in public works?
Everything related to this debacle should be in the public domain, there should be no hiding place for the guilty.
Everything related to this debacle should be in the public domain, there should be no hiding place for the guilty.
fluffnik said:
Famous Graham said:
The Leith businesses must be fuming
...even more than everyone else.Surely someone must be criminally liable.
It's the Parliament building all over again.
Famous Graham said:
I was wondering earlier if the Leith businesses (via the Leith Business Association) could bring a suit against...who? Would it be the Council, TIE, the contractors?
It's the Parliament building all over again.
There are also no plans to provide compensation to businesses affected by the trams work despite a further 3 years of distruption on the cards.It's the Parliament building all over again.
Today's council meeting was supposed to vote to approve the £231 million borrowing to fund the line to St Andrew Square - which would take the project over £1 billion once interest is added in.
Last Friday, the Council's report said that the costs of cancellation would be £690m - down from £750m in June. This morning, the Herald broke the news that the figure was down to £650m. In the course of the council meeting, it came out that it is actually £610m!
Despite this, the Lib Dems tried to push on with the SAS proposal. Howeever, the Tories backed the Labour amendment which would see the line completed only to Haymarket. Apparently this is the least bad option - never mind that the (highly dubious) business case predicts that this line will never make a profit (annual loss of £3.1m).
On the plus side, when the council reached agreement with the contractors, the contract was for the line to SAS. As that is no longer the case, the contractors could still walk away.
Unfortunately there will still need to be extensive roadworks to reinstate areas like Leith Walk and the junction at Haymarket properly as well as remove the tramworks on Princes Street, which are currently disintergrating under the weight of the buses.
Last Friday, the Council's report said that the costs of cancellation would be £690m - down from £750m in June. This morning, the Herald broke the news that the figure was down to £650m. In the course of the council meeting, it came out that it is actually £610m!
Despite this, the Lib Dems tried to push on with the SAS proposal. Howeever, the Tories backed the Labour amendment which would see the line completed only to Haymarket. Apparently this is the least bad option - never mind that the (highly dubious) business case predicts that this line will never make a profit (annual loss of £3.1m).
On the plus side, when the council reached agreement with the contractors, the contract was for the line to SAS. As that is no longer the case, the contractors could still walk away.
Unfortunately there will still need to be extensive roadworks to reinstate areas like Leith Walk and the junction at Haymarket properly as well as remove the tramworks on Princes Street, which are currently disintergrating under the weight of the buses.
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff