 |
Re: Cost Overruns....? You missed one.....
Author: ron
Date: 06-08-2021 - 09:42
BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FUD Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Would be interesting to see the list of
> overruns
> > that are already allocated and funded. What the
> > story highlights seems to be the unfunded list.
> >
> > As a practical matter, every construction
> project
> > has overruns. Sometimes, they can be managed so
> > the contingency funds cover them. Usually, they
> > exceed the contingencies because 1) they were
> > unforeseen (sometimes by just not looking, but
> > even on a small scale, a lot of current
> > construction budgets are currently being
> torpedoed
> > by skyrocketing material costs, and having a
> key
> > supplier go bankrupt isn't really Caltrain's
> > fault), and 2) the contingenciess were limited
> by
> > trying to make the job look cheaper than
> everybody
> > knew it would be. Then, of course, there are
> the
> > ones that have 3) a large component of
> > incompetence (looking at HSR). With Caltrain,
> it
> > looks like a combination but more #1 than #2,
> with
> > only a bit of #3.
>
> You left one big reason for cost overruns out.
> The one that was made famous by the I-105 project
> cost overruns... And, has now been repeated by
> tht CAHSRA fiasco, and probably Caltrain... The
> sponsoring agency simply lies about project costs
> to make it look better in the approvl processes,
> (or with voters...) to get initial funding. And,
> once they got the initional funding, once the 105
> project started construction, the cost overruns
> began almost immediately.
>
> These 105 cost overruns use to come at the expense
> of local projects awaiting funds. But, Caltran
> always came with really good "excuses", and in
> some cases literally were pleading "ignorance" (we
> forgot to include the 70 million dollar cost of
> the Vermont interchange in our original estimates,
> oops "My Bad"...) at the Quarterly funding meeting
> I attended at LACTC (now MTA) in the late eighties
> and early nineties. And, every quarter a new bill
> and new excuses. And, back then, not unlike with
> the CAHSRA fiasco cost overruns and impact on
> thing like the US Link project, every quarter
> dozens of local agency projects were put on hold,
> some for years, while Caltans sucked the local
> match pots dry, and then some, as the project came
> in at nearly 3 times estimated original costs.
> And, NO, that does not include any of the
> additional LRT costs.
>
> The only good news is that after that the
> Legislature gave control of Caltrans project
> financing over the local CTC's, and no more of the
> fat Caltrans hog getting first dibs at the
> trough... Unfortunately, we now see CTC's in many
> urban areas now neglecting funding for our highway
> system.... One problem solved, another new onw
> created....
Nothing new here. Google Willie Brown "dig a hole and fill it with money". He explains how government works.
-------------------------------------------------------
> FUD Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Would be interesting to see the list of
> overruns
> > that are already allocated and funded. What the
> > story highlights seems to be the unfunded list.
> >
> > As a practical matter, every construction
> project
> > has overruns. Sometimes, they can be managed so
> > the contingency funds cover them. Usually, they
> > exceed the contingencies because 1) they were
> > unforeseen (sometimes by just not looking, but
> > even on a small scale, a lot of current
> > construction budgets are currently being
> torpedoed
> > by skyrocketing material costs, and having a
> key
> > supplier go bankrupt isn't really Caltrain's
> > fault), and 2) the contingenciess were limited
> by
> > trying to make the job look cheaper than
> everybody
> > knew it would be. Then, of course, there are
> the
> > ones that have 3) a large component of
> > incompetence (looking at HSR). With Caltrain,
> it
> > looks like a combination but more #1 than #2,
> with
> > only a bit of #3.
>
> You left one big reason for cost overruns out.
> The one that was made famous by the I-105 project
> cost overruns... And, has now been repeated by
> tht CAHSRA fiasco, and probably Caltrain... The
> sponsoring agency simply lies about project costs
> to make it look better in the approvl processes,
> (or with voters...) to get initial funding. And,
> once they got the initional funding, once the 105
> project started construction, the cost overruns
> began almost immediately.
>
> These 105 cost overruns use to come at the expense
> of local projects awaiting funds. But, Caltran
> always came with really good "excuses", and in
> some cases literally were pleading "ignorance" (we
> forgot to include the 70 million dollar cost of
> the Vermont interchange in our original estimates,
> oops "My Bad"...) at the Quarterly funding meeting
> I attended at LACTC (now MTA) in the late eighties
> and early nineties. And, every quarter a new bill
> and new excuses. And, back then, not unlike with
> the CAHSRA fiasco cost overruns and impact on
> thing like the US Link project, every quarter
> dozens of local agency projects were put on hold,
> some for years, while Caltans sucked the local
> match pots dry, and then some, as the project came
> in at nearly 3 times estimated original costs.
> And, NO, that does not include any of the
> additional LRT costs.
>
> The only good news is that after that the
> Legislature gave control of Caltrans project
> financing over the local CTC's, and no more of the
> fat Caltrans hog getting first dibs at the
> trough... Unfortunately, we now see CTC's in many
> urban areas now neglecting funding for our highway
> system.... One problem solved, another new onw
> created....
Nothing new here. Google Willie Brown "dig a hole and fill it with money". He explains how government works.
