+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: GGH Transportation and Growth Plan (/showthread.php?tid=1588)
RE: GGH Transportation and Growth Plan - danbrotherston - 04-27-2023
(04-26-2023, 07:02 PM)clasher Wrote: Ion was still funded by the gov't, vs. something like a condo building or a steel mill that's just one company building it.
And so? The government didn't hire any engineers or consultants to build it...they hired a single private firm to do the whole thing and take all the risk. It's a PPP project. The REASON for a PPP is that people believe what you believe: that private companies are magically more efficient than the public sector. At least for transit there is some reasons why this could be true--our region isn't an expert in building and operating LRT, but in theory, a private company that has experience with it could be, in practice apparently Keolis cannot keep the trains running in light freezing rain.
But time and time again, this is proven not to be the case, efficiency has much more to do with scale than it does who runs an organisation. Efficiency increases the larger scale a product is built at but decreases the more people who are involved. Building the ION is a one off, single product, but involves tens of thousands of people. It's worst case for efficiency no matter who builds it.
But I still don't think this is related to the costs, because no engineers have been hired, or consultants retained...this is a cost estimate...one that makes little sense.
RE: GGH Transportation and Growth Plan - Bytor - 04-27-2023
(04-27-2023, 01:06 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: And so? The government didn't hire any engineers or consultants to build it...
The Region still had engineers working on it, though. We published one or two sets of functional design plans that the bids were made against and very changes were made to them.
GrandLinq's engineers only decided how to build it, not what to build, and the "what" still needed our own engineers.
RE: GGH Transportation and Growth Plan - danbrotherston - 04-27-2023
(04-27-2023, 01:00 PM)Bytor Wrote:(04-27-2023, 01:06 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: And so? The government didn't hire any engineers or consultants to build it...
The Region still had engineers working on it, though. We published one or two sets of functional design plans that the bids were made against and very changes were made to them.
GrandLinq's engineers only decided how to build it, not what to build, and the "what" still needed our own engineers.
I understand that...but the budget that's being discussed here that is so utterly absurd, is not including that work...the budget is specifically the scope of work of the private company...hence saying the budget is inflated because the public sector is inefficient is not only debatable because the public sector isn't necessarily inefficient, it's completely abusrd because it has nothing to do with the public sector.
RE: GGH Transportation and Growth Plan - bravado - 04-27-2023
(04-27-2023, 02:25 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(04-27-2023, 01:00 PM)Bytor Wrote: The Region still had engineers working on it, though. We published one or two sets of functional design plans that the bids were made against and very changes were made to them.
GrandLinq's engineers only decided how to build it, not what to build, and the "what" still needed our own engineers.
I understand that...but the budget that's being discussed here that is so utterly absurd, is not including that work...the budget is specifically the scope of work of the private company...hence saying the budget is inflated because the public sector is inefficient is not only debatable because the public sector isn't necessarily inefficient, it's completely abusrd because it has nothing to do with the public sector.
Not necessarily - I think it’s a likely possible scenario that our local engineers, who have no incentive towards cost savings, presented a plan that followed every wasteful law and ordinance and then sent that outrageous summary to the contractors to be inflated again.