Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Wednesday, 10th March 2010 Change Date

Trams depot work 'running two years behind schedule'

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 July 2009
A KEY element of the city's £545 million tram project could be around two years behind schedule, a leading construction expert warned today.
The claim by John Carson, a former director of maintenance for Network Rail, is strongly disputed by tram firm TIE, which said work at the Gogar depot was only nine months delayed, as revealed by the Evening News last month.

Mr Carson, the former head of Miller Civil Engineering, said the final business case for the project showed construction work at the tram depot should have started at the end of February last year.

He said work to move 141,000 cubic metres of earth in preparation for the construction phase had begun 16 months late and still had around seven-and-a-half months to run, meaning building work faced a combined delay of more than 23 months.

Last month, tram chiefs admitted work at Gogar was already nine months behind schedule, potentially pushing the completion date into 2012.

But Mr Carson today said the "incompetent" leadership of the project now meant the end date could be closer to 2014, with a final price tag of closer to £1 billion. He said: "Things are so far behind because of the incompetence and arrogance of the council, who thought they could deliver a project of this size."

The tram company said the engineering expert had taken the information "out of context" and was presenting a skewed picture of the progress that had been made. Work at Gogar had begun in April and was progressing well TIE said.

Susan Clark, deputy director of the tram project, said: "As indicated to Mr Carson in our response to his query, the construction programme for the construction of the tram depot at Gogar is currently nine months behind. Progress on the site is going very well, with excavation being carried out ahead of programme. This part of the work is not on the project's main critical path, therefore its impact on the overall delivery of the tram project can be minimised.

"Taking information out of the overall context of the larger programme can lead to misinterpretation which is why the overview of the factual information is essential. We are working hard with the tram consortium to revise the current programme and as announced in the Evening News, we will be announcing the revised opening date in due course.

"It is expected that the delay to the project as a whole will be a matter of some months."

The site next to Gogar Roundabout will house the tram depot, a tram stop and all of the main signalling and electrical equipment for the tram line.

The Evening News understands that engineers have encountered a series of problems on the site, including complications on diverting a huge water pipe which runs under the A8 close to the Gyle Shopping Centre.

Councillor Gordon Mackenzie, the council's transport convener, said: "Speculation, based on small pieces of specific programme information out of context of the whole programme, is unhelpful and misleading."

The first tram cars are expected in Edinburgh next April, and once the depot is completed, a stretch between Gogar and Edinburgh Park will be used for trials.


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 July 2009 10:05 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh transport plans
 
1

alfonsa pedrosa,

embra 03/07/2009 11:54:34
Two years and counting,now there is a surprise.
2

Mallory,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 11:59:56
Has anybody worked out how vross town double decker buses will fit under the tram wires or will Lothian's fleet be restricted to single deckers?

And where will the fleet move to from Annandale Street?
3

TankEngine,

Uphall 03/07/2009 12:07:10
Just two years late! Look there's a flying pig.
4

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:09:49
This whole thing is not only an embarrassment to Edinburgh, it's an embarrassment to the whole of Scotland. Can we please scrap it now before it costs us even more money?

At best it is goiing to end up as a tourist railway. At the same time it will claim valuable road space from an already congested city and will probably cost well into 10 figures by the time it is finished.

Please. Can common sense prevail for once?
5

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:09:55
Not sure if it is two years late, but given construction was due to start in August last year per the final business case and they are a long way off starting the building works, it is at least a year late. Much like the utility diversions which were supposed to be completed in Sept last year.

TIE tells lies.
6

Busy as usual,

Bonnyrigg 03/07/2009 12:11:46
2 - single deckers and bendy buses, what an improvement that is to an already stetched bus service. I expect LB will be sold off to compensate for the inevitable cost overun.
7

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 03/07/2009 12:12:23
So what ? Every project is late at some stage , this will easily be made up .
8

vote them out,

Blitz 03/07/2009 12:12:40



Never has such a beautiful city had such a shower of wasters (Councillors) spending so much money to rip up the streets and the economic fabric of the city's communuty apart. The city centre looks like a scene from the world war II blitz.



9

vote them out,

blitz correction 03/07/2009 12:13:51



Never has such a beautiful city had such a shower of wasters (Councillors) spending so much money to rip up the streets and tear the economic fabric of the city's communuty apart. The city centre looks like a scene from the world war II blitz.
10

Jackie Treehorn,

03/07/2009 12:14:57
'arrogance' of the council or 'ignorance and stupidity' of the council? The latter I think.
11

,

03/07/2009 12:16:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Jackie Treehorn,

03/07/2009 12:18:04
#7 Kermit

"So what ? Every project is late at some stage , this will easily be made up ."

Any project manager that was running a project 2 YEARS behind schedule would have been SACKED long ago and would not be receiving bonuses.

City of Edinburgh Council are run by gangsters.
13

Skip McClendon,

03/07/2009 12:19:43
City of Edinburgh Council and TIE are arrogant and incompetent?!? Surely not!
14

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 12:20:26
"The site next to Gogar Roundabout will house the tram depot, a tram stop and all of the main signalling and electrical equipment for the tram line."

"This part of the work is not on the project's main critical path"

So, the trams will be able to operate without a depot, signals or electricity. Now that's what I call "world class"!
15

,

03/07/2009 12:20:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

,

03/07/2009 12:22:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Duncan in Edinburgh,

03/07/2009 12:25:29
I love how the uninformed opinions of one person are accepted as gospel by those here who are determined to see the worst in this scheme. And similarly, how one poster's uninformed view that the introduction of trams will stop double-decker buses running (hint: no it won't) is similarly swallowed whole and regurgitated as fact.

Roadworks become "chaos", an overspend within contingency becomes "will cost over a billion", etc., etc. It just serves to make the anti-tram brigade look foolish.
18

Hector the Red,

03/07/2009 12:28:05
"The Evening News understands that engineers have encountered a series of problems on the site, including complications on diverting a huge water pipe which runs under the A8 close to the Gyle Shopping Centre."

This will be the pipe that the numpties at TIE re-located to the wrong place and susequently had to re-locate it again, doubling the time and doubling the cost.

How can incompetance be classed as a "Complication" ?


19

Jams,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:36:43
Not so long ago the council told us that everything was on time and on budget. A short time later they reluctantly admitted it might be 9 months late and over budget.

Now the transport convenor tells us that Speculation is unhelpful!!! Perhaps if they told us the whole truth he might have a point, but the pattern of lies, spin and information withheld by TIE and the council makes me far more likely to beleive Mr Carson's "Speculation" than their official statements on the matter.

If you cannot treat us with respect then at least stop treating us like idiots. Or is the problem that "Some people can't handle the truth!"
20

Vox Rationalis,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:38:56
There's another tram story here about the mdf mock-up.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinburgh/15000-track-down-tram-.5426674.jp
21

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:40:24
"The site next to Gogar Roundabout will house the tram depot, a tram stop and all of the main signalling and electrical equipment for the tram line."
This the area which they should be concentrating on getting right on time. If the signalling is not installed and working then there will be no trams running.
22

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:45:30
#18 - Duncan, these are not uninformed opinions. It is a fact that parts of the project are running at least one year late. (You could try and do something no pro-tram supporter ever appears to do and do some research to confirm). It is also a fact, confirmed by TIE, that the project is over-spending. What is wrong however is their refusal to provide up to date costs and to revise the business plan to reflect current reality rather than the fantasy land projections they had.

The foolish ones are those who think reintroducing a 19th century mode of transport makes sense when it has failed to meet its objectives in every UK city it has been tried.
23

Big bob 79,

03/07/2009 12:46:43
TRAM SHAM

Referendum NOW!.....

24

Foo,

03/07/2009 12:47:28
I'd be interested to know if there has been a tram story literally every day for the past year?
25

simonp,

03/07/2009 12:47:36
#18 don't forget Duncan is right and all anti-trammers are wrong..because he says so!!!
26

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 12:48:26
#18 Duncan

You seem to have forgotten that it has been established that there is, in fact, an overspend. Your assertion that it is "within contingency" when the contingency amount is no longer attainable in the foreseeable future is disingenuous.
27

regentlad,

Lothian 03/07/2009 12:48:36
17: That could be a more accurate assertion!

And the Council/TiE have themselves to blame. I wrote to TiE 3 years ago to mention that Leith tram depot at Smiths Place was still in situ (and in Council ownership) and could easily be used for the 27 trams. Operationally its in a better position than a depot at Gogar which is on the western extremity of the line, and Leith is better placed should the Council ever extend the tram line. It would take some time for a replacement tram from Gogar to cover a breakdown at Newhaven or in the city centre! No reply was sent, I heard later they planned to sell Leith to help pay for Gogar but of course the property downturn and the geological problems at Gogar have put paid to that silly idea.

Between Mr Carson, a man of long number of years experience in the rail and construction industry and Ms Clark and Cllr MacKenzie I think I'd take Mr Carson's advice any day. Unless of course we're talking about expenses claims and jaunts overseas....
28

Big bob 79,

03/07/2009 12:49:52
The only and only shortened tram line is expected to make a 14 million pound loss in its first year!

Scrap this embarrassment
29

,

03/07/2009 12:51:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

Arrow,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 12:55:23
has anyone noticed the mess that the road taking the buses along Melville Street and back to Shandwick place has become. in the crescent leading to Shanwick place it is clear that the road over the cellars assoicated with the buildings on Coates Crescent is collapsing. these minor roads are not capable of having buses of the size and frequency presently using them
31

Lee John,

03/07/2009 12:55:56
Delay? Who would have thunk it?
32

Ecto,

03/07/2009 13:00:51
Susan Clark, deputy director of the tram project, said: This part of the work is not on the project's main critical path, therefore its impact on the overall delivery of the tram project can be minimised.

What having no where to park the bloody things at the end of the day is not critical what are they going to do just abandon them on the street. This one needs her jotters as well.
33

The Busman,

Leith 03/07/2009 13:03:39
In my view, there is a very high likelihood that the part of the line from Princes St down to Leith will not be completed. This is because the Council will be left high and dry on the money; and the only way to recover anything from the situation will be to abandon work on the final two miles of line.
34

,

03/07/2009 13:03:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
35

,

03/07/2009 13:04:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
36

scotsol,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:05:33
#23 - I don't think Duncan or anyone else was denying that parts of the project are late, though that is substantialy due to political interference. What he and anyone with half a brain is questioning is the validity of the views of this "leading construction expert" who has nothing to do with the project and no particular information, but is bandying about idiotic figures like a billion pounds, whatever that's supposed to be.
37

Snails dont like curry and chips,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:08:21
Have these TIE bufoons been trained by Sadaam Husseins minister of information??? Gogar is nothing but a big hole in the ground and has been for about 2 years. The tram tunnel under the A8 is not there, no infrastructure has been laid, no building foundations are there. All that is there are a couple portcabins. Has Susan Clark escaped from some form of asylum - or does she not actually know where Gogar is. TIE are simply a bunch of self interested liars
38

The Busman,

Leith 03/07/2009 13:10:17
#36

Why am I a 'clown'?

Because the Scottish Government will *not* be able to make up the shortfall arising from the difference between the project cost and what they are committed to pay, either the good citizena of Edinburgh will face the Council tax bill from hell, or the scope of the project will have to be cut back (further).
39

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:10:40
#37 - It is not late by one single minute due to political interference - in my comments I refer to the final business plan approved in Dec 07, dates on which were updated post the SNP's review.

And to say that the views of a former director of maintenance for Network Rail and Head of Civil Engineering have no validity shows the ostrich mentality of the liars at TIE and those few others who support this farce.
40

Jaco Pastorius,

Phnom Penh 03/07/2009 13:13:12
39. Your oversized shoes tend to give away the fact that you are a clown. And stop painting grotesque smiles on your lips!
41

regentlad,

Lothian 03/07/2009 13:14:10
33: The depot is critical to the line, not just for parking but for maintenance. Kind of concerning that the deputy director of the tram project says otherwise! Where is she going to service the trams....in the middle of Princes Street? I'm sure the Spanish tram makers who'll provide the warranties would have something to say if there was no depot!

42

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:15:16
#28.
Just remember that TIE is really more concerned with long term transport in Edinburgh, Lothians and even Fife.
We assume that their objective is to maintain TIE's influence for as long as possible, so ensuring continuity and coherence in planning and implementation.
Regarding criticism of TIE, they are planning an integrated transport network. Why should they consult civil engineers ? These engineers would only point out potential problems which would impinge on the cost and timescale of the project. Much easier to have a few transport visionaries who do not unduly concern themselves with potential spiraling costs and problems which may never happen.
The current tram line is only to be the first phase of a much more ambitious network.
You have to accept that as Leith will not be central when trams are running as far afield as Fife, it is only common sense to get it right first time rather than have to make major changes sometime in the future.
43

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 13:17:08
#37 scotsol

a good example of "half abrain" and "idiotic" might be stating that accommodation, maintenance, signalling and power facilities are "not on the project's main critical path".

"a billion pounds, whatever that's supposed to be"

One thousand million pounds.
44

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 13:20:06
Remembering of course that the Parliament building went TEN TIMES over budget, is it so unrealistic that trams might go over by a mere two times?

I think not.
45

,

03/07/2009 13:20:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
46

Duncan in Edinburgh,

03/07/2009 13:22:44
#40 No amount of expertise is substitute for knowledge of accurate information, which this man by his own admission does not have. Soliciting his opinion on this scheme is the equivalent of talking to a TV doctor about what killed Michael Jackson; he can speculate, but cannot diagnose. This piece is fluff. If you hold such store by research, why is it you are so desperate to justify opinions reached without evidence?
47

scotsol,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:27:41
#40 - If you think that the views of "a former director of maintenance for Network Rail and Head of Civil Engineering" are beyond question, you are remarkably innocent. And why then do you routinely disbelieve all statements from directors of TIE, who have similar qualifications?

#44 - If you look in the Oxford, you'll see that a thousand million is only a billion in America. Here it's supposed to be a million million, but it's now totally confused. The expression ought to be confined to children's comics, like most of your other pronouncements.

I suppose my dictionary could be wrong. It defines "Incandescent" as "glowing with brilliance", ha ha.
48

PaulB,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:34:34
Scrap any more tram stories in the Evening News they are getting so boring. The Trams Are Coming!
49

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:36:34
#47 - Duncan, there is plenty of evidence that the project is running hugely late and over budget, much of it grudgingly released by TIE.

With his background and experience he is entitled to state his professional opinion.

Why do you doubt his assertion that the project is running massively late and over budget? What scares me is that I very much doubt that TIE actually knows what the final costs and completion date are looking like.
50

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:38:11
#48 - The directors of TIE are not similarly qualified. Take a look if you doubt me.
51

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 13:42:24
#48 scotsol

The Scottish Parliamentary Budget uses 1,000,000,000. The Oxford online states "The 'American' system is now standard use in British government publications."

This goes also for Local Government, of which TIE is an arms length company.

Your argument has collapsed to childish name-calling in record time today.
52

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 13:44:53
#51 GraemeH

I wouldn't bother appealing to scotsol's logic. He's already stated he "really (doesn't) care what the majority think. The trams are right for Edinburgh."

So, you see, scotsol knows best, regardless of the facts, and everybody who disagrees is wrong.
53

Heretic_,

03/07/2009 13:45:20
#40
On the face of it you make a fair point, but Mr Carson does unfortunately have a long track record of spouting sh*** on various topics
54

scotsol,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 13:51:32
#53 - Really? Take a look at posting #45 for a shining example of Incandescent logic. The Parliament went over budget, so the trams must be doing the same. Wow, devastating.
55

Duncan in Edinburgh,

03/07/2009 13:55:12
#50 Mr Carson has a long-exhibited tendency to only see the evidence he wants to see, and only reach the conclusions he wants to reach. He used to viciously attack the former Scottish Executive's transport strategy at every turn; yet he endorsed the SNP when they adopted a whole range of Lib/Lab initiatives as their own. His forthright opposition to a new Forth Bridge softened notably when the SNP government pushed forward with it. He argues for a tunnel under the Forth - quoting a £500 million construction cost but failing to cost the work to take traffic into and out of the tunnel, which would likely be £2 billion or more - largely because he lives in South Queensferry.

In short, he is entitled to his opinions, but they are opinions shaped by politics, grudges and personal wishes, as well as by his undoubted expertise.
56

Hoof Hearted,

03/07/2009 13:55:43
This whole story is just sour grapes from a former boss of a company that failed to get on the tender list for the tram scheme.
57

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 13:59:25
#55 scotsol

I suppose I must spell it out for you as you don't seem to be able to make the connection by yourself.

I made the comparison, in the context of tram supporters constantly rubbishing the likelihood of large budget overruns, specifically to demonstrate that an overspend of a "mere" 100% is hardly without precedent in Scottish public works.
58

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 14:01:13
#56 Duncan

"His forthright opposition to a new Forth Bridge softened notably when the SNP government pushed forward with it."

What do you base this on?
59

Duncan in Edinburgh,

03/07/2009 14:06:25
#59 Observation.
60

Old Cartha Boy,

03/07/2009 14:08:18
"Councillor Gordon Mackenzie, the council's transport convener, said: "Speculation, based on small pieces of specific programme information out of context of the whole programme, is unhelpful and misleading."

Equally applies to the mutterings of the likes of Dawe, Wheeler, Gallagher and any one else associated with this ill-conceived, poorly planned, badly constructed project. Even in their heart of hearts they must know what we know - this will NOT be completed!
61

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 14:09:37
There is a school of academic thought that suggests the process of "reference class forecasting" when scrutinising major infrastructure projects.

For example, academic evidence has shown that 9 out of 10 rail projects (of which tram schemes formed part of the study) were overbudget and most of them by over two-thirds. The guidance suggests that one should consider whether there are any factors involved in the current project which would tend to suggest a different outcome. For example, in this case, have TIE so far demonstrated a greater degree of engineering competence? Has a greater degree of scrutiny/control been exercised over the project? Is there any reason to suppose that the usual tactics of "strategic misrepresentation" of costs/timescales, etc, has not taken place?

If no factors can be found to suggest that the management of the current project is any different from usual, then one should suppose that the outcome of the current scheme will be similar to the 9 out of 10 which have over-run, possibly substantially.

Here endeth the lesson.
62

Trams shams,

03/07/2009 14:10:12
Big Bob 79

Referendum NOW!..... double
63

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 14:14:11
Susan Clark - "Taking information out of the overall context of the larger programme..."

Clr Mackenzie - "small pieces of specific programme information out of context of the whole programme..."

Next time he uses a statement prepared by TIE he should really check that it's sufficiently different from their own.
64

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 14:14:32
#60 That explains it.
65

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 14:17:25
#62 Sarah B

What did the business case say about optimism bias?
66

nemien,

Dublin 03/07/2009 14:42:43
As a Scot living in Dublin with an interest in trams and having experienced the difficulties here I have checked this out and if you go to:

http://www.edinburghtrams.com/index.php/story_so_far/view_details/7/

this is the Business Case which the City of Edinburgh signed off on and is the basis for TIE's construction programme or it should be.

In Section 12.10 Milestone summaries page 191 there is a summary of the milestones for the Depot.

I think that Councillor Gordon Mackenzie has a reading problem or is it blindness to the truth? There is no conjecture in these dates!

The earthworks are shown ticked as complete which they are not due in part to the water main diversion that TIE did not know about and the construction of the depot has not even started.

Does he really know what he is on about, the depot from their own figures will take 16 months to build and they have not started yet!!!!

If you read the part about the first tram delivery then you find out that it is due in December 2009 not April 2010 as the Councillor maintains.

It looks as if you could have a lot of demonstration trams scattered about the lovely City of Edinburgh, because the depot will not be ready to receive them for a long time.

A lot more disinformation( or is it lies!!) from the City of Edinburgh and TIE
67

Herman The German,

03/07/2009 14:45:18
I feel so privileged to be in the esteemed company of such experts.
68

Dragonlord,

03/07/2009 14:54:21
This is great news! Two years late means that by the time the tram LINE is up and running, the finacial situation will have improved and the investment may work out after all. Clever Tie. And we all thought they were a bunch of money grabbing clowns that could run a raffle!




Ps For those that are rather slow, this is a sarcstic post!
69

regentlad,

Lothian 03/07/2009 15:08:40
57: I wouldn't think so. If anyone had sour grapes then why bother to warn them of the dangers .... just let them dig a bigger hole for themselves !

Mr Carson has quoted from TiE's own business case that the depot work was to start last February. He's correct as the fact is it hasn't and we're now in July. Mr Carson has also estimated the amount of earth still to be moved even before the work can start.

More seriously he estimates (and let us hope he isn't correct!) that because of the Council/TiE's incompetence and arrogance, the project cost will end up nearer 1 billion pounds. Now there's a fair chance a man of this experience will be correct so whose going to pay the additional 500 million pounds. The Scottish Government have said they'll not pay a penny more and the Council promise of 'big business contributions' hasn't come to much has it? So that just leaves Edinburgh's council tax payers.....
70

Herman The German,

03/07/2009 15:09:11
I am at a loss to understand why 99% of the above feel competent to comment on the construction and running of a major infrastructure project.
When it is painfully obvious that they would be incapable of pouring pi$$ out of a welly boot that had the instructions written on the sole.
71

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 15:14:27
#72 Perhaps because 99% of posters would actually make a batter job of running the project? It would be more difficult to make a worse job of it.
72

animmo,

03/07/2009 15:16:27
#72, it's not that any of us are better placed to project manage the tramline construction, but we would rather hope that those actually in the job would know how to do it. It is after all their job and area of 'expertise'
73

Herman The German,

03/07/2009 15:21:30
#73.
"a batter job of it"there is no need for violence!

I rest my case.
74

The Judge,

03/07/2009 15:24:01
Councillor Gordon Mackenzie, the council's transport convener, said: "Speculation, based on small pieces of specific programme information out of context of the whole programme, is unhelpful and misleading."

Ok Gordon how about YOU tell us the truth.

How many months behind is the project?

How much will the final cost of the project?

Has the £10m design finished yet?

How much have the council raised for our part of the costs? If that's no longer enough to finish the project where will the 10's of millions of pounds come from?

How much will council tax rise in the next 5-10 years to be able to cover the annual running costs and any subsequent loans the council take out?

What is going to happen to Lothian Buses?

Of course like Big Phil before him Gordon doesn't have to answer to us.

The SNP & The Lib Dems are forcing this disaster of a project upon us. Remember that at the next local elections.
75

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 15:34:15
#75 Must've been a subconcious slip. Probably because the project is being "battered" through against massive opposition.
76

Foo,

03/07/2009 15:37:35
Blah blah, generic rant, blah blah, my expert opinion blah blah if you took the time to do some research, more hot wind, blah belch poot, insult regarding tram supporters, blah blah, outrage at being insulted back by tram supporters, blah blah blah, finished with seemingly innocent yet highly patronising quip regarding my thoughts on your intellectual capacity.

77

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 15:44:45
All those doubting thomases who think that this train set is going to plan need to consider for a moment another large scale project conducted in Edinburgh not that long ago.

Initial projected cost: Between £10-40 million
Actual cost: £414 million -- at least ten times what it should have been

Initial projected duration of project: 2 years
Actual duration: 5 years -- over twice the time.

That little project was the Scottish Parliament building. Now, virtually the same kind of quango has been set up to run the trams project as was set up to run the parliament project. Politicial interference is being conducted by mush the same set of politicians with more or less the same axes to grind.

Purely on the basis of this, I expect the tram project to run for at least twice the projected time and to cost between 5-10 times the original estimate. I also predict that despite the cost going up, the amount actually delivered will be cut down substantially.

These are my conclusions based upon the evidence available to me and my general feeling about it. Let's see if I'm wrong shall we?
78

Jackie Treehorn,

03/07/2009 15:45:32
#60 Duncan

Will you be observing in CC Blooms tonight?
79

taxiedin,

EDINBURGH 03/07/2009 16:00:22
a visitor asked me if the romans were building the trams. i said no or it would have been finnished if they were. what a waste of time and good money.scrap it
80

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 16:00:28
#81 Fuelhead

Very true. There is one extremely important difference between the two projects: the Scottish Parliamentary corporate Body had the power to top-slice "whatever it took" from the Scottish Block, while the tram project will hit the financial buffers - thankfully, though, not at speed.
81

Forthtag,

South Queensferry 03/07/2009 16:05:57
#56 How wrong you can be!!!

Have a look at my web site, does it look as if I have given up on a bridge as the correct solution to the Forth Replacement Crossing.

http://www.geocities.com/forthtag/index.htm

Have a look at the front page, it is from the Sunday Herald. We are paying four time as much for this bridge as the Danes intend to spend on a bridge bridge 20km long from Denmark to Germany!!!!

So much for my SNP support and the LibDem/Lab initiative ideas!!!
82

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 03/07/2009 16:23:29
TIE was set up by the Labour ECC who not just didn't learn from the Parliament building fiasco, they REFUSED to learn from that project. Why?? Because at that time Labour in Westminster was throwing money at the Labour Scottish Executive to keep them quiet. Don't believe me?? Well, didn't the SNP Government discover that the Labour Scottish Executive never held any meetings with Westminster that they should have? Labour in Westminster issued instructions, the Labour Scottish Executive just bent over and took it.

This Tram project was a Labour vanity project set up in the full expectation that it would be bailed out by a Labour Scottish Executive, who in turn would be bailed out by a Labour Westminster. And Labour and Unionists turn round and says Scotland can't be independent because it relies too much on subsidies.

EVERYBODY who is not anti-SNP KNOWS this project, if it is to be completed, will cost close to £1bn, and it won't be completed until 2013, at the soonest. They'll end up getting a Tram to run back and forth along Princes St for publicity, and then the whole thing will be cancelled.

For years to come, tourists will point to the trams lines and wonder where the trams are.
83

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 16:51:48
#87:

You are probably not too wide of the mark.

As you might know, I am pretty scathing towards some aspects of the SNP but in this particular area, I think that they were absolutely spot on dead right to oppose this obscene waste of money.

Edinburgh will be destroyed by this daft project and it find it sickening and upsetting that it has been allowed to get this far. Taking up the road space in this way is the ultimate anti-car measure and THAT is the hidden agenda.

If they were really so set against people being able to use their cars, why didn't they just get a few concrete blocks and place them in the middle of the roads to stop traffic from passing? that would have been a damn sight cheaper than building a toy train set and would have had about the same effect on the transportation system in Edinburgh.

It really is heartbreaking that we have such stupid morons with such high levels of influence.
84

James (1),

03/07/2009 17:00:22
Been away for a wee while but returned to see the 3 amigoes are still spinning the same rubbish that the tram line will be worth it at any cost. Also notice no new supporters for them! Why is that?
Foo is struggling to find logical reasons to defend this folly and resorting to sarcasm. Common sense is obviously getting through to hin=m?
However Duncan, who is not normal in thought or deed, comes out with all sorts. He is known for changing the meaning of words to suit his arguments so I suppose he can find a new meaning for the words "two years behind schedule".
I also have a sneeking suspicion he is one and the same scotlol.
It is a huge waste of money but we are stuck with it and will be paying the cost of this folly for many many years.
85

Incandescent,

03/07/2009 17:06:58
#89 James (1)

You've done it now.
86

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 03/07/2009 17:11:50
#88
I was referring to those who are anti-SNP at any cost.

What I am waiting on is the project collapse and then Labour blaming the SNP for it.

I criticise the SNP councillors in the ECC for getting into bed with the Liberals. They should have stood against this project from the start. They seem to have swallowed the lies about the project costs and timetable. I'm quite sure some of them will lose their seats at the next election because of it.
87

taxiedin,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 17:23:17
scrap it give the bin men there wages
88

animmo,

03/07/2009 17:48:49
Scrap the binmen and use their bones as tramlines
89

pongo2009,

03/07/2009 18:11:31
This is unbelievably high risk all round. At best the £500m Scottish Government allocation is all spent. That's not the same £500m going to be deprived by Westminster but basically the whole country is bust. There is little more money and the trams are at the back of any queue.

A Tory MSP is now campaigning for A9 dualling and other deserving improvements. Pity his party threw away £500m replacing a single bus route from nowhere to not quite the airport.

Or is that code for when we agreed a £500m cap we really meant it.

Funny this really bad news has come just as Holyrood is in recess.
90

archie12,

03/07/2009 18:15:03
#89 - The whole of Scotland will be paying for this Scheme for years in the form of broken manifesto promises, cutbacks in public services and under-investment in the infrastructure to bring in investment long term.
91

NorT,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 18:36:22
No mention anyway in the experts article (and i agree with him) about the problems that are going to arise when they try to divert the very large water main at Gogar. There is no suitable land round about for it to go and as TIE are going to have to bear the costs which were not allowed for that part is going to be delayed for many months and cost many millions to undertake. Also because of the sewers under Princes Street the contractors have been forced to dig up across the whole of the road and put in strengthening to stop the swers collapsing. Agian this was not budgeted for and will cost a few million as well as delay the project by mny months. This also applies to Shandwick Place and York Place. No wonder TIE don't won't to tell us about this.
92

calum,

03/07/2009 18:44:59
Hold on, guys, Gorgie_Tony is about. How long until this loony comes on with "Roll on the trams, top deck is best. Traaa laaa laaa".
Surely there's community care for him!!
93

Foo,

03/07/2009 20:53:52
Future generations will look at these threads and shake their heads in digust. That's if people still shake their heads in those days. Perhaps they'll rub their nose, or squat, or show some other outlandish display of disapproval.
94

JAMBO 4,

Embra 03/07/2009 21:29:34
No 102 Poo

I see the broon stuff is still emanating from yer mooth

And anyway what is digust ?
95

Ian down under,

Musselburgh 03/07/2009 21:37:50
#2 Go to Manchester, trams and double deck busess get by fine. also the overhead wire headroom would probably allow double deck trams. The pantograph that collects the current is flexible and can cope with a wide variation in wire height so they can be higher where buses run and lower on segregated areas.
Mind you just because I support the tram and the idea of eventually having a network does not mean I think the people building it or at least the 'heid yins' are any good.
96

crowsteppedbettygrable,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 21:50:00
Scotland used to be, not so long ago, the rail powerhouse of the world. Seems today we've got trouble re-inventing the wheel - maybe those who criticize, quite rightly, the incompetent civic worthies - should take some night classes in engineering and solve the (history repeating itself) tiny little inconsequential tech problems of making a basic object like a tram work. Result - less time making the rest of us out to the world as bitter, petulant, ignorant, vicious nebs- if you don't like it - DIY and better yourself!
97

tsongkhapa,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 21:57:39
The usual acerbic diatribes distilled into personal invective. Give it a rest.
98

crowsteppedbettygrable,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 22:03:17
And on a general note to posters - everyone please do try and use the basic rules of grammar and spelling - did you know, our international audience thinks we're all either boozed up, thick or just misanthropic boors with petty personal vendettas. Makes all your critical comments about trams, salmond, the price of cheese look really stupid and vacuous.
99

Ian down under,

Musselburgh 03/07/2009 22:05:19
#105 I agree. It is not just our rail heritage but our general engineering expertise which has gone. Where are the present day Thomas Telfords, John Louden Macadams going to come from. We train plenty lawyers, accountants, MBAs, administrators, politicians but we have lost our way in engineering. We social work people's natural spirit and vitality out of existence. Civil engineering projects can be a boost to the human spirit. Just think of the world icons which are engineered, The Forth Bridge [the red one that isn't falling down, the West Highland Railway, Settle and Carlisle Railway, most of Switzerland railways, Sydney Harbour Bridge........the list is endless. Natural features are wonderful but engineers have produced the iconic structures that signify famous places. To see how we have gone downhill just come to Musselburgh and go shopping at Tesco. Look around the outside and you'll see the remains of a factory that once filled their site. It was Bruntons Wire Mill and they made , among others, the cables for the Forth Road Bridge, Humber Bridge, Bosphorus Bridge. Now it's gone and we have a supermarket instead.
Yes building a tramway is engineering simplicity but complicated by politicians and 'business' leaders who have difficulty managing themselves.
100

Ian down under,

Mussleburgh 03/07/2009 22:06:37
#107 That's another thing we used to lead the world in literacy.
101

crowsteppedbettygrable,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 22:27:55

No. 106 tsongkhapa, you have me at your mercy - you see deep into my soul. You are clearly top KappaNinja, TiltingExpressClass. But - oh, this is where we part - Master and Ingenue - I am Enlightened! And cannot return to the forced Cherry-blossoming of your "sod thinking, let's rest" mantra! I leave you this Gutted Haddie as Talisman of my debt to you...
102

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 03/07/2009 22:33:54
Ian (108) - Part of the problem seems to be the level of political involvement in projects. To often, it is politicians who drive a particular project and discount any other option which does not concur with their own preference.

Pressure is then brought to bear on officials who raise concerns about elements of the project to keep quiet. Critics can be silenced by recruiting them or some such and private firms keep quiet because they hope to pick up lucrative work on the project.

It is quite a disgusting situation and I wish we could get back to the days when honesty and professional integrity was allowed to take precedence over political arrogance and general cluelessness.
103

Julian.,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 22:44:20
Mr Carson,

You wouldn't be against this project by any chance?

Because telling lies about the project is the usual trademark of the abti-tram brigade.

First point. If the earth moving was due to start Feb last year and it's 16 months behind shcedule that means they've only just started. Funny that because I've seen them moving earth for several months now.

Also, even if it was 16 months late starting how exactly does that make it 24 months behind schedule.

Maybe SarahB could shed some light on this...one of the few tram sceptics who actually tells the truth.
104

crowsteppedbettygrable,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 23:00:37
No. 111 Sarah B - t'was ever so. Each city gets what it deserves, in its timeframe. But there's another issue above honesty and integrity. If Hadid and Calatrava were brought in, there would be general incomprehension, but a positive gut feeling that it was "right". And the result would be beautiful. In this sense Charles is right to criticise Rogers - chelsea was poor. With the trams, we have a highly competent contractor, but no vision - no Hadid - who would be able to stun the dozy paymasters and the gurning populace into acceptance. Genius always trumps cluelessness, but the people are now too inarticulate to express this frustration. Our grandparents, who built the world, would have no such problem.
105

Julian.,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 23:12:52
#113,

Your grammar and spelling leaves a bit to be desired as well.
106

crowsteppedbettygrable,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 23:26:51
114, no spelling mistakes in post 113. But you should check your spelling, dearie... 112 perhaps?
107

Julian.,

edinburgh 03/07/2009 23:53:21
#115,

Mine is not perfect.

But then I didn't make the statement:-

"everyone please do try and use the basic rules of
grammar and spelling"

How about the grammar? Wasn't there a few errors there:-)
108

Julian.,

edinburgh 04/07/2009 00:00:46
Are the EEN so lazy they couldn't even get a picture of the works at Gogar? An image would actually have been quite useful in this case.

But oh no, they decided to just dredge up that old picture of Princes Street from their files.
109

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 04/07/2009 00:01:14
Julian (112) - thank you for the compliment.

As far as the pipes at Gogar are concerned, I understand that there is a large water pipe which needs to be diverted and the delay has arisen because (a) it had not been picked up in TIE's initial surveys, (b) convincing TIE that their design solutions were inappropriate/inadequate, and (c) that the additional cost/delay of diverting it properly is essential.

The pipe cannot be put under the depot, because of gradient and other issues, and cannot be diverted immediately around the depot because it cannot have too sharp a corner in it. Therefore, the solution seems to be quite extensive earthworks for some considerable distance on either side of the depot to give the pipe a more gentle bend as it bypasses the site, but this entails additional cost and time.

I gather there are other issues at Gogar, including drainage and bedrock but have not heard how these are to be addressed.

Likewise, because of the weight of the trams TIE have chosen, there were issues with the strength of substructure proposed under Princes Street (and I presume other on-street locations). Much more major works are now being undertaken (involving digging from pavement to pavement) in an attempt to ensure that no utility repairs will be required for the next few decades but, again, this involves extra cost which TIE has been reluctant to incur.

I hasten to add that I have no documentation on this and am merely repeating what I have heard on the grapevine.

110

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 04/07/2009 00:19:51
Crow (113) - I think in this case the problem is more basic: the public do not believe this scheme is the best solution for its public transport needs.

I would suggest that, at the time the tram scheme was initiated, the major transport issues in the city involved access to the major passenger generators, particularly hospitals.

The initial studies which resulted in the tram solution were undertaken partly at the behest of Waterfront Edinburgh and concluded that (a) only a tram would do; and (b) getting passengers from the Waterfront to the city centre was the most important route. And that, I believe, is where the fundamental mistake was made: a very expensive publicly-funded scheme designed primarily for the purposes of property developers. Unfortunately, the best professionals in the world would have had a hard job convincing the increasingly exasperated populace that this is the best public transport solution its hard-earned taxes could have achieved and TIE/politicians have battled hard to justify what was/is, in my view, a very poor scheme.

By all means, let's have innovative design but, if the public is paying, then first and foremost, the solution must be fit for purpose and address public need over private interests.


111

Julian.,

edinburgh 04/07/2009 00:27:12
Sarah B,

Yes, but how can Mr Carson claim that the earth removal has only just started when it is quite obvious just looking at the site that substantial amounts of earth have already been removed.

And why, even if it was just started, is it 2 years behind schedule? Blimey they only started building the tramline 2 years ago.

Who is ths guy anyway? It seems to me that he is deliberately spinning against the project. Has he got some sort of vested interest in doing this?
112

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 04/07/2009 01:06:29
120 - Julian. It is hard to see how someone might have a vested interest in a project failing, however it is clear to see why some people might have a vested interest in it continuing with it and who choose to ignore the basic evidence presented to them about the true status of this failed project when compared against its own published timelines and objectives.

If, as I mentioned earlier, you were to research this vanity project you will see that the actual construction of the depot (ie all groundworks completed and founds prepared) was scheduled to commence in August last year - there is no sign of any construction (or any meaningful work at all at Gogar these days) and it is clear from the current state of the ground works that we are a long way off works starting. It might not be as much as 2 years behind (although I would not be in the least surprised given the utility diversions are also over 1 year behind), but TIE is simply telling yet another lie when compared with their own business plan when they say it is "only" 9 months behind.
113

Julian.,

edinburgh 04/07/2009 01:20:09
GraemeH,

I can think of several reasons why he might have a vested interest in it failing. Or maybe he's just a plain and simple anti-trammie, employing the usual tactics of misinformation.

I'm not trying to say the depot isn't behind schedule. But what you said about the calendar proves my point. As Mr Carson said the earthworks were meant to take 7 months. So, if as you say the construction of the depot was supposed to start in August that means that even if the earthworks have only just started, the construction of the depot will start in January. That's 16 months not 2 years.

Of course that's assuming nothing has been done up until now. The last time I drove past it looked like a lot of earth has already been moved. Have a look yourself.
114

Cabbie,

told you so brigade 04/07/2009 01:20:30
just to remind those that blame the SNP/Lib Dem administration. The SNP have always opposed the trams in the council and as part of the coalition agreement the SNP are allowed to oppose the scheme. The trams were forced through by Labour, Tories, Greens and Lib Dems. At a recent council meeting the SNP group moved a motion to scrap the trams, fill in the holes and hand any money back to the government but as predicted this was defeated by 12 votes to 46. The SNP take no pleasure in saying 'we told you so'
115

Euan,

Edinburgh 04/07/2009 09:46:43
This yet more (obvious) evidence that the tram project is in a very, very precarious state financially.

TIE can try and put as much spin as they want onto this tram project, but the fact is that they are staring into the abyss and have been for some considerable time now - and they know it.

The failure to locate the huge water main underneath the proposed tram depot in the initial surveys has clearly caused huge disruption and massive delays to the work at Gogar. I sincerely hope someone has been sacked over this matter.

I have been saying for 2-3 years now that the tram LINE's construction, if continued, would end up costing around £1 billion.

This whole farce is nothing but a complete embarrassment to Edinburgh and Scotland as a whole.

It is time to call a halt to the madness and SCRAP the trams once and for all.
116

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 04/07/2009 12:52:47
#122 - Julian. I live in West Edinburgh not far from the Gogar site. I see for myself very regularly the absence of any meaningful activity for months now. Yes, a lot of earth was moved well over 1 year ago, with precious little been done since then.

Work here actually started at the end of 2006 - amazingly this is prior to the final business case being approved by the council. In approaching three years now they have dug a hole and done b##ger all else.

Perhaps when Mr Carson talks about two years he is using progress to date and that not one bit of work has been fully completed yet across the whole route to work out what the likely delay is? After all, if they are running over 1 year late on the initial phases, why should we assume that the subsequent phases will run on time and that they would not over run by a significant amount as well?

I would suggest that the misinformation is put about by TIE who kept telling us "on time and on budget" when by their own published timetables it was massively late and a consequence going to cost much more, who refuse to update their business plan to reflect the real world and who refuse to respond to FOI requests for updated costings and completion times citing "commercial confidentiality".

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.