Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownTown
2. The fact they have spent so little money is an example of how terrible this project is, not how great it is. They're progressing at a snails pace which is the only reason so "little" money has been spent.
3. The "doomsday" scenarios you speak of are the projects own projections. Any any fools knows if they say 85 Billion then it's 100 Billion at a minimum. All big infrastructure projects blow their budgets out like this, only a fool would think CAHSR would be an exception (especially after all the cost increases so far).
4. The only reason the price hasn't been completely blown out is because they keep scaling back the scope of the project. They've already drastically reduced the speed of the overall system and the length of the trains it can handle. It's comparing apples to oranges to look at the original estimate and the current proposed system.
|
While I really haven't posted in this thread much, I have been following it and wanted to offer a reply on these points. Not individually but as a group.
There have been numerous projects from across the country that have gone over budget. A few were slightly over budget and this can be possibly excused as incorrect estimation issues or minor budget issues possibly due to weather delays. There are other projects that were grossly over budget to the point where either the estimates were severely under actual costs to get public support.
Most of the time though, the estimates are correct and as the project is under way, it is the design changes and features that are added that start to increase the costs. Sadly, I think most Project Managers over the large projects come to rely on the contractors and their PM's to pass upward the budget impacts to change requests.
This in turn leads many of the changes to go to the Contractors directly rather than through the overall Project Manager, who is in charge of the overall budget for the project. The Contractors just think about the money and do the work, bill the project and boom, over budget even if it wasn't fully approved because it was requested by the people that hired the Project Manager.
With CAHSR, what we are seeing is that the contractors have been told who to listen to, the overall Project Manager, not local politicians or anyone else with regards to special projects. This is keeping the overall costs down on the project.
This is also why the speed of the project seems to be going slower, bids are able to be kept lower as the number of workers needed is lower. The same for the amount of concrete, steel, equipment, and so forth. The various contractors working on the project don't end up competing against each other for the items they are all needing.
So, while it may take potentially 2 years longer (estimated) doing it the slow and steady way, it can potentially save the project $3-$5 Billion (estimated) that can be used elsewhere.
Scaling back the scope is showing that the Project Manager is doing what they are supposed to be doing. Projects are game of give and take. You have a budget and a set of requirements. When someone comes in with a change request the Project Manager looks at the change, evaluates it and then gets feedback from the contractors about how it would impact the budget and timelines. They then present the information back in the form of a risk assessment.
This gives the person requesting the change a chance to withdraw the request, change the budget, or change the requirements. In this case, they felt going with shorter stations was worth the trade off.
I guess the presumption is that the longer stations will not be needed until many years after opening and they will be able to extend the stations before they are needed. I think they are also planning on running smaller train sets initially and gradually adding cars as ridership increases.
The idea here is that airlines don't start flying 400 seat planes between locations when estimates show only 20 people will fly between the cities daily. They start smaller and ramp up as passengers increase. The same with highways, and other forms of transit, including personal vehicles.
Overall, I just think it is counter productive to complain about projects that go vastly over budget and then talk about the scope scaling back when that shows that the budget is actually being watched closely and the project isn't scaling back, just the station size.
One thing to remember, the project is the first high speed rail line to be built from the ground up in North America. Once the initial segment is completed, it will be able to be studied by many other States and groups looking at bring HSR to their region. They will be able to see what worked and what didn't and can learn from what California has done.
Prev
Linear Mode
