More river crossings
 

It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That £45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

Here is part of the Mayor's recent press release.

"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10 years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting new affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

They include:

Plans for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge linking Rotherhithe & Canary Wharf to be accelerated
A series of enhancements to be made to the proposals for Silvertown Tunnel to make it greener and more public transport-focused, and exploring further benefits for local residents who use the tunnel
A DLR crossing at Gallions Reach, helping support the development of around 17,000 new homes across Newham and the Royal Borough of Greenwich
Further assessment work for a Barking Riverside-Abbey Wood London Overground crossing
Further assessment of a North Greenwich-Isle of Dogs ferry, supporting new development on the Greenwich Peninsula and the Isle of Dogs."

More river crossings
 

Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

Here is part of the Mayor's recent press release.

"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10
years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting new
affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

They include:

Plans for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge linking Rotherhithe &
Canary Wharf to be accelerated
A series of enhancements to be made to the proposals for Silvertown
Tunnel to make it greener and more public transport-focused, and
exploring further benefits for local residents who use the tunnel
A DLR crossing at Gallions Reach, helping support the development of
around 17,000 new homes across Newham and the Royal Borough of Greenwich
Further assessment work for a Barking Riverside-Abbey Wood London Overground crossing
Further assessment of a North Greenwich-Isle of Dogs ferry,
supporting new development on the Greenwich Peninsula and the Isle of Dogs."

Yes, those sound a lot more useful than the pointless, unwanted,
ridiculously expensive shrubs on piers.

The Barking-Abbey Wood crossing might make it easier to visit Bazalgette's
magnificent but remote Crossness Pumping Station that's hard to get to
using public transport (you walk past the grim setting of A Clockwork
Orange):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57670263516073

More river crossings
 

In message , at
01:43:14 on Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Offramp remarked:
"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10
years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting
new affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

Affordable homes and business opportunities on the bridge. That's a
throwback the Mediaeval times. Perhaps we could also arrange to have
criminals' heads mounted on stakes at either end too.
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
01:43:14 on Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Offramp remarked:
"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10
years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting
new affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

Affordable homes and business opportunities on the bridge. That's a
throwback the Mediaeval times. Perhaps we could also arrange to have
criminals' heads mounted on stakes at either end too.

Huh? Who said anything about homes and business opportunities on the
bridge?

More river crossings
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
01:43:14 on Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Offramp remarked:
"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10
years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting
new affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

Affordable homes and business opportunities on the bridge. That's a
throwback the Mediaeval times. Perhaps we could also arrange to have
criminals' heads mounted on stakes at either end too.

Huh? Who said anything about homes and business opportunities on the
bridge?

try "supporting" (new affordable homes)

tim

More river crossings
 

In message , at 14:53:54 on Sun, 9 Oct 2016,
Recliner remarked:

01:43:14 on Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Offramp remarked:
"The package of new river crossings to be built in the next five to 10
years will vastly improve travel across the capital, while supporting
new affordable homes and business opportunities in East London.

Affordable homes and business opportunities on the bridge. That's a
throwback the Mediaeval times. Perhaps we could also arrange to have
criminals' heads mounted on stakes at either end too.

Huh? Who said anything about homes and business opportunities on the
bridge?

try "supporting" (new affordable homes)

In East London, not *on* the bridge.

That would be enabling; bridges support things *on the bridge*.

That's why their supports are called... err... supports.
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

More river crossings
 

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

More river crossings
 

Offramp wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!


Yes, I think that's right. Now, whether it gets built or not, it will be a
model of how *not* to do public sector procurements.

More river crossings
 

On 12/10/2016 02:45, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!


Yes, I think that's right. Now, whether it gets built or not, it will be a
model of how *not* to do public sector procurements.


I suggest it will be more a model of how not to let "national treasures"
drive policies. Joanna Lumley stitched up Ministers so thoroughly over
letting gurkhas come to the UK[1] that I don't blame them from heading
for the bunkers when she backed another vanity project.

There are times I ponder the Treasury having power to task 00 agents ;)


[1] Something the military and civil service had grave reservations
about all along because - as we have seen - the law of unintended
consequences has a wide reach.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

More river crossings
 

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 10:13:05 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 12/10/2016 02:45, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!


Yes, I think that's right. Now, whether it gets built or not, it will be a
model of how *not* to do public sector procurements.


I suggest it will be more a model of how not to let "national treasures"
drive policies. Joanna Lumley stitched up Ministers so thoroughly over
letting gurkhas come to the UK[1] that I don't blame them from heading
for the bunkers when she backed another vanity project.

There are times I ponder the Treasury having power to task 00 agents ;)


[1] Something the military and civil service had grave reservations
about all along because - as we have seen - the law of unintended
consequences has a wide reach.

I think the law of unintended consequences also applies with the
Gurkhas:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-2330107.html

Also, now that Gurkhas earn the same pay as UK recruits, there's less
of an economic case to keep recruiting them in the British Army. Now,
the army plans to recruit little more than 200 Gurkhas per year.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/224...-cuts-continue

“The Gurkhas have been at risk for a long time and, arguably, one of
the main reasons why they have survived for so long is because they
were cheap – the cost of a Gurkha brigade was half that of a British
brigade.

“Inevitably, after Joanna Lumley spearheaded what some consider an
ill-advised campaign to win Gurkhas equal pay and pensions, the Gurkha
Brigade has now been presented as a target.”

More river crossings
 

"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction before
the bridge had the go ahead?

tim

More river crossings
 

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:32:24 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far. Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

More river crossings
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:32:24 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on
it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

tim

More river crossings
 

If we imagine that there were 45 different types of consultant used on the Chimera Bridge, and each was paid one million pounds, then our quest is at an end.

More river crossings
 

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:53:59 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:32:24 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on
it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

They are costs that will have to be written off if the bridge is
cancelled.

More river crossings
 

In message , at 12:53:59 on Wed, 12 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working on
the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 10:13:05 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 12/10/2016 02:45, Recliner wrote:
Yes, I think that's right. Now, whether it gets built or not, it will be a
model of how *not* to do public sector procurements.


I suggest it will be more a model of how not to let "national treasures"
drive policies. Joanna Lumley stitched up Ministers so thoroughly over
letting gurkhas come to the UK[1] that I don't blame them from heading

I'd love to know who actually thinks she's a national treasure. She's a
competant actress with a posh accent who used to be quite pretty half a century
ago, thats pretty much all there is to her.

With the ghurkas thing the government at the time should have just grown a
pair and made it clear that the gurhkas knew exactly what they were signing
up for when they joined and residency in the uk wasn't on the list.

--
Spud

More river crossings
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:53:59 on Wed, 12 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working on
the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

Yes, they'd all be on retainers. Plus some services would be billed in
retrospect, and so the bills for those would be payable when the project's
cancelled.

More river crossings
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:53:59 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:32:24 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 17:03:14 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Offramp wrote:
It looks like the garden bridge is going to wither and die. That
£45,000,000 worth of prime compost will have to be sent to the EU.

More on the Garden Bridge. It seems Cameron was the ultimate backer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37616161

An opponent of the Garden Bridge said how the amount of money spent on
it
so far is the equivalent of TWO Millennium (Wobbly) bridges!

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

They are costs that will have to be written off if the bridge is
cancelled.

Obviously, but they are sunk costs

It was clear from the item on NN that the government dept in question are
seeing these differently (one of the arguments for agreeing to increase
their exposure to cancellations costs was the size of the already sunk costs
that would be put at risk)

tim

More river crossings
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:53:59 on Wed, 12 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up those
professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or whatever)
notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told one day that
they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working on the project,
spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15 Million,
when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was 15 million -
including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought to
be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has already been
spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of misuse
of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen of
them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally negligent
to do so.

tim

More river crossings
 

In message , at 10:39:27 on Thu, 13 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:
I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably)
construction before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working
on the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15
Million, when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was
15 million - including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought
to be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has
already been spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of
misuse of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen
of them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally
negligent to do so.

So much that you don't understand :(

Start with the simple fact that the garden bridge is a much more
complex, innovative and large project than the wobbly bridge.

Costs more to design? Who'da thunk it.
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:39:27 on Thu, 13 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:
I note that the current argument is about the 15 million costs for
cancellation if we don't go ahead.

Who was this moron who signed contracts for (presumably) construction
before
the bridge had the go ahead?

Presumably the architects, engineers, designers, gardening experts,
surveyors, accountants, lawyers, PR agents, etc have charged their
normal fees for the work done so far.

work done so far isn't cancellation costs

Lots of costs are incurred on
prospective projects before they get the final go-ahead.

These aren't cancellations costs

The most likely reason for a "cancellation cost" is having signed up
those professionals on a contract were they were given 3-months (or
whatever) notice of the project being stopped. Rather than being told
one day that they had hundreds of redundant staff, previously working
on the project, spare at their office next Monday morning.

But how can three months of a few design consultants add up to 15 Million,
when the total costs of building the wibbly wobbly bridge was 15 million -
including, presumably, all of the design costs?

The number of design consultants you should have on retainer here ought to
be no more that a dozen. Especially give than 20 Million has already been
spent on "real" work.

Anybody who retained 100s ought to be standing in the dock accused of
misuse of public money.

Without some sort of orderly exit-strategy, during which to find new
projects for those staff, or even pay *them* a three month severance
amount, they wouldn't have agreed to start the work.

I understand the economics of the consultancy, thank you very much

What I don't understand is why we should have retained more than dozen of
them on a project that has yet to be signed off. It's criminally
negligent to do so.

So much that you don't understand :(

Start with the simple fact that the garden bridge is a much more complex,
innovative and large project than the wobbly bridge.

Costs more to design? Who'da thunk it.

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

tim


--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

In message , at 17:14:22 on Thu, 13 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 17:14:22 on Thu, 13 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the design
work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just some
holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they have
completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually build to the
design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

tim

More river crossings
 

In message , at 15:06:47 on Fri, 14 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the
design work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just
some holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they
have completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually
build to the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work (see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM
Nuttall delivering the Guided Busway).
--
Roland Perry

More river crossings
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 15:06:47 on Fri, 14 Oct 2016,
tim... remarked:

we already have 30 million sunk cost

what did that pay for?

The project so far?

which as it can't possible be for any construction work must be the design
work.

And I would expect (give the total size of the expected costs) that 30
million would pay for the complete design work necessary. Not just some
holding work with more to come later.

The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they have
completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually build to
the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work

don't be silly

architects fees for overseeing build works are usually 5% of the build costs
(and the retainer is going to be a percentage of that)

(see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM Nuttall delivering the
Guided Busway).

This was a major project undertaken by an authority that didn't usually
undertake such major projects

That it went wrong proves nothing

tim

More river crossings
 

In message , at 17:32:17 on Fri, 14 Oct
2016, tim... remarked:
The only reason that you keep such designers on a retainer after they
have completed the design is to make sure that the buiders actually
build to the design and that's going to be a minimal amount of work.

It's most of the work

don't be silly

architects fees for overseeing build works are usually 5% of the build
costs (and the retainer is going to be a percentage of that)

It's most of the work done by the architects.

(see the way Cambridge CC botched monitoring BAM Nuttall delivering
the Guided Busway).

This was a major project undertaken by an authority that didn't usually
undertake such major projects

That it went wrong proves nothing

It proves that you need to spend years monitoring the build and the
snagging, not after you've spent not very long drawing up enough plans
to get the project funded.
--
Roland Perry