Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Story I did, front page, project scotland, april edition, out today.

------------------------

Bridge project axed as price rockets by £20m

GLASGOW has asked designers to go back to the drawing board after it scrapped a landmark project by a world-famous architect.
Neptune’s Way, regarded as a key component in the city’s riverside regeneration, was abandoned when bids for the scheme designed by Richard Rogers Partnership came in £20m over budget.
Rogers beat off UK and international rivals in a design competition in 2003. But the tendering process for the design, which included major public realm works on both banks of the River Clyde, revealed “considerable” additional costs, bringing the scheme in £20.25m over the original budget of £34.6m.
The council said rising steel costs, increased inflation in the construction industry and alterations to accommodate the new Fastlink transport route had pushed up costs. It now says it will pursue a new bridge design and “world-class public realm” with a ceiling of £33m.
But a council spokesman commented: “Discussions were held with Richard Rogers representatives who felt that the budget set for the new bridge would not, in their view, present the type of crossing they would be interested in tendering for.” RRP declined to comment.
Former council leader Charlie Gordon MSP, a driving force behind the bridge, said: “Personally I’m very disappointed. The design had been carefully chosen through a competition process and public consultation.
“But I can understand GCC’s decision. In the modern post-Holyrood climate it’s not possible for the council to keep underwriting increasing costs. And it has a number of other largescale projects to deliver. Perhaps the private sector and the enterprise network could have stepped up to the plate in this instance.”
A design by Glasgow’s GM+AD Architects was shortlisted alongside Rogers. Partner Alan Dunlop said: “A bridge by Richard Rogers is better than no bridge or a contractor-designed bridge, particularly when Glasgow has made it such a high profile part of the city’s Clydeside regeneration.”
The new project will be divided into two contracts, the first for the quay walls and public realm. Second contract is to design and build a simpler bridge. Gerry Grams, Glasgow’s city design adviser, said the contract will go to OJEU notice next month with a site start next summer.
“With this new procurement method, GCC intends to secure a project within an achievable time scale that offers greater cost certainty while retaining design as the main focus of the brief.”

TRY AGAIN? (this appears as a boxed out section on the page)

“We were gutted when we didn't win, having extended so much effort in trying to do a well designed, pared, iconic but affordable bridge and I hope that would stand us in good stead should we submit again.”
“But if it’s a bun fight led by a contractor with minimum design input required then we won’t.” Alan Dunlop, GM+AD
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
space_invader said:
TRY AGAIN? (this appears as a boxed out section on the page)

“We were gutted when we didn't win, having extended so much effort in trying to do a well designed, pared, iconic but affordable bridge and I hope that would stand us in good stead should we submit again.”
“But if it’s a bun fight led by a contractor with minimum design input required then we won’t.” Alan Dunlop, GM+AD
I Hope you do resubmit Alan, i would really love to see the Latis up and running in the resubmission for the tradeston bridge.

But like you say it cant be compromised to a state that it loses its originality from the original design conception. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
The really interesting bit in the piece is the comment from Charlie Gordon, blaming as much as anything really Holyrood for the demise of the bridge and suggesting that in future there will be a need for greater cost control or cost certainty on future public projects.

Wonder what cost control can be imposed on the new transort museum, maybe the architectural equivalent of herding cats?
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
Keeping on the cost mode, the finnieston bridge originaly started out at 8m and ended up being nearly 21m by the time they implemented the works...

Some sections of the minutes here justifying the costs in different elements to the construction of the bridge.

Tenders for the scheme were returned on 26 March 2002. Edmund Nuttall Ltd (Nuttall) submitted the most advantageous price/quality offer which represented the best value tender. Their tender price was also the lowest submitted at £7,973,499.45. Nuttall were declared the “Preferred Bidder” for the scheme and were duly appointed on 16 May 2002.
Original Tender
March 2002 (£) Tender 7,973,500 10,246,134

(£) Revalidated Tender May 2004
Enhancement No 1 (Increasing bridge clearance) 411,054 504,568
Enhancement No 2 (provide for future LRT) 875,030 1,059,874

11,810,576
Totals 9,259,584

Scottish Enterprise Glasgow £16.05 M
Glasgow City Council £4.25 M
TOTAL £20.3M
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
The accompanying editorial I wrote:

THAT Glasgow City Council has scrapped its £34m city centre bridge link because of a projected overspend of £20m (Page 1) is no surprise. As former council leader Charlie Gordon points out, in these post-Holyrood days budgets can no longer be underwritten by Government.
Richard Rogers’ design was selected partly on the basis that the project would be placed in a “safe pair of hands”. Competition rules required that sound costing plans be submitted and the jury was impressed with the winning team’s ability on that front.
The so-called ‘starchitects’ – whose iconic designs are lusted after by civic leaders keen to raise the profiles of their cities – frequently see their designs scrapped or handed over to ‘delivery’ architects because of spiralling costs. Recently Zaha Hadid, who like Rogers defeated Glasgow practices to claim the new Transport Museum trophy, has seen a London scheme of hers soar in costs. It has since been placed in the proverbial ‘safe pair of hands’. Basically it’s a lesser-known practice that would not have generated the press attention that Hadid did.Taken together these incidents cast doubts over the viability of delivering the Transport Museum to budget.
But maybe the architects aren’t to blame. Glasgow says that integrating its Fastlink project (a city centre and Clydeside dedicated bus route) had pushed up the bridge’s cost. That could suggests that a co-ordinated infrastructure strategy had not been implemented, or at best, had been poorly thought out.
Or maybe it’s a case of a shift in focus since Stephen Purcell took over the city leader role from Gordon. If you remember, one of Purcell’s first moves was to scrap the café in George Square project, another Gordon legacy, on the basis of rising costs.
The most depressing aspect of the debacle is that post-Holyrood, it appears decision makers are no longer convinced by the value of good design. It’s now associated with massive overspends. And that’s bad news for our architects.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Do you think many will enter the new comp. after the last disaster.

Also as much as the GM+AD and FS entries where far better than the RR proposal do you think that they would be seen as 2nd best if they one in there currnet form.
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
space_invader said:
this bridge is going down the same route as the squinty one, mriaz.
Aye i guess it was too good to be true Spacey, all the time i was saying to myself how can the cost of neptune be 40m including groundworks when the cost of Finnieston was more than doubling within the 2 years of original costing.

Even the lighting was upgraded from the original costing.


Background
The Finnieston Bridge Scheme is being promoted by Scottish Enterprise Glasgow (SEG) for the provision of an additional bridge crossing of the River Clyde at Finnieston, adjacent to the Pacific Quay Development.
Glasgow City Council (GCC) is assisting with the provision of professional services in relation to the scheme. A Memorandum of Agreement between SEG and GCC has been entered into for the project.
Tenders for the scheme were returned on 26 March 2002 with the Preferred Bidder (Nuttall) being appointed on 16 May 2002.
The planning application for the Preferred Bidder’s design was submitted on 26 July 2002 with planning approval confirmed on 15 January 2003 (with conditions). Scheme, Road and Compulsory Purchase Orders were confirmed on 10 July 2003. An objection to the scheme was lodged at the Court of Session on 19 September 2003. A hearing to consider the objection took place on 21 April 2004. Due to time constraints, the hearing was
adjourned and is scheduled to continue on 26 October 2004.
Proposals Due to the extended delay to the award of the Contract caused by the Appeal process, the Preferred Bidder has indicated a need to revalidate his tender. The project team has, therefore, entered into
discussions with the Preferred Bidder to establish the nature of and justification for such a revalidation. In order to minimise delays to the project while the Appeal is ongoing, Scottish Enterprise Glasgow have
instructed that the design-only element of the project be awarded separately and in advance of the construction phase of the project.
The cost of the design element as a separate contract is £522,000. If construction does not proceed, this abortive design cost will be borne by SEG. The additional cost of separating the design and construction
elements is £28,373
Past Entries of the Tradeston bridge,the FS scheme was a good one on thinking back, lots of Public Realm space on it, i imagine the new entries will come with design modifications at least to curb the original costs.

 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
Herald

£22m limit for bridge across Clyde


THE budget for a controversial bridge over the River Clyde, which was scheduled to be built by one of Britain's leading architects, has been cut by millions of pounds.
Glasgow City Council scrapped the original plans for the pedestrian and cycle link between Tradeston and Broomielaw, designed by Richard Rogers, after the price of the project soared from £38m to nearly £60m.
Tenders have now been issued for a total of £22m for the bridge, the quay walls, and public areas around the site.
Officials claimed the revised design would still be "attractive and functional" and have produced a European-wide advert offering a £6m contract for a new design and build team for the bridge.
The notice, in the Official Journal of the European Union, also indicated that it would be around two years before it was finally ready.
A separate tender has been put out for a £14-16m contract for work to develop the quay walls and area around the bridge.
A council spokeswoman said: "We have advised the consortium, which includes the Richard Rogers Partnership, that we cannot got ahead with a redesign because it breaks all the rules of European procurement. Therefore, we have to go out to tender for a new bridge design.
"However, on the issue of quay walls and the public realm, we are renegotiating with Faithful & Gould in order to deliver these elements.
"We are going to retender for the bridge in terms of design and who is going to be involved. It is up to the Richard Rogers Partnership to decide if they want to be involved in this process."
It is thought savings will be made through simplifying designs for the bridge and using different materials.
The Richard Rogers Partnership, the architect behind the Millennium Dome, Madrid Barajas airport, and the new Welsh Assembly building, were involved in the original aborted project, but it looks unlikely it will retender.
The bridge was due to be completed next year and remains at the centre of the council's 10-year plan to rejuvenate Glasgow's waterfront and redevelop run-down areas.
The Richard Rogers Partnership declined to comment, but Steven Purcell, the council's leader, has said a new design for the bridge, which had been named Neptune's Way, would still bring commercial and tourist investment into the city.
He said the decision to cut the cost of the bridge was not about "compromising but making sure we deliver quality regeneration without additional burden for Glasgow's taxpayers".
He added: "This will still be a destination which will attract business, residents and tourists."
However, Alan Dunlop, of Gordon Murray and Alan Dunlop architects, a Glasgow-based firm, said a cheaper bridge would not act as a landmark on the Clyde.
He said: "I would question the need for the project at all now when in all likelihood it won't be the iconic structure and marker for a regenerated Clydeside it was originally intended to be. If you need to get across the river at this point, you could use the King George V Bridge, 100 metres further along.
"It's a decent enough structure, functional and will serve it's purpose but it is not a icon of a rebirth of the Clydeside. We now run the risk that the Tradeston Bridge won't be either, so why bother?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
Well in truth Mo, it was a bit naughty of stephen, the squinty bridge is the one I was talking about.

this is the full quote
Well, it's not so much the greatly reduced amount but the fact that it's contractor led that would be the problem for us and stop us submitting. It's a long span across to bridge for £6 million and it won't be the structure that was originally envisaged but if the emphasis was still placed on creativity rather than cost certainty as it seems now to be then you might get interest. However, the fact that it's now Design and Build more than anything will prohibit the possibility of getting a distinctive bridge. It won't be the architects leading the process or designers: the creative force, most likely it'll be the accountants.

I have real sympathy for the Council, money is tight obviously, due to other things ( one of which you mentioned )and maybe they feel that they've gone too far with the whole idea of a bridge to scrap it totally and risk losing face, but I would question the need for the project at all now when in all likelihood it won't be the iconic structure and marker for a regenerated Clydeside it was originally intended to be. If you need to get across the river at this point use the King George V Bridge, 100 metres further along.

The squinty bridge is design and build but is different. It was not seen as a symbol for Glasgow but much more straighforwardly as a means to an end and serving the need to get traffic across the bridge at this point and free up the site for the BBC. It's a decent enough structure, functional and will serve it's purpose but it is not a icon of a rebirth of the Clydeside, we now run the risk that the Tradeston Bridge won't be either, so why bother?

In my own view , Neptune's Way was the wrong bridge in the first place, but of course I would say that, as a partner in gm+ad and a beaten finalist.

A
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
Hmmm me thinks you have something up your sleeve alan d. the discreetness of your reply there says it all.. lol.

I guess you will reveal all if and when the time is right for your resubmission.;)

:)

ET Story
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
:mad: Guess its a slap in the face for the cooncil

Why not use the money for an iconic bridge @ at Water Row and Glasgow Harbour... it is up for regeneration and would bring the worlds attention to Glesga. and Govan. :)

eveningtimes
POLITICIANS and architects today urged council bosses to scrap plans for a multi-million pound footbridge across the River Clyde.
Council chiefs revealed yesterday the £60million bill for the crossing - trumpeted as a new icon for the city - was being slashed by £40m.
Dubbed Neptune's Way, it was expected to link Broomielaw and Tradeston and was seen as a symbol of the rebirth of the river.
But costs spiralled and now Glasgow City Council is insisting the bill be capped at £22m.
Firms are being asked to re-tender to design a new bridge at the dramatically reduced cost.
Today SNP group leader Councillor John Mason said the design by the Richard Rodgers Partnership had been a waste of money.
He said: "We felt from the beginning there was no need for a bridge. We questioned it all along."
In June last year, council chiefs spent £1m buying the Euroyachts boat repair firm in Tradeston to make way for the footbridge.
Mr Mason added: "The council has spent a lot of money buying up the land but I don't think we need a bridge there. It's a waste of money and would be way down my list of priorities."
Despite being referred to as both Neptune's Way and the Tradeston Bridge, council bosses admit the crossing has no official name - adding to speculation the bridge could be doomed.
A competition to find a name was launched in August last year but a spokesman said despite receiving some suggestions the council still hadn't made a decision.
Alan Dunlop, of Glasgow-based Gordon Murray and Alan Dunlop architects, whose firm also submitted a proposal for the bridge, believes the chosen design was wrong in the first place, saying: "The purpose was more than a bridge. It was an icon to be seen in council brochures worldwide.
"I have real sympathy for the council; money is tight and maybe they feel they've gone too far to scrap it totally and risk losing face.
"But I'd question the need for the project at all now when it won't be the marker for a regenerated Clydeside it was intended to be."
Finnieston Bridge, dubbed the Squinty Bridge, is nearing completion further upriver.However, Mr Dunlop said there was more need for that structure.
He added: "It was not seen as a symbol for Glasgow but as a means to an end - getting traffic across and freeing up the site for the BBC."
But former provost Alex Mosson, councillor for the area and chairman of the city Marketing Bureau, insisted the bridge should be built.
He said: "If it's £20m that's still a substantial amount of money and will still provide something of an icon. It's an integral part of the city's regeneration plan."

17/05/06

THE footbridge, dubbed Neptune's Way, had been trumpeted as a new icon for the city, but politicians and architects have branded it a waste of money
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
the council won't be raising the council tax this year, it's the same as last year, that's a positive thing and like all councils in Scotland and I think most in the UK they are faced with an additional financial burden as a consequence of the resolution of equal pay for female workers. That's why I have sympathy for them.

I don't agree with the doom mongers of the SNP, my response is much more positive than the others Mo. I think but in both cases taken slightly out of context to suit the storyline.

No complaints, that's what happens but the point is genuine, why have a bridge at all here if it's design and build and not what it was originally intended to be..... more than just a means to get pedestrians across the river?
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top