Chance missed to build cheaper tram system
BRISTOL City Council rejected the chance to build a tram system despite figures showing it would be cheaper than the proposed new Bus Rapid Transit link, it has been claimed.
At the inquiry into the new £50 million guided bus route yesterday, tram company Sustraco said that the alternative was not given "proper consideration".
-
Rapid transit vehicle streetcar on a visit to Bristol
The company, which had submitted proposals for a £15 million light railway, claims that the council changed the estimated costs of the project before rejecting it.
The company also accused the cabinet member for transport, Tim Kent, of saying something "untrue" when he announced that a report outlining the decision to chose the bus system over trams had been discussed at a meeting where the tram company put its case.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
Documents submitted to the inquiry show that Sustraco were invited to submit a proposal for an alternative to the BRT.
Their initial proposal put the cost of a new tram link at £14.57 million. But the company claims that, at a meeting in April last year, their figures were "arbitrarily" changed to £38.9 million.
Similarly, they claimed that their estimate of passenger numbers on the Ashton Gate to Temple Meads section was reduced by almost one million.
A meeting was arranged by the then cabinet member for transport, Gary Hopkins, for Sustraco to present a detailed response to the changes.
The meeting on May 27 was chaired by Mr Hopkins' successor in the role, Mr Kent, and Sustraco presented their case, showing that their proposals met all the requirements at a lower cost than the bus link.
Sustraco claimed that Mr Kent announced at the end of the meeting that the council had already decided "before the meeting" that the bus option would be chosen.
On returning from the meeting, Sustraco officials said they found they had been sent e-mails with a 34-page report attached.
The report, which Sustraco said was written before the meeting, detailed the decision without considering evidence submitted in the meeting.
At the inquiry at Armada House, Robert Chard from Sustraco told the inspector: "The council's declared interest to include ULR [ultra light railway] was insincere.
"The requirements and costs have not been properly and equitably considered.
"The promoters have made numerous errors and miscalculated the costs. The conclusions do not include the option with the best value to the public purse."
James Skinner, chairman of Sustraco, told the inquiry that Mr Kent had said in a radio interview that the 34-page report favouring the BRT had been discussed in the meeting.
"This was simply untrue," Mr Skinner told the inquiry.
"The whole thing was a sham and a waste of money," he added.
The inquiry continues.
Comments
by snowymalone
Saturday, June 23 2012, 6:56AM
“@ DM_Fishponds
"Look at SnowyMalone's first comment in this story; his rating has gone from +25 to -6 within an hour this morning (22/06/12)."
Oh yeah! It's down to -7 now. I didn't know my throwaway opinions mattered that much... I'm rather flattered ;).
Just as an aside - KBillies - so what do you think of that bastion of integrity and LibDem values Nick Clegg?”
by DM_Fishponds
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:58AM
“@FuzzHead, Have you considered that this "ratings-mugging" might have been carried out by the BRT Project Team and the troll is just their unwitting stooge?
Now there's a story!”
by DM_Fishponds
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:50AM
“@BaldeeHeed – "We have asked for, and been given, over £100million for the three routes."
Remember, the total estimated cost for the three BRT route is £197 million! A figure that is likely to go up rather than down.
Better to build the South Bristol Link through Cllr Kent's ward to get to Emersons Green than take all those passengers via the city centre; how ridiculous!
Of course Cllr Kent is still opposed to the South Bristol Link, it was in his election manifesto. One rule for Cllr Kent's own ward and another for the rest of Bristol!
Bristol currently has half a ring-road which ends at Keynsham. Perhaps the mayorial candidates would like to consider the South Bristol Link as a vote-winner?”
by Baldeeheed
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:36AM
“I love reading KBillies' posts, it brightens up my morning.
They're so fawningly sycophantic that they must be some form of ironic joke. Tim Kent must cringe everytime he reads them, unless of course KBillies is actually Tim's nom de plume, in which case he is in desperate need of psychiatric help.
And guys, why on earth does everyone get hung up on red and green arrows? Who gives a toss whether some anonymous person that you'll never meet likes or dislikes your opinion?
Anyhow, back to the main point of the article. I would prefer a tram, but I don't believe that Sustraco's proposals were either realistic or rigorous enough for serious consideration.
However, BRT is not the answer and our councillors are driving us down a blind alley by trying to impose this over-engineered, expensive and very limited system of buses-down-bus-lanes on our city. We have asked for, and been given, over £100million for the three routes. This money could have been better spent on a Park and Ride (in South Glos.) for the M32/M4, which is desperately needed, a free circular central bus route, some more bus lanes at pinchpoints and junctions, and, most importantly some money to kickstart the Bristol Metro.
We have just applied to Government for £100million for the Metro - do you really think they'll give it to us, in this age of austerity and after having been given money for GBBN, Cycling City and BRT? I don't think so.”
by DM_Fishponds
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:34AM
“@FuzzHead, Yes, just look at who has benefited from the "ratings-mugging" on the comments section of this story and who they support.
"Misleading" – "dishonest" – "untruths" – "lying". Pick any/all the words that you believe describes this "ratings-mugging".”
by Fuzzhead
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:10AM
“Ooh all his red arrows now replaced by lots of green in the space of 15 mins of the troll post - proves the case I believe. LOL - how transparent, rigging votes on a public forum. Administrators may like to take note, assuming they care.”
by DM_Fishponds
Friday, June 22 2012, 11:08AM
“@FuzzHead - "He managed 17 red arrows in 10 minutes for me one day . . ."
Look at SnowyMalone's first comment in this story; his rating has gone from +25 to -6 within an hour this morning (22/06/12).
I've suggested showing individual Plus & Minus-Rating Totals rather than the sum of both. I'm sure that people at the Post will track him/her down even if fake IPL addresses are being used. It might even make an interesting story in The Post. Whoever it is, they are obviously very insecure!”
by Fuzzhead
Friday, June 22 2012, 10:53AM
“He managed 17 red arrows in 10 minutes for me one day, DM. I doubt that many people on a Sunday even read my post within that time, never mind had an opinion on it. Obviously got a system rigged. Sad.”
by DM_Fishponds
Friday, June 22 2012, 10:09AM
“@FuzzHead - "But you are the troll, Kbillies, and a blinkered sycophant. Lots of red arrows I see on your comments."
Fuzzhead, we've just been "ratings-mugged" by the troll or one of his sympathisers!
Green is the new red and vice versa!”
by Fuzzhead
Friday, June 22 2012, 9:15AM
“But you are the troll, Kbillies, and a blinkered sycophant. Lots of red arrows I see on your comments.”