Reasonable estimates

Re: Cambridge picks no-frills option for walking bridge — April 5

As a resident of east Galt, I have followed the debate over a pedestrian bridge across the Grand River with some interest. I wasn’t convinced of the necessity for such a bridge when it was first tabled, but with the work proposed for the Southworks site it makes more sense.

The reports of the cost estimates of the various design options have been uniformly labelled as overbudget, which implies that the contractors are coming in too high, when I believe it should be more properly described as poor estimating by city staff, who do not seem to be in touch with the current cost of work for which they request estimates. I have noted this in other projects, notably the sports complex, and wonder if staff are indeed ill-informed or getting some kind of signal from council to prepare a lowball proposal so that whoever initiates the idea can build momentum and support, and then, when the true cost is known, have vocal supporters who might not have been there if an accurate cost have been attached to the initial proposal.

I’m sure that for some projects the only way is to issue a request for proposals on a tight set of specifications, but on “blue sky” projects like a foot bridge it should be possible to say, “We have $X — what can you build?” That’s how we taxpayers have to work. As my granny would have said, “Cut your suit to fit your cloth.”

Gordon Divitt

Cambridge