Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude
No. That is not disingenuous. That is exactly what should be done when scoping out a new asset.
Yes. They should. Every single alternative should be scoped out and estimated considering every "externality". Because all those "externalities" will be different for every alternative. They will also have very different time profiles which matters unless you don't believe in time value of money. And I put "externality" in quotations because they aren't externalities. They are scope.
|
Except these problems exist and need to be addressed regardless of the development plan being discussed. Hence, out of scope for the construction project in question. You may identify them as potential assumptions, but to say they are part of the scope to build this project is bull####. It would be like someone buying North Hill Mall and wanting to redevelop that space then telling the group they are responsible for improvement costs to 16th avenue, something that has been an issue for decades and a well known problem for the City. That isn't how things are done. That is how you guarantee projects don't get kicked off.