City council’s decision to delay the 25th Avenue reconstruction project may wind up costing taxpayers an additional $1.3
million.The road project, also known as the “bridge to nowhere,” will cost $4.5 million, according to the city’s 2007 budget. However, when the project was shelved in May, city staff assured council the project could be done for $3.2 million.“I want answers on that one,” said Coun. Barry Beardsell of the 
$1.3 million difference. “I know it’s tough to figure out what things are going to cost, but this is nothing new.”Staff recommended that council delay the project when bids for phase three of the project came in at more than $2 million, $323,000 more than the city had planned on spending. Former city planning manager Lorne Holowachuk said that by combining phases three and four into one and delaying the project until 2007, the city would save money.When council voted on the proposal, Beardsell was the lone councillor who voted against the idea. At the time Beardsell said construction prices would likely continue to rise and the city would not save any money. In an interview on Tuesday, Beardsell said he has not changed his
opinion. “Of course we don’t know at this point what the bid’s going to come in at – maybe Lorne’s right,” Beardsell said. “But I’m from Missouri and I’ll believe it when I see it.”Finance manager Rob Mayne, who was not yet working for the city when the decision was made, said it’s too early to tell whether or not the city will save money or lose money on the project. “We won’t know for sure until the quote comes back,” Mayne said. “That could take another two months.”When asked to confirm the amount the city has budgeted for the project Mayne said he would do some research and call back. However, Mayne was unable to call back before press time.Coun. Juliette Cunningham who gave the bridge its moniker at the May council meeting said she was not aware that the budget figure for the project had exceeded staff’s estimate.
million.The road project, also known as the “bridge to nowhere,” will cost $4.5 million, according to the city’s 2007 budget. However, when the project was shelved in May, city staff assured council the project could be done for $3.2 million.“I want answers on that one,” said Coun. Barry Beardsell of the 
$1.3 million difference. “I know it’s tough to figure out what things are going to cost, but this is nothing new.”Staff recommended that council delay the project when bids for phase three of the project came in at more than $2 million, $323,000 more than the city had planned on spending. Former city planning manager Lorne Holowachuk said that by combining phases three and four into one and delaying the project until 2007, the city would save money.When council voted on the proposal, Beardsell was the lone councillor who voted against the idea. At the time Beardsell said construction prices would likely continue to rise and the city would not save any money. In an interview on Tuesday, Beardsell said he has not changed his
opinion. “Of course we don’t know at this point what the bid’s going to come in at – maybe Lorne’s right,” Beardsell said. “But I’m from Missouri and I’ll believe it when I see it.”Finance manager Rob Mayne, who was not yet working for the city when the decision was made, said it’s too early to tell whether or not the city will save money or lose money on the project. “We won’t know for sure until the quote comes back,” Mayne said. “That could take another two months.”When asked to confirm the amount the city has budgeted for the project Mayne said he would do some research and call back. However, Mayne was unable to call back before press time.Coun. Juliette Cunningham who gave the bridge its moniker at the May council meeting said she was not aware that the budget figure for the project had exceeded staff’s estimate.
2 comments:
Now that everybody, including contractors, knows what is in the budget for this project, what are the chances the bids will come in much lower than the budget amount. You can thank the "financial watchdog" for looking after the public interest on this one. Who is he working for?
The announcment of the $4.5 million estimate was announced at an open council meeting and reported on by both newspapers and the radio media. (Dec.12) Hopefully competitive bidding and early tendering will get the lowest price possible.
Post a Comment