by Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star posted Apr 13, 2016 at 1:00 AM
I watch a lot of stuff on HGTV — Fixer Upper, Flip or Flop, Income Property and every incarnation of Mike Holmes. Given that I can barely hang a picture myself, I am always amazed at the seemingly natural ability these folks have to fix things. But even more surprising are the situations that can suddenly arise, throwing a monkey wrench into all of your plans. Rip open a wall and find termites, ancient wiring or duct work leading nowhere. The crawl space may show rot or a foundation with more cracks than the Republican Party. None of these things were found during the home inspection but you are now the proud owner of the mess, so you have to dig deep and move on. These reality TV scenarios came to mind after the Regional District of North Okanagan revealed that while $7.5 million was borrowed to construct the Greater Vernon Athletics Park, the final price tag came in at $8.5 million. One of the apparent reasons for the overrun was lurking under the ground. “There were areas of clay soils found that hadn’t been identified in the geotechnical analysis, resulting in a greater volume of excavation and ultimately higher costs,” said Stephen Banmen, RDNO’s general manager of finance. Yes drill holes were initially sunk to investigate soil conditions, but unless you turn the property into Swiss cheese, you are really taking a guess on what is under foot. The quality of soil can vary within a few feet. Uncertainty also arose when the 2012 cost estimates didn’t reflect what was actually happening during the tender stage and construction. The price of materials, such as concrete, can go up and down depending on regional and global trends, while the availability of building trades can also impact the bottom line. It’s a scenario that’s not unique to the athletics park. If there was one screw up, though, it was not including showers right from the get-go, particularly because we all know that athletes can be rather aromatic after doing their thing. Adding showers at the last minute not only impacted the budget, but it undermined public faith in the planning process. Juliette Cunningham, Greater Vernon Advisory Committee chairperson, says lessons will be learned from the track overruns. Fair enough, but it’s difficult to know what should happen. Possibly RDNO could ensure a project’s budget has sufficient contingency funds to absorb unexpected expenditures. The other option is that when asking the public to borrow funds, be up front that overruns are possible and provide a clear strategy for handling the extra bills. What didn’t help last week was some politicians claiming that residents were only asked to borrow $7.5 million and that didn’t reflect the total project cost. Such revisionist history is insulting to taxpayers, particularly given that pre-referendum propaganda didn’t suggest the $7.5 million was simply a down payment on the final price tag. But finances aside, we must consider the end-result. The athletics park is an extremely busy place and it will serve the needs of an active community for decades to come.
Showing posts with label Greater Vernon Athletics Park. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greater Vernon Athletics Park. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Thursday, April 07, 2016
Director Says Facility Cost Was Misleading
Posted on 4/7/2016 12:38 PM by Pete McIntyre 107.5 KISSFM
The cost overrun on the Greater Vernon Athletics Park will likely lead to more careful wording for future referendums. The final price tag was $8.5 million, one million more than what residents approved in a 2013 borrowing referendum. Greater Vernon Advisory Director Bob Spiers felt that was misleading, given that much of the public information before the vote indicated that 7.5 million would be the total price of the project. "The communications to the taxpayer were a little bit misleading. Most of us expected the final cost was going to be the borrowing cost, and it wasn't," Spiers told the media. Spiers says six months after it was completed, the regional district has "established" how much the project went over. He feels the extra spending could impact public support for future votes. "I was discouraged by what was put out the public, and there was substantial overages. Maybe the project should have been stopped before we went forward, if we knew about the overages." Spiers says the public relied on information in "Frequently asked questions" contained on the District's website, when they voted on the project in a 2013 referendum. Director Catherine Lord didn't feel it was misleading, adding they did stick to the amount they wanted to borrow, and used reserves and grants for the extra. Inflated construction costs and adding $340,000 showers to the project were two reasons the price grew. Director Doug Dirk says the borrowing amount and total cost are separate. "That misunderstanding needs to be taken apart. (The public) needs to know that the referendum is for the amount to be borrowed, not the project cost." Director Bob Fleming says stopping the project after it began was not an option. "I don't think we had a lot of alternatives going forward. The community will find the value is worth it." Director Jim Garlick had some advice for future referendums, given what they learned from this one. "Don't start a project with an estimate that is a few years old," said Garlick, who also suggested future projects try to include as many local companies as possible, as some of the out of town firms used on the park, was an issue. GVAC chair Juliette Cunningham noted the facility is being well used, beyond their expectations. "We have to be aware of the cost, but we also have a very good facility, and it makes us a better community," said Cunningham. RDNO Parks Planner Keith Pinkoski told the committee, the park is being used by 15 to 20 walkers and runners every morning, and the field is booked virtually every evening. The park next to Okanagan College in Coldstream, opened to the public last August.
--------------
Don Quixote Note: http://www.rdno.ca/docs/referendum_FAQ.pdf
SOME of the questions and answers of the FAQ:
Q. What does this $7.53 M include?
A. The $7.53 million dollars is to construct the facility, and includes the building, equipment and site development costs. It will provide a facility ready to operate. The cost of the land is not a part of the $7.53 M, as it has been provided by Okanagan College to the Regional District under a long‐term lease for only $1/year.
Q. How can you guarantee the people that the cost will not climb? A. The referendum is for the authority to borrow to a maximum of 7.53 M. The cost will not climb beyond that, and only what is necessary will be borrowed.
Q. What happens if we get money from grants? A. Only what is needed will be borrowed, so if money for the construction of the facility is obtained through grants or donations, the borrowing amount will be decreased.
Q. What is the annual operating deficit? A. The annual operating deficit is estimated at $40,000/year and $11,000 for maintenance of the artificial turf; however some of this cost will be recovered through facility fees that are collected from organization who book the facility for programming.
Q. What is the cost breakdown for the project?
A. Below is the cost breakdown. The biggest cost is in the artificial turf and the high‐quality synthetic track. This is an investment to increase the amount of programming time that the field can handle. The synthetic track will also be able to be used in poor weather and is required in order to host any provincial track and field events, such as the BC Seniors Games.
ITEM Design/Site Work* $2,131,000
Synthetic Turf Field $1,137,000
Sports Facility Buildings $1,305,000
Rubberized Track (MONDO) $1,705,000
Natural Field $ 50,000
Throws Sectors $ 414,000
Uncovered Seating $ 200,000
Sports Amenities $ 249,000
Landscaping $ 339,000 _
TOTAL (includes contingency) $7,530,000 *Design/Site work includes: costs associated with the design work; off‐sight works such as roadway lighting and drainag
The cost overrun on the Greater Vernon Athletics Park will likely lead to more careful wording for future referendums. The final price tag was $8.5 million, one million more than what residents approved in a 2013 borrowing referendum. Greater Vernon Advisory Director Bob Spiers felt that was misleading, given that much of the public information before the vote indicated that 7.5 million would be the total price of the project. "The communications to the taxpayer were a little bit misleading. Most of us expected the final cost was going to be the borrowing cost, and it wasn't," Spiers told the media. Spiers says six months after it was completed, the regional district has "established" how much the project went over. He feels the extra spending could impact public support for future votes. "I was discouraged by what was put out the public, and there was substantial overages. Maybe the project should have been stopped before we went forward, if we knew about the overages." Spiers says the public relied on information in "Frequently asked questions" contained on the District's website, when they voted on the project in a 2013 referendum. Director Catherine Lord didn't feel it was misleading, adding they did stick to the amount they wanted to borrow, and used reserves and grants for the extra. Inflated construction costs and adding $340,000 showers to the project were two reasons the price grew. Director Doug Dirk says the borrowing amount and total cost are separate. "That misunderstanding needs to be taken apart. (The public) needs to know that the referendum is for the amount to be borrowed, not the project cost." Director Bob Fleming says stopping the project after it began was not an option. "I don't think we had a lot of alternatives going forward. The community will find the value is worth it." Director Jim Garlick had some advice for future referendums, given what they learned from this one. "Don't start a project with an estimate that is a few years old," said Garlick, who also suggested future projects try to include as many local companies as possible, as some of the out of town firms used on the park, was an issue. GVAC chair Juliette Cunningham noted the facility is being well used, beyond their expectations. "We have to be aware of the cost, but we also have a very good facility, and it makes us a better community," said Cunningham. RDNO Parks Planner Keith Pinkoski told the committee, the park is being used by 15 to 20 walkers and runners every morning, and the field is booked virtually every evening. The park next to Okanagan College in Coldstream, opened to the public last August.
--------------
Don Quixote Note: http://www.rdno.ca/docs/referendum_FAQ.pdf
SOME of the questions and answers of the FAQ:
Q. What does this $7.53 M include?
A. The $7.53 million dollars is to construct the facility, and includes the building, equipment and site development costs. It will provide a facility ready to operate. The cost of the land is not a part of the $7.53 M, as it has been provided by Okanagan College to the Regional District under a long‐term lease for only $1/year.
Q. How can you guarantee the people that the cost will not climb? A. The referendum is for the authority to borrow to a maximum of 7.53 M. The cost will not climb beyond that, and only what is necessary will be borrowed.
Q. What happens if we get money from grants? A. Only what is needed will be borrowed, so if money for the construction of the facility is obtained through grants or donations, the borrowing amount will be decreased.
Q. What is the annual operating deficit? A. The annual operating deficit is estimated at $40,000/year and $11,000 for maintenance of the artificial turf; however some of this cost will be recovered through facility fees that are collected from organization who book the facility for programming.
Q. What is the cost breakdown for the project?
A. Below is the cost breakdown. The biggest cost is in the artificial turf and the high‐quality synthetic track. This is an investment to increase the amount of programming time that the field can handle. The synthetic track will also be able to be used in poor weather and is required in order to host any provincial track and field events, such as the BC Seniors Games.
ITEM Design/Site Work* $2,131,000
Synthetic Turf Field $1,137,000
Sports Facility Buildings $1,305,000
Rubberized Track (MONDO) $1,705,000
Natural Field $ 50,000
Throws Sectors $ 414,000
Uncovered Seating $ 200,000
Sports Amenities $ 249,000
Landscaping $ 339,000 _
TOTAL (includes contingency) $7,530,000 *Design/Site work includes: costs associated with the design work; off‐sight works such as roadway lighting and drainag
Track overrun could impact public support for other facilities
by Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star posted Apr 7, 2016 at 9:00 AM
Cost overruns at the Greater Vernon Athletics Park could cast a shadow over future public projects. The Regional District of North Okanagan has revealed that the final price tag for the running track and sports fields is $8.5 million, well above the $7.5 million originally borrowed after a referendum. Juliette Cunningham, Greater Vernon Advisory Committee chairperson, admits the situation with the athletics park may lead some residents to question finances for future amenities like twinning Kal Tire Place. “We hope to learn from that when we move ahead with other projects,” she said. “Perhaps there is a process to do more quantitative investigation of projects” Director Bob Spiers is calling for more transparency when financial figures are provided to taxpayers for constructing facilities. “We need to tell people that if there are overruns, how they will be addressed instead of saying there will be no overages,” he said, adding that there was a public assumption that the $7.5 million would cost everything. Director Catherine Lord insists the project wasn’t misrepresented to residents. “The (referendum) question was on borrowing and not the cost of the project,” she said. While $7.5 million was borrowed for the track, the budget was hiked to $8.6 million in 2015 to reflect an increase in project scope and some higher than expected costs. Seventy percent of the additional budget was drawn from reserves, with the remainder secured through grants and general revenue. “One of the issues we encountered was at the time of the initial site excavation,” said Stephen Banmen, RDNO’s general manager of finance. “There were areas of clay soils found that hadn’t been identified in the geotechnical analysis, resulting in a greater volume of excavation and ultimately higher costs.” The other factor driving impacting the price tag was an upswing in construction costs due to Okanagan market conditions. Also included in the amended budget was $340,000 to include showers. Showers were initially cut from the project to save money, but added at the last minute. “The user groups said that wasn’t practical,” said Cunningham. A $50,000 provincial grant was directed towards the showers. Director Bob Fleming isn’t concerned with the final $8.5 million cost for the track. “It’s good value for what`s up there and it is being well used,” he said. Organized sports are using the facility as are local residents. “Lots of walkers and runners are taking advantage of the low impact surface and beautiful location,” said Cunningham.
Cost overruns at the Greater Vernon Athletics Park could cast a shadow over future public projects. The Regional District of North Okanagan has revealed that the final price tag for the running track and sports fields is $8.5 million, well above the $7.5 million originally borrowed after a referendum. Juliette Cunningham, Greater Vernon Advisory Committee chairperson, admits the situation with the athletics park may lead some residents to question finances for future amenities like twinning Kal Tire Place. “We hope to learn from that when we move ahead with other projects,” she said. “Perhaps there is a process to do more quantitative investigation of projects” Director Bob Spiers is calling for more transparency when financial figures are provided to taxpayers for constructing facilities. “We need to tell people that if there are overruns, how they will be addressed instead of saying there will be no overages,” he said, adding that there was a public assumption that the $7.5 million would cost everything. Director Catherine Lord insists the project wasn’t misrepresented to residents. “The (referendum) question was on borrowing and not the cost of the project,” she said. While $7.5 million was borrowed for the track, the budget was hiked to $8.6 million in 2015 to reflect an increase in project scope and some higher than expected costs. Seventy percent of the additional budget was drawn from reserves, with the remainder secured through grants and general revenue. “One of the issues we encountered was at the time of the initial site excavation,” said Stephen Banmen, RDNO’s general manager of finance. “There were areas of clay soils found that hadn’t been identified in the geotechnical analysis, resulting in a greater volume of excavation and ultimately higher costs.” The other factor driving impacting the price tag was an upswing in construction costs due to Okanagan market conditions. Also included in the amended budget was $340,000 to include showers. Showers were initially cut from the project to save money, but added at the last minute. “The user groups said that wasn’t practical,” said Cunningham. A $50,000 provincial grant was directed towards the showers. Director Bob Fleming isn’t concerned with the final $8.5 million cost for the track. “It’s good value for what`s up there and it is being well used,” he said. Organized sports are using the facility as are local residents. “Lots of walkers and runners are taking advantage of the low impact surface and beautiful location,” said Cunningham.
Wednesday, April 06, 2016
Track price tag revealed
by Kate Bouey - CASTANET Apr 6, 2016 / 3:22 pm
The cost of the Greater Vernon Athletics Park, next to Okanagan College's Vernon campus, has been revealed. While the price is more than $1 million over the original estimate, it is slightly below the amended budget, according to staff at the North Okanagan Regional District. “The final cost of the facility was $8,588,316,” said Stephen Banmen, NORD's general manager of finance. “The amended budget was $8,605,000.” A 2013 referendum gave NORD approval to borrow $7.53 million for the project which then suffered cost overruns. In 2015, a further $735,000 was added to the budget. Later that year, another $340,000 was added so that showers could be added to the change rooms. The huge increase in the cost of the track project has been blamed on the “dramatic cost escalation in market conditions for building construction” as well as the unanticipated excavation of poor soils from the north-east corner of property not identified during the original geotechnical analysis and related costs. Banmen also said debt issue costs of $120,480 were not factored into the budget. “The project was tendered in stages over 2013 to 2015. In the end, seven major tenders and requests for proposals were awarded for the main components of the project, including design, site grading, civil work, running track, artificial turf field, amenities building and bleachers.” Some minor work on the site still continues. Due to “a couple of deficiencies” related to the civil works and the running track contracts, the district is holding on to $118,000. The running track and sports field officially opened to the public last September.
The cost of the Greater Vernon Athletics Park, next to Okanagan College's Vernon campus, has been revealed. While the price is more than $1 million over the original estimate, it is slightly below the amended budget, according to staff at the North Okanagan Regional District. “The final cost of the facility was $8,588,316,” said Stephen Banmen, NORD's general manager of finance. “The amended budget was $8,605,000.” A 2013 referendum gave NORD approval to borrow $7.53 million for the project which then suffered cost overruns. In 2015, a further $735,000 was added to the budget. Later that year, another $340,000 was added so that showers could be added to the change rooms. The huge increase in the cost of the track project has been blamed on the “dramatic cost escalation in market conditions for building construction” as well as the unanticipated excavation of poor soils from the north-east corner of property not identified during the original geotechnical analysis and related costs. Banmen also said debt issue costs of $120,480 were not factored into the budget. “The project was tendered in stages over 2013 to 2015. In the end, seven major tenders and requests for proposals were awarded for the main components of the project, including design, site grading, civil work, running track, artificial turf field, amenities building and bleachers.” Some minor work on the site still continues. Due to “a couple of deficiencies” related to the civil works and the running track contracts, the district is holding on to $118,000. The running track and sports field officially opened to the public last September.
Greater Vernon Athletics Park – Construction Cost Summary on GVAC Agenda Thursday, April 7, 2016 8:00 am
http://www.rdno.ca/agendas/160407_AMD_AGN_GVAC_Full.pdf
3. Greater Vernon Athletics Park – Construction Cost Summary - Staff report dated April 7, 2016 RECOMMENDATION 5 Page 15 That the report dated April 7, 2016 from the General Manager, Finance titled, “Greater Vernon Athletics Park Construction Cost Summary” be received for information.
Excerpts from Report:
3. Greater Vernon Athletics Park – Construction Cost Summary - Staff report dated April 7, 2016 RECOMMENDATION 5 Page 15 That the report dated April 7, 2016 from the General Manager, Finance titled, “Greater Vernon Athletics Park Construction Cost Summary” be received for information.
Excerpts from Report:
Monday, September 21, 2015
Greater Vernon Athletics Park
The $7.5 million for the Greater Vernon Athletics Park was borrowed at the 2015 Spring Borrowing rate. (2.20% for first 10 years) Using the attached amortization schedule the Principal payment each year will be $265,208 plus 2 interest payments of $82,500. (Total $430,208 each year for 20 years).
The final bill(Cost) for the Athletics Park will be produced in early 2016. Any cost above the $7.5 million will be funded from existing reserves.
Operating costs (estimated originally at $55,000 per year ) will be known as part of the 2016 GVAC budget.
----------------------
The final bill(Cost) for the Athletics Park will be produced in early 2016. Any cost above the $7.5 million will be funded from existing reserves.
Operating costs (estimated originally at $55,000 per year ) will be known as part of the 2016 GVAC budget.
----------------------
 |
| http://mfa.bc.ca/resources/tools |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)