Annex Redux – Post Documentation
Ron Bolin: May 17, 2011
- How many buildings and homes in the city have the same problem???
- Who is responsible for them???
- What will the new building actually cost in the end???
- Where is the value analysis???
While Council seems to have already signed a contract for the construction of a new city hall Annex, it is still worthwhile to examine the information which they have belatedly decided to make public in order to try to find the wisdom of their expenditure of our tax dollars.
Two documents are available on the City’s web site, a brief summary from the Herald Engineering study (HE) on the building and a News Release (NR): “Answers to questions regarding new City Hall Annex” . The following observations are taken from them. Observations have been taken from the Herold Engineering report unless identified in bold by the notation (NR), the News Release.
Background facts and Indications are:
- “Annex at high risk of structural damage during a significant seismic event.”
- 1937 – Built as a two storey warehouse
- 1954 – A single storey addition to the west elevation
- ???? – Further addition to the west elevation
- 1977 – A third storey added with renovations on both interior and exterior
- 1999 – City purchased building – negligent due diligence apparently performed (NR)
- Floor space of existing building is @ 3372 sq m (36296 sq ft)
- Floor space of new annex is 3986 sq m (42,900 sq ft), an 18% increase. (NR)
Estimates of Cost of Seismic Upgrade Options:
- $4,273,878 – Concrete Stair Core
- $4,268,742 – Concrete Shear Walls
- $4,569,276 – Roof Expansion
- Estimate of @25% in soft costs
- Total cost between $5.3 and $5.7 million plus the costs of leasing space during renovation
Scheduling:
- 1 year if building was vacated
- 1.5 years if phased by floor so that lease space requirement was reduced
- Costs of leasing space during either upgrading or new construction must be identified
Cost of New Building:
- For a floor area of 3372 meters (same size as current annex) at $3000/m sq. $10,116,000 (HE); [but the new building is said to be 42,900 sq. ft., an increase of about 18% (NR).
- Upgrade would cost @ 45% of cost of new building in construction costs
- Lease costs during renovation estimated at $330,000, bringing seismic upgrade costs to @48% of new construction costs
- Upgrade cost of 48% of new construction cost is below the industry standard of 70% for renovation vs new construction
- No total cost for the new annex is given in the News Release, but increase in costs since the 2008(?) Herold Engineering report and the 18% increase in building floor space should be noted as well as possible additional costs to construct the building to a “post disaster seismic standard” (NR)
- Instead of using reserves, the City wants to borrow $4 million in short term borrowing which will raise taxes by 1.1%/year for five years (NR). ( It should be noted that in a “good” year the city takes in more than $4 million in income over expenses. This money which, in essence, is over-taxation, goes into reserves.)
Report Conclusions:
- “When issues such as sustainability, future usage, operational and maintenance costs are considered over the long term (typically 30 years), purchasing a building or constructing a new building may be economic alternatives to upgrading.”
- “This would require a value analysis done on the various development options available and is outside the scope of the report; however due to the high cost of the upgrades, it is recommended that this be considered.”
- Public Participation requirements are met by a public Expression of Interest call and subsequent discussions and negotiations with 13 proponents, i.e. developers, building managers, etc. who made up the only Public that mattered (NR).
My Questions:
- How many buildings and homes in the city have the same problem???
- Who is responsible for them???
- What will the new building actually cost in the end???
- Where is the value analysis???
Welcome, citizens, to the Royal Order of Siam as presented to us by our Council and Staff.
Our municipal motto: “Owa Tagoo Siam”. Repeat quickly several times.
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
Ron,
As usual, very interesting points. I will say this to answer your question about the “other buildings”. Those applicable building owners are responsible for those applicable upgrades. If those owners are lucky enough to have an income stream they can increase from the building tenant than they should be addressing this need. If not, they should be talking to their banker as they can’t raise taxes…
I also think that you have misread or misunderstood the 48% vs. 70% ratios. It is actualy more like this: A building owner can do whatever they want, whenever they want under specific circumstances. In the case of 48% that is actually the generally accepted percentage of wall paper and paint type works one can perform to a specific dollar value, before a siesmic upgrade is required. This is not something the City has put in place but moreover, the BC building code. It also happens to be around the same percentage that the city places huge DCC charges on developers. Do it under that percentage and it is more palitable. Herold Engineering Limited’s numbers are not know for accuracy when it comes to dollar values but that’s not what they do – they are engineers, not estimators or construction project managers. So, you may be able to see that there is room to modify or even increase those numbers considerably depending on what values are considered when you make the math work. The numbers are based on interpretation for sure.
Just my opinion mind you. As much as I think there is huge room for improvement at the existing annex as far as what happens there) I think that it is of absolute important to have a command central that is bullet proof in the event of a major shaker.
Thanks for the clarification for those of us who are babes in the woods when it comes to systems and practices in these fields, Wyatt. I’m absolutely with you about the necessity of having a bullet proof command central in the event of a major quake. For those who don’t understand just how bad it can be, I’d recommend an hour or two watching CNN mainline news, *not* CNN “lite” (HLN). For over twenty-four hours they’ve been covering the impact of a superstorm tornado which hit Joplin, Missouri with predictions last night that another of similar strength may be on its way. There couldn’t possibly be a better illustration of exactly how bad things can get when a major disaster hits. Interesting parallels with Nanaimo: a city of close to the same size, surrounded by outlying smaller communities for which Joplin is the hub. What’s happening there could easily happen here if we get hit with “the big one.”
Wyatt: I agree that the owners of buildings are responsible for their maintenance. We “own” city hall and its annex and other civic structures and are responsible for their care and safely. But the question is: How much such care and safety is necessary? Enough for a 6 on the Richter scale? A 7? an 8? a 9? Being bulletproof depends on the kind of bullet.
Perhaps you could provide more info on the renovation of older structures as they relate to the necessity for seismic upgrades. I was, as you correctly noted, somewhat tentative as I did not understand the reference entirely. I note that in a comment on “Where’s the Beef”, Dan Appell stated that if renovations greater that 10% were to be made, seismic upgrading was called into the question.
This is where I would expect to see a value analysis done. It seems that there are many ways of securing a building with less expense. I would also like to know the effect of seismic upgrading on the life of a building. There are a lot of old buildings in the world that have somehow survived the centuries.
I just don’t like being treated like a mushroom.
I also note a couple of interesting stories on this subject which I have found in my searches which others may enjoy:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/03/16/bc-legislature-seismic-report.html
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/04/20/b-c-jitters-raise-cost-of-quake-proofing/
No one has or will or can, explain why spending $16 million instead of $4.2 million is a good idea.
This is the same construction project team that brought you the VICC for the low low price of %52 million …. make that $72 million…..can anyone say $100 million? And just for good measure, this management team gave Millennium $3 million to NOT build a hotel.
So what was the reward for this grand, colossal incompetence?? One gets a half million dollar handshake, and the other gets promoted.
Nanaimo have 16% jobless ….. businesses are quietly closing…. is anybody listening??
What would that extra $12 million do in the hands of the taxpayers to spread around town as they see fit??
What we are witnessing in local politics is compounding incompetence, and I don’t think I see any happy end to it.
In the event of the ‘big one’ it is the emergency planning guys that need a command centre, not the inept bunch at city hall.
How much time and money are we going to spend on an event that may never happen??
For those who want “bulletproof”, what about our very own Diefenbunker… Or after spending all that money on bulletproof, did we blow it up?
The decision on the Diefenbunker wasn’t within our power or city council’s. It was federal property and may still be.
Wendy: I think I am sometimes remiss in not attaching smileys to my barbs.
Other than just blowing off steam, does anyone have any real suggestions how to put the brakes on this thing, or do we just have to sit by and watch this staff and council spend every last dime they can squeeze from the taxpayer?
Does anyone here have any legal expertise?
Since the city is a corporation, and since the taxpayers are the shareholders, has anyone ever entertained taking legal action against a council and corporate officer who are not acting in the best interest of the shareholders?
“Wendy: I think I am sometimes remiss in not attaching smileys to my barbs.”
Ron: I am devoid of a sense of humour. This is not a reply barb; it is simply the truth. Perhaps in the future you should attach notification. Thank you.
“Does anyone here have any legal expertise?” Jim has a very good point!
It is all very fine and self-satisfying to gossip on line but in the 13 years i have lived here I have seen council make many bad decisions, while well meaning groups get caught up in their own rhetoric and a few local grumble but nothing materially changes.
The old guard on council, Sherry, Holdom et. al. run a a tight ship where closed collegiality intimidates new blood. These people have a huge constituency in the status quo that essentially makes voting, and most certainly on-line gossip, meaningless.
Only significant legal challenges will brake the old entrenched guard’s hegemony.
PS . . .
The old guard are, essentially, playing to their constituency, waning real estate/development/tourism, not to a Nanaimo healthy future . . .
If you want a better platform,supply better planks.
Does anyone here think that ANY council could actually change city hall?? Councilors are clearly no match for city staff. They must presume that city staff is giving them the straight goods and respond accordingly. The glazed eyes, and stunned looks from most councilors when you ask the most basic questions, is actually quite discouraging.
This Annex decision demonstrates gross mismanagement of taxes …. that single expense could have held taxes to zero for four or five years, without cutting any of the ‘services’ we are always threatened with losing, should staff have to lower taxes.
They don’t have to reduce any services, they just have to give up the shiny new office on the hill.
I don’t believe anyone at city hall or on council have any true idea just how bleak the economic future is in Nanaimo. ‘And if the blind shall lead the blind, they all wind up going off the cliff’.
Personally, having an ‘exit Nanaimo’ strategy in place is just good common sense, based on what is happening. Selling real property as one can, and renting, is likely a better long term plan than waiting for the bus to hit the wall.
One of Nanaimo’s largest economic ‘sectors’ is retail, which is shrinking every year. It used to be that people came from as far south as Duncan and all points north. Not so any more. The Duncan Wal-mart exceeds ours, and Courtenay has their own big box stores and soon will have their own Costco ….. what do you think is going to happen when those thousands of north island shoppers don’t come south anymore?? Yet, with ever rising taxes the cost of renting retail space will continue to rise.
Small businesses are quietly closing all over town, the jobless rate at 16% is twice the provincial or federal average.. and this city management team thinks they really need to just keep sucking money out of the local economy as if we were still in the midst of the boom days!
“And if the blind shall lead the blind, they all walk off the cliff’. You can bet city staff have sound ‘exit’ plans already in place, an example was witnessed with Berry’s golden handshake, a person who single-handed is the chief architect of the current finacial fiasco we find ourselves in the midst of.
If you want your blood pressure to really boil, find out exactly HOW the VICC runs and what the possibilities are that it will ever stop bleeding money!
Ironically, what was supposed to be the seed of Nanaimo revitalization, may by itself turn out to be the final nail in the coffin. You would be hard pressed to demonatrate ANY economic pluses for the taxpayers of Nanaimo resulting from this Korpan, Cantelon, Manhas, Unger, Holdom, Sherry,Brennan, Berry and Kenning
led disaster downtown.
There I go again …. time for my meds.
2 Engineers
2 Accountants
2 Business Executives
1 Purchasing Manager
1 Activist
and
1 Great Mayor (ie:Diane Watts of Surrey)
OK Wayne: I see what appears to be your answer… Now what was the question?
I agree with the drift of what Jim Taylor says in this and a previous blog. This is all about City Hall management finessing the construction of a nice new building for themselves. I suspect that the so-called vulnerabilties in the Annex as identified in the engineering report are present in three-quarters of the buildings in downtown Nanaimo. When someone wants to get rid of a tree, it is suddenly rotten and ready to fall over in the next windstorm. When City Hall managers want new offices, the existing building is a fragile structure that will collapse if it is given a good shove. What about City Hall itself? Is it an earthquake resilient structure? I doubt it. But the City hall management obviously don’t want to torpedo this nice art deco building. The tragic aspect of Nanaimo is that it has councils that are so easily finessed.
The reason that city hall staff and city council continue to spend money as they will is simple:
We, the Electorate Have Taught Them They Can Do Whatever They Like..
Oh, some of us may bitch and chew, and even get steamed enough to send a letter to the newspaper, or post on a blog. But the vast majority of residents, don’t have a clue what is going on, and sadly don’t seem to either care or think there is anything they can do.
The average person sitting on council did NOT have the support of about 85% of the total available vote. And as long as they can keep their 15% or so, they will continue to get re-elected.
What is to be done to change this mess??
Ron,
Sorry for the delay – I’m away up north at the moment.
The BC Building Code makes those definitions and when one makes claim to a post disaster structure it matters not whether it is a school, a hospital, community centre, bridge or City Annex. This stuff isn’t dreamt up although one could argue the pricing may very well be. The repairs were tendered – I remember seeing it. The study, obviosuly commissioned to determine the effectiveness of saving the old building and making these costly repairs. Next comes the bylaw to make all things green – this means you can’t just blow it up, push it over and or throw it out. Everything must be taken apart – think about how labour intensive that is and what is involved when you have the most expensive tipping fees (RDN landfill) in the west.
This sort of restraint / renovation is not something that most people / building owners do – not even the City as it is too pricey. Consider the number of floors and the fact that all this material needs to be anchored with some serious rods, straps and anchor bolts down to a foundation which in itself may not be adequate you are just throwing money at a lossing battle. Building new in this case is the most cost effective solution. That said, scope creep (adding things to the project) and making it bigger, more fancy and so on isn’t part of this issue and that lies squarely on the shoulders of the unelected whom truely run the show down town.
Just my thoughts.
Cheers,