The design of the city’s new operations building and construction supervision could cost more than $2 million.

At least one councillor, meanwhile, is questioning whether it should even be moving forward right now.

Coun. Dan Boyd raised concerns about the project at Monday’s council meeting.

Shannon Clohosey, the city’s manager of environmental sustainability, brought forward a recommendation that council award a $2.15-million contract to the Toronto-based firm RDHA. It submitted the lowest of the five eligible proposals considered.

Also submitting eligible proposals on the design and construction supervision were CEI at $2.26 million; Stantec at $2.56 million; Manasc at $2.41 million; and Perkins at $2.45 million.

The contract would see the design along with supervision during construction to ensure it’s built to the design approved.

Questioned by Coun. Rob Fendrick, Clohosey said all the subcontractors proposed to work on the design under RDHA are made up of firms that are local and/or have a local office in Whitehorse.

Those include Kobayashi & Zedda Architects, which did an initial study on the location for the building a number of years ago.

The operations building is being proposed as the first part of a larger building consolidation project that would move a number of departments and offices out of sites scattered around the city to the site off Two Mile Hill and Range Road.

This portion of the project will see staff and operations that are currently in the Municipal Services Building (MSB) on Fourth Avenue moved up the hill.

It’s anticipated the new operations building would cost $44 million alone.

The full consolidation – if it goes ahead – would come out to around $73 million.

Taxpayers were initially told the full building consolidation project would cost $56 million when it was first announced.

Council members in favour of the project argued last night that moving ahead with the design and construction supervision contract would give the city greater clarity on the exact costs.

Boyd, however, argued it’s unclear where the funding will come from.

The city will receive $15 million from the federal gasoline tax revenue fund, with the remainder anticipated to come from city reserves and financing.

Boyd argued the city needs to get its finances “in order” before it moves ahead with the design of the major project.

He added that he “fully supports” replacing the ageing MSB once financing is in place.

If you were going to build a house, he argued, you wouldn’t get the design done without having your finances in place first.

City manager Christine Smith noted officials will soon have more clarity on exactly what’s in the reserves as finance staff finish up accounting for the 2015 fiscal year.

While Coun. Samson Hartland didn’t take direct issue with the awarding of the design, he did note there could be some “tough decisions” ahead.

“We know numbers are starting to climb,” he said of the rising cost of the project, which was only publicly revealed on May 6.

Other council members defended the project, noting the dire need to replace the MSB and the historical low interest rates that are available right now.

“This is imperative work that needs to happen,” Coun. Roslyn Woodcock said.

As Coun. Jocelyn Curteanu pointed out, if the city doesn’t move ahead now and interest rates rise, the cost “could skyrocket” even further.

Fendrick described the difficulty for the city now as decisions on design inform decisions on construction and vice-versa.

“We’re in a tricky part right now,” he said.

Mayor Dan Curtis, meanwhile, argued “what we can’t afford to do is wait in perpetuity.”

Once the design is complete, he stressed, it will give the city a much better sense of the true costs it faces.

As he pointed out, there are cases where the cost on a project – or part of a project – actually come down from the estimates.

Curtis used the design contract as a prime example. He pointed out the design had been estimated to cost $2.59 million, and all the eligible proposals came in beneath that, with the potential award being $440,000 under that.

As Coun. Betty Irwin commented: “We desperately need that design” to know the true cost.

“It’s critical this contract be awarded,” she said.

That decision will happen next Tuesday evening, when council votes on the contract.