Photo by Vince Fedoroff
PROJECT A NO-GO – Mayor Laura Cabott announces late this morning that the massive city hall renovations project has been cancelled due to the contractors’ bids being substantially higher than anticipated. The city hall portion behind her, which was built in 1966, would have been demolished.
The new city hall project has been cancelled because the low bid was $10 million over what the city had budgeted, Mayor Laura Cabott announced late Thursday morning.
Revised - The new city hall project has been cancelled because the low bid was $10 million over what the city had budgeted, Mayor Laura Cabott announced late Thursday morning.
The decision was made this week, though council has been talking about the project since the three bids were received two weeks ago, the mayor explained.
She said the low bidder was informed of the cancellation Thursday morning.
“We are not comfortable moving forward with this project at this time,” Cabott told reporters in front of city hall.
She said the new city hall was to fulfill a number of objectives, like providing a larger space for employees located elsewhere, such as at the Municipal Services Building on Fourth Avenue.
There was a commitment to provide a transit hub at the new city hall, and public washrooms, she noted.
She said the reconstruction project was to include renovations and upgrades to the older part of city hall built in 1966 to improve items such as energy efficiency.
All those objectives still need to be fulfilled, but how to go about that has not been determined, she said.
The mayor said council will now have to examine other options to fulfill the commitments.
The older part of city hall facing Second Avenue, she said, is not energy-efficient, and bleeds heat.
Some staff have put plastic over their windows, she pointed out.
Cabott said they’ll need to do a redesign of the project, which could begin this summer.
A renewed project will still have toa go through a review during discussions to establish the capital budget for next year, she explained.
The city has indicated the three bids received ranged from a low of $33 million to $39 million.
Bids were received from Ketza Construction of Whitehorse, JBL Construction of Calgary and Whitestone Construction.
The city said the low bid was submitted by JBL Construction.
The city had budgeted $26.2 million for the project, of which $22 million was the cost of the demolition required and the new construction.
Of the $22 million, $17.4 million was coming through federal funding programs.
The city would have been required to contribute $9 million from city reserves.
Had the city not cancelled, Cabott said, it would have been required to take an additional $10 million out of reserves, for a total contribution of $19 million.
The budget, for instance, had included $5 million for an energy upgrade and $1.3 million to upgrade the heating system.
Cabott said the federal funding was to expire in 2024 – but the good news is it has been extended to 2027.
The mayor noted there was both public support and opposition to the project.
Upgrades to the existing city hall are still required and will need to be addressed to bring the building back to standards, says a press release issued Thursday regarding the cancellation.
It says some of the longstanding issues include the mechanical, heating, and electrical systems, which are near end-of-life and no longer operate efficiently.
Additionally, upgrades to items such as the roof and windows will need to be addressed to improve the building’s energy efficiency and reduce the city’s greenhouse gas emissions, says the release.
Some of this work wasn’t done earlier because it was believed the building would be demolished, the mayor pointed out.
The city hall project was part of the city’s building consolidation initiative – originally devised almost a decade ago – that included the new fire hall off Black Street and new Operations Building off of Range Road.
When the bids came in substantially over-budget, Coun. Ted Laking suggested council should put off the project until they could find a way to reduce the cost.
Laking started raising concerns about the escalating cost back in December 2021, based on recent and past estimates of the project cost.
The project estimate in 2014 was $9.7 million, but it jumped to $18.9 million in 2019, he pointed out to his colleagues on council before Christmas.
He noted the estimate leaped again in 2020 to $20.8 million, and again last June to $24.7 million before arriving at the final estimate last fall of $26.2 million.
“This is great news for taxpayers,” Laking said in a statement issued later Thursday regarding the cancellation.
“There has been significant public concern from taxpayers about this project going over budget.
“Bringing their concerns to the forefront and giving them a voice is why I raised the issue of the project continuing to go significantly over-budget and suggested it be cancelled several months ago.”
In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.
Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.
Comments (39)
Up 10 Down 3
Wilf on Apr 26, 2022 at 2:19 am
Where are the nine (9) buildings? What happened to the nine (9) buildings?
Up 19 Down 3
Jack on Apr 25, 2022 at 7:38 pm
City Hall is a salary and pension factory...nothing more.
Up 23 Down 4
Anie on Apr 25, 2022 at 2:30 pm
Juniper, well said. We are a country that punishes those who work hard and succeed. Years ago, I worked with a woman who lived in my neighbourhood. We both had entry level govt jobs. I struggled to keep children in sports, hers played for free. My Yukon electric bill was a challenge in the winter, she told me once that hers was covered by social services. She eventually quit, showing up to work every day was 'a hassle". I used to sometimes wonder, if someone sat down and did the math and assessed a dollar value to all her freebies and subsidies, just how much money she actually had compared to me. But it wasn't something I really wanted to think about.
Up 17 Down 15
Observer on Apr 25, 2022 at 10:55 am
I hear a lot of the neo cons going on about how it is more important to consider costs when it is a private business. There is no such thing in the Yukon, most business would not exist or prosper if it weren't for government. Most businesses have done very well by government business in this country.
Up 20 Down 4
Not my money, not my worry on Apr 24, 2022 at 12:06 pm
Why is it that only the private sector has to worry about costs. When we build a house or commercial space we have to take into account the final tally. Can we afford it? If not where do we cut costs? There is a limit that we can all live with. But the government just forges ahead. Rather than build what they need or can financially stomach, they make a wish list of all their wants and wishes. Cost appears to be secondary as they don’t seem to care about the final number. So many times we see projects budgeted, then when tendered they begin to skyrocket. Even when they are awarded the cost still seem to rise, dramatically sometimes. The Whistlebend school for example. The price is now increased 20% since the site sign was built. I imagine the new City Hall would fall under the same. Not sure why we even tender these projects. But I for one am glad some resemblance of common sense and fiscal responsibility has prevailed. But my worry is that all this funding has been extended until 2027 so keep your seat belt on, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Up 36 Down 3
Groucho d'North on Apr 24, 2022 at 10:34 am
Some kitchen table economics: The proposed building replacement plan is beyond the available budget - Thanks for recognizing this and stopping the project before financial commitments were made!
Going forward will require a re-examiniation of the plans to arrive at a more affordable building option.
Like most government buildings they attempt to become monuments to vision, purpose and progress while they are really over-engineered art projetcs.
So like all budget-concious planners, look to function rather than form and select building designs that provide the utility requirements to do the City's work with a practical carbon foorprint and O&M requirement. Our moden age is about living within our means, that goes for governments too.
Up 12 Down 18
Climate Joke on Apr 23, 2022 at 8:39 pm
Not even a year ago, the city of Whitehorse declared a climate emergency. Now they are cancelling a project which would have greatly reduced their GHG emissions because it was going to cost too much.
So it is clear that this "climate emergency" is not really an emergency after all. Apparently inflation and cost overruns are more important than tackling climate change. I wonder what the NDP will say about this? Probably nothing, since they are also a bunch of virtue signaling hypocrites who never put their money where their mouth is. They also declared a 'climate emergency' by the way.
I look forward to the next rally by the same people supporting this decision to cancel the contract, telling us that we need to act on climate change NOW. Looking at you Councilors Michelle Friesen, Jocelyn Curteanu and Melissa Murray.
Up 15 Down 3
Jim on Apr 23, 2022 at 6:45 pm
@Hard Truth, I guess we always assume the cost of a government(s) job doubles every couple years. Have you every wondered why that is? How about when a private developer builds condos and pre-sells them up to 2 years in advance. Prices on them are usually comparable to current. So by your math their costs will double and they will loose their shirts. But they carry on. There’s a few under construction at the moment. If prices are doubling for everyone we may have to rethink that 6% inflation. Maybe they realized it’s a builders market at the moment. Trust me, if you don’t need the work you will pad it very well. Maybe their specifications need to come back to reality. Have you seen the Palace on the hill with it’s expansive offices and common places, huge glass windows and 9 million dollar parking lot. Or maybe they don’t need extra space for the foreseeable future with plenty of staff working from home. Also has anybody done a study on the payback for spending 30 or 40 million in energy savings considering that in 50 or 60 years the city will demo this one.
Up 25 Down 3
Charlie's Aunt on Apr 23, 2022 at 6:08 pm
@ Hard Truth, you have a point but I think you are missing the point that most of us were unhappy about that ridiculous design, not about needing a new city hall. Is there anything wrong with a simple design with a false front that meshes with the buildings on Main St reflecting our history? Do we need an elaborate complex that includes a bus station with washrooms?
Council needs to shake its head; no more Greyhound or Holland America that usually have washrooms on buses anyway so, we are talking of passengers on local buses covering short trips. Many stores have public washrooms but if there is a need for a truly public facility then simply incorporate it into a new city hall design, bearing in mind of course that the facility would require staff to maintain routine cleanliness as they do in airports. Current bylaws require the color of homes in newer neighborhoods to be approved as they cannot be the same as those of neighbors, but COW would feel safe because no neighbor in their right mind would copy that design.
Up 34 Down 8
Who is the mayor of crazy town? on Apr 23, 2022 at 3:06 pm
How about we put the City Workers at the Chilcoot Inn? Then they might start to see where the problems are, with their entitlements!
Up 35 Down 5
@kp on Apr 23, 2022 at 8:15 am
No kidding. Laking deserves some credit on this one. Even though I mostly disagree with him I am happy that at least one of them is refusing to be a rubber stamp.
Up 9 Down 28
Hard Truth on Apr 23, 2022 at 12:39 am
This is an unpopular opinion judging by all the comments here and all around town it seems.
But this is penny wise and pound foolish. First off, the renos required to keep the building up to code including the new roof, mechanical upgrades, electrical upgrades, etc etc. will not be cheap. I'm guessing that the cost estimates for all of this work have not been recalculated in the last year or two and so, like the final price for the new building, will have risen significantly, possibly doubling. Second, the city has now given up 16? 17? million funding from the feds which may be available sometime in the future but more than likely not. I'm sure YTG was also kicking in money which will now go elsewhere. Third, the 1 or 2 million spent on planning this thing will now have to be scrapped. Then in likely 5-10 years, the new building will need to be built regardless and so we are back to square 1. The prices will likely have increased again by this time (certainly will not have dropped). And lastly, the costs to heat the current building will continue going up over the next few years and we will all be paying to heat the atmosphere above it as well because it is so old and inefficient.
I doubt any journalist or anyone else will tally these costs as they start to compile, but I can almost guarantee they will far exceed the current cost of the new building right now.
So keep patting yourselves on the back COW, but this is really short term planning which will result in unavoidable property tax increases in the future to cover the cost of this delay.
On the bright side, it seems to be a very popular move politically, and you might even have guaranteed yourselves a second term since no one seems to care about the big picture here.
Up 28 Down 4
Juniper Jackson on Apr 22, 2022 at 6:33 pm
I'm pretty surprised. Most of the people we elect soon wallow in the glory of spending someone elses' money. I'm sure it's not over. Somehow, fiscal management and responsible spending has left the building. Debt seems to mean nothing to the people that have 'enough' without living on their credit cards and overdraft. So, that guy with the big house? He's the one nailed for taxes, he's the one nailed for donations, he's the one paying out the nose for keep his home maintained. At the end of the month, he probably has very little more than the low income guy who gets all the perks, discounts, deductions, child care. So, one is paying for the other through taxes and higher costs. One gets hockey free for his kids, the other one pays a fortune.
Up 19 Down 4
bonanzajoe on Apr 22, 2022 at 5:51 pm
SH on Apr 22, 2022. I could have done the job for 50 bucks and a case of dynamite.
Up 37 Down 8
Wilf Carter on Apr 22, 2022 at 3:21 pm
Wow - finally some one has seen financial sense like Ted and others on council. The operation Bldg was built wrong. They didn't need all the space if they went electric driven buses that can be left out doors in winter with electric heaters. That space can be turned into office space. Thanks to Ted and Council for making a smart decision at this time.
Up 45 Down 5
Anie on Apr 22, 2022 at 3:04 pm
Why is the municipal services building on 4th still standing? That's not a rhetorical question, I really want an answer. We were told that if the City proceeded with the public services compound up the hill, then this building (which was deemed to be beyond its useful life and too expensive to renovate) would be dismantled and the land either sold to offset some of the new building cost, or used for affordable housing (frankly, I forget which, it was so long ago). I supported that plan. I argued here that it made financial sense. I was lied to, we all were. Somebody should be held accountable for this deception. C'mon council, show some backbone.
Up 63 Down 11
KP on Apr 22, 2022 at 11:48 am
Looks like lil teddy wins this round. The staff must just hate having a real fiscal conservative around.
Up 69 Down 7
Mitch Holder on Apr 22, 2022 at 9:18 am
One less Kobayashi/Zedda carcrash wrapped around a traditional log cabin museum is a win for everyone in the territory. No doubt. I applaud the municipal council of the city of Whitehorse for their pragmatism in this decision, I am sure we can get you folks setup in something that will serve as functional, as this is the Yukon way. Funds saved can go to the many more urgent needs of not only our community but all the communities of the Yukon. TGIF.
Up 39 Down 18
SH on Apr 22, 2022 at 9:01 am
Vern,
"$22 million was the cost of the demolition required and the new construction."
The demolition itself wouldn't cost $22,000,000.
Up 62 Down 10
Yukonexe on Apr 22, 2022 at 7:12 am
The elites always want a bigger ivory tower to look down to the suffering plebs.
Why not use that money to help people. Drop taxes on fuel prices. Fully stock the food bank. Affordable homes. The roads. Bring down the price of electricity. Ect....
Up 53 Down 9
Dave on Apr 22, 2022 at 6:04 am
Hahahahaha.
City hall 1, Laura cabott 0.
This must really sting.
Up 60 Down 6
CJ2 on Apr 21, 2022 at 11:16 pm
Wow, good call. I'd love to see the city take a turn towards managing what we have and not so much showpiece projects. People should be able to get excited about a City Hall and given the chance to see a few designs. The whole thing seemed top-down. There just wasn't a good feeling around it. Plus hopefully they will hold off on executing the May tree.
Between the pandemic and the war in Ukraine, it's just not a good time to invest in this project.
Up 63 Down 6
drum on Apr 21, 2022 at 10:09 pm
Have you seen the cost of Gas and groceries in the Yukon? This is what our politicians should be focused on. How do our seniors on a very fixed income manage to survive or does anyone care!!!!!! Not them seemingly.
Up 56 Down 8
bonanzajoe on Apr 21, 2022 at 8:39 pm
The probable truth is that City council succumbed to the demands of the public.
Up 29 Down 21
bonanzajoe on Apr 21, 2022 at 8:37 pm
Build it out of 10 inch logs.
Up 57 Down 8
surprise? not on Apr 21, 2022 at 7:42 pm
Thank you councilor Laking for stopping this. I wish your colleagues took your advice earlier.
Up 60 Down 7
If only we could see this coming on Apr 21, 2022 at 7:20 pm
Ted warned council back in December that this would happen but they ignored him and went ahead with it anyway. Thank god there is one council member bringing common sense to the table.
Up 33 Down 5
Josey Wales on Apr 21, 2022 at 5:59 pm
Should read...
City hall high, new city hall cancelled!
Up 49 Down 6
Charlie's Aunt on Apr 21, 2022 at 5:20 pm
Whoopee: Absolutely thrilled we don't have to look forward to those irrelevant green pikes on the front. Maybe now they will invest in a sander, paint & brushes for the neglected peeling paint. Most of us try to look after our woodwork better than COW and that hasn't happened suddenly over past 2 winters.
Up 99 Down 21
Matthew on Apr 21, 2022 at 4:19 pm
About time.. they must go to the drawing board and redo the plan itself, it's ugly and does not fit anywhere in Northern Canada. I mean, metal clad buildings are very ugly and loud. Anyone hear the metal expand and contract every day!? It's rather loud and annoying! Not to mention 15-20 years from now ALL of those screws in metal need to be replaced due to countless times expanding and contracting.. I'm just a self employed builder though, I'm sure Kobayashi and Zeda are much smarter... LOL
Up 57 Down 17
Vern Schlimbesser on Apr 21, 2022 at 4:10 pm
$ 26.2 million was budgeted for this project, but $22 million of that was just for demolition. So, construction was planed to be $ 4.2 million.
Think about that for a moment.
Laura seems happy that $17.4 million of that was coming out of our back pocket instead of our front one.....like she's not responsible for that amount?
Think long and hard about what Dan Curtis left you, and remember, Dan and Jocelyn are still there...whatever this absurd logic was called, it likely isn't over.
Up 83 Down 16
Face saving on Apr 21, 2022 at 3:59 pm
Admit it. It was cancelled not because of higher bids (the City had dumped money into other projects with way higher overbids than that). It was cancelled because you’d be crucified by the community in a time when you cannot even coordinate getting the roads plowed (no offence to the folks who do that work). What a non-transparent and embarrassingly ignorant attempt at face-saving. Ethics would have you saying ‘you know what, this is a bad idea.’
Up 82 Down 11
Craterville on Apr 21, 2022 at 3:58 pm
Good, now fill some pot holes.
Up 89 Down 9
YD on Apr 21, 2022 at 3:56 pm
This is a win for taxpayers!
Up 83 Down 8
Pruden on Apr 21, 2022 at 3:27 pm
Well at least common sense has now come to the forefront. Council should give their heads a shake that this project got this far and spiraled out of control. While it's good to dream big dreams, taxpayers don't have big pockets for the amount of money council wanted to spend. Perhaps they figured out their political careers were also attached to the costly pricetag of this enmourous politically out of control structure?
Up 92 Down 7
North_of_60 on Apr 21, 2022 at 3:22 pm
Good news!!! Use the budgeted funds to improve the 'energy efficiency' of the City Hall building and renovate the Fire Hall into office space. Now that they're not tearing it down they can do some much needed maintenance, like the peeling paint in the photo. It's about time the CoW learns to live within it's means to focus on the actual 'needs' rather than extravagant 'wants'.
Up 85 Down 8
Nathan Living on Apr 21, 2022 at 2:54 pm
I am surprised but grateful that this project was cancelled.
I think council can do far more for Whitehorse taxpayers. It seems odd that we have to continually argue for the most basic city services.
Up 90 Down 7
Al on Apr 21, 2022 at 2:20 pm
YES !!! Finally the neon light went off at COW. Most sensible thing to have done.
Up 89 Down 6
Resident on Apr 21, 2022 at 1:57 pm
Good. It would be one thing if this building was critical infrastructure, but a new City Hall is not a good use of money in the current economic situation.