Spokane7
65°
August 2, 2011 in City
YMCA demolition $250,000 over budget
Officials hope to save money during restoration
More asbestos than thought was in the old YMCA building at Riverfront Park, adding about $100,000 to the demolition costs. Restoration of the site is scheduled to be complete in October.
(Full-size photo)
The city of Spokane Parks and Recreation Department is more than $250,000 over budget on the demolition of the old YMCA building in Riverfront Park. But the department thinks it can find almost $150,000 in savings.
More than $100,000 of the cost overruns on demolition is a result of having more asbestos than expected in the 1965 building. Parks Director Leroy Eadie said the YMCA had conducted an asbestos analysis of the building before selling it, but that estimate turned out to be “pretty grossly inadequate.”
The substance, which must be handled as a hazardous material because it can cause significant lung damage, was wrapped around many pipes and vents hidden from view.
The original estimate for demolishing the building and restoring the site, made by architect and former Park Board member Steve McNutt, was $1.3 million, but that assumed an average amount of asbestos in the building, Eadie said. Other than the asbestos, the demolition estimate was “largely accurate,” he added.
Other unexpected costs involved oil, possibly from the parking lot that was on the property before the building, and routing the stream that flowed through the property.
The department will save some money on restoration by cutting down the number of basalt columns, benches and bike racks, using free fill dirt and not importing topsoil.
Restoration will start soon, and is scheduled to be complete in October.
Supermajority for taxes unconstitutional, judge rules 
drywitt99 on August 02 at 3:31 a.m.
Okay Dazed…….you get a free shot at Verner over this.
I won’t say a word.
oneanddone on August 02 at 4:31 a.m.
Seems to me that only govt spending allows “cost overruns”. Businesses generally write a contract that makes those costs a liability of the bidder. But then govt cares little about that because the taxpayer gets the bill.
drywitt99 on August 02 at 5:07 a.m.
Yeah…….private companies doing business with a goverernment agency NEVER have cost overruns.
“…..reports that the average cost overrun on defense acquisition contracts is 40 percent
Thus, a 40 percent cost overrun on a procurement contract that barely qualifies as significant is at least $100 million dollars.”
http://www.suu.edu/faculty/christensend/evms/An%20Analysis%20of%20Cost%20Overruns%20On%20Defense%20Contracts.pdf
That’s right…..PRIVATE BUSINESSES submit a low bid to a governmental agency…..incur MASSIVE overruns…..and then yahoos blame the government.
And if that agency attempts to hold the private business liable…..yahoos accuse them of being anti-business.
jimvw2 on August 02 at 6:14 a.m.
P.S., Drywit99, the Mayor has virtually no control over the Park Board, according to city charter. Responsibility for the underestimate of costs rest squarely with them.
Spokane_Citizen on August 02 at 6:27 a.m.
When you write a contract that lands the entire risk of encountering unexpected ‘changed work conditions’ (like larger quantities of asbestos, or the discovery of hidden pollutants in the soil) on the contractor, then the bidders just increase the cost of the bid to cover the increased potential for any changed conditions….and the taxpayer pays much more for the completion of work everytime. The public just thinks they’re getting a better deal because there are no ‘cost overruns’.
There are excavation contractors who will not bid county excavation jobs (such as for sewers) because the commissioners won’t consider contracts with clauses for changed conditions (and only somebody who has never worked in the construction industry would believe you can know everything about what you’re going to find before you start digging). The other contractors just all bid very high to cover their risk in that case…and the taxpayer gets the shaft….so the commissioners can look good.
bez233 on August 02 at 6:45 a.m.
Quote of the day
Parks Director Leroy Eadie said “pretty grossly inadequate.”
I can think of several places and situations that quote applies : -
Ninch on August 02 at 6:48 a.m.
No one with a brain would sign a demolition contract without change orders being available. Hidden conditions are “hidden.” In all PRIVATE and PUBLIC BIDDING construction/deconstruction projects there are “unforeseen” circumstances and thus change orders. Also “change orders” are not the same as “liability” …of which the latter is covered by insurance and bonding.
Note: The State of Washington requires the building owner to provide an “asbestos” report before demolition or remodel. Thus the contractor cannot be made financially responsible for discovery of asbestos not included in the OWNER’S report.
DickAdams on August 02 at 7:00 a.m.
The really sad part regarding the purchase of the Y is the property could have been sold to the private sector. Government of course spent much more than the property was worth but the park board, with non-elected officals, calls the shots and to heck with the taxpayers.
Orphan on August 02 at 7:31 a.m.
Well said Ninch.
My experiance with goverment contracts was always involved more paper work and effort to get the job done. I always estimated costs higher than on a private job, the fact that I did quite a few goverment jobs told me that everyone was doing the same. In my view doing goverment work always cost more than doing private work.
Orphan on August 02 at 7:33 a.m.
What the Park Board should have done was sold the Y to a private concern had the private company do the demo and then purchased it back from the private firm and it would have been less expensive.
greenlibertarian on August 02 at 9:23 a.m.
Change orders=increased profitability.
That’s how the game is normally played.
ManleyPointer on August 02 at 9:26 a.m.
Why should we expect anything different from people who are playing with Monopoly (i.e., taxpayers’) money?
The_Seer on August 02 at 9:36 a.m.
Tea Bagger rule #1: Never miss an opportunity to bash all forms of government while demonstrating your bottomless stupidity.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on August 02 at 10:12 a.m.
Yes, we should have sold this property to some private company. Then they could have torn the building down and the piece of land could be called the Bank of America outlook at Riverfront Park and they charge you $10 to access their land. Great idea.
Orphan on August 02 at 10:27 a.m.
Liberal read the entire post again please. What I was attempting to say is selling the property to a private company with the understanding that the work would be done and then sold back to the parks board at a predetermined price and date. Doing it that way would put the middle man in the position of cutting costs to make money something goverment agencys dont seem to be able to do.
The Parks Board would have had a fixed price without the possibility of cost over runs and a private company would have been given an opportunity to make a buck. All in all I think it would have been cheaper since you would have had several private companies compeating to get the work.
By taking the goverment out of it the costs would have gone down.
Think outside of the box.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on August 02 at 10:35 a.m.
Yes orphan, because private business never screws anyone and is never out to make an extra buck. They are perfect stewards of or communities.
Private companies never screw anyone to make as much money as possible, you know like airline companies charging to check your bag or raising their fee’s when federal taxes expired so they can make more money. Or banks charging you to walk into their branch and talk to a person. Oil companies doing everything on the cheap so their’s no protection in case of an oil spill and then having people clean it up with paper towels (or you forgetting BP and the Exxon oil spill in Montana or even Alaska). Companies firing people here so they can pay someone in China 10 cents a day. Yeah, private companies never do anything wrong.
Dazzeetrader11 on August 02 at 10:40 a.m.
This is exactly another example of why government should stay out of this type of thing. The cost on this is now approaching $7 million..and for what? A hole in the landscape that measures under an acre. Nice going Govs.
Verner was, indeed , in this process. She lobbied foruse of conservation futures. She won…a big stinkhole that produces no revenue…..nothing. Figures but this is how libs think..”.oh geee…gimme a view…no matter the cost!!” “I’ll remember it always “<sigh>………and so it goes in “liberal town”..$7 million loss in a depressed period. Worse…no income to offset! Nice….but you have the pretty communal view…….<rolls eyes=”“>.
So, to go with the new $4.5 million in new “green” busses ( which don’t work well by the way) and her 2 purchases of goofy real estate….she’s added over $25 million in new debt.
Nice going. Government and fiscal responsibility don’t mix well.
Ask the council (Verner voted to buy it)…they bought the old Playfair site and then had to pay the new owner well over $1 million just to unload it. Nice.
Oh well…bigger and better things await me today… I’d vote her out. Condon would too;)
ManleyPointer on August 02 at 11:01 a.m.
There are people out there in our community who haven’t the vaguest idea how capitalism works. None. Or about the role and motivation of “government” in the lives of private citizens. It is disheartening.
Orphan on August 02 at 11:38 a.m.
Liberal How do private businesses screw you or anyone over. Last I checked you dont have to work for someone that you do not like or who you think is on the up and up.
Private companies enter into contracts with people/workers and other companies, last I checked no one put a gun to anyones head to make them work or make an other company enter into a contract so exactly how is anyone being screwed when they willingly enter into an agreement. People/workers are free to go anytime they like.
You also do not have to purchase airline tickets from an airline that raised their fees. As a matter fo fact you do not have to fly, I do not fly anymore because I am not willing to give up my personal freedom due to pat downs.
Do you really think oil companies want to have oil spills? Oil spills are expensive to clean up and it hurts the oil companies bottom line. Think about the amount of oil that is pumped from the ground and then think about the amount that is spilled. I dont know the numbers but I would think the percentage is so small thast it is basicaly a non issue in the large picture. .
What is wrong with a company doing business where ever they want to. You do no thave to purchase any companys goods or services ever. Vote with your pocket book and your feet.
Most of your posts are based on emotion and feelings which is typical of liberals but not very usefull in the real world. Try logic sometime and you wont get so upset about the little things.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on August 02 at 12:26 p.m.
No, sorry Orphan liberals have a real sense of the world, it is you righty tea baggers that live in some fantasy land.
Oil companies have been proven, especially after the BP oil spill, to cut costs and safety costs that would PREVENT oil spills because it costs them to much money. They know they have any oil spill, clean it up and still make billions of dollars, as evident by how much BP still made even during the biggest oil spill in this counties history. If you really think oil companies care about preventing oil spills above their profits you are living in a true fantasy land.
Do you honestly think people have much choice of leaving their job right now to find any better job? I guess you think our unemployment rate is zero.
Nice that you say we liberal post mostly emotions and feelings, yet we are the ones that usually have references and facts to back us up, yet you and most of your righty tea bagging friends post nothing to back your facts up or post opinion editorials from right leaning groups.
Wake up sir to the real world.
The_Seer on August 02 at 12:37 p.m.
manly: Oh, please, educate us lowly wastrels about how capitalism works.
All I’ve seen most of my life is how it doesn’t work.
MrNatural on August 02 at 2:59 p.m.
Well…aside from the unforeseen costs I’m very glad that this land is now turning in to a public commons area. Truly this will be a beautiful place at Spokane Falls for all to enjoy.
Orphan on August 02 at 3:31 p.m.
Liberal The unemployment rate is quite high, but you have to look at who is not working. The bottom of the barrel are not working, most everyone that wants to work is working or has started their own business. So yes you can quit your job right now. For example all of my kids are doing just fine during this so called down turn buying homes advancing in their jobs/fields, raising kids.
I might add I have not helped my kids out financialy nor has anyone else helped them, all of us that love them would not want to insult them or their abilitys by holding their adult hands.
Now this is funny as I was typing this out I got a phone call from a head hunter I know for a $150K plus per year job. I turned it down because I am semi retired and dont really want to go back to work. Now I am on the hunt for someone that can do the job.
Squid on August 02 at 3:32 p.m.
I am constantly amazed at our local government recklessly giving our money away in their spending explosion and then telling us that they are broke and need more money for their new projects or mistakes. What will it take to stop the bleeding? Why do the majority of voters believe they are truthful or necessary expenses?
ManleyPointer on August 02 at 4:01 p.m.
It’s not my job to educate anybody about anything. And it may very well be that others have different ideas about how governments and economies ought to function. I just hate to see capitalism mischaracterized and demonized in such a thoughtless, offhand way by people who don’t seem to have a clue what they’re talking about. Talk is cheap.