Toronto St Lawrence Market North | 25.3m | 5s | City of Toronto | Rogers Stirk Harbour

DSC said:
The motion for additional funds passed unanimously with an amendment proposed by Holyday saying that if there is need for yet more money the Staff Report should come with cost saving strategies not only request for $$$. Now to get the damned thing built!!
Click to expand...

Does this have to go back through full Council now, though?
 
I wonder how much of the increased cost is due to the delays.. this is moving at a snails pace unfortunately and that likely messes up a lot of the financials.
 
DSC said:
The motion for additional funds passed unanimously with an amendment proposed by Holyday saying that if there is need for yet more money the Staff Report should come with cost saving strategies not only request for $$$.
Click to expand...

Only in Toronto can a watered-down proposal get further watered down.

Original:

urbantoronto-4162-12832.jpg

Source: UrbanToronto

Revised:

urbantoronto-4162-28460.jpg

Source: UrbanToronto

Six months from now:

$_61.JPG

Source: https://www.ebay.com/itm/AMISH-24x24-DOUBLE-WIDE-2-STORY-VINYL-GARAGE-SHED-NEW-/132116343315
 
Cost of the North St. Lawrence Market project keeps rising

That $116.3-million is 53% higher than the original price tag of $76 million for the project and 28% higher than the $91-million cost determined in 2010 once the design was finalized. The project’s completion has also been delayed, now to the spring of 2022.

Heads should roll at City Hall but they never do nor have they on the ballooning cost of the Nathan Phillips Square renovations or on Union Station, which if we’re lucky, will be done at the end of this year — some 20 years after the original budget was set at $640-million.
The cost of the Union Station reno is now 30% higher at $823.5-million.
More... https://torontosun.com/news/local-n...north-st-lawrence-market-project-keeps-rising
 
Though it might have been expected that some "archaeology" would be found, it WAS and this meant a costly and quite long-term dig on the site. This, plus the 'natural' cost inflation since the original cost estimate in 2010 were inevitably going to increase costs. Then the Bondfield fiasco meant a further long delay and yet more cost increases.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Cost of the North St. Lawrence Market project keeps rising

That $116.3-million is 53% higher than the original price tag of $76 million for the project and 28% higher than the $91-million cost determined in 2010 once the design was finalized. The project’s completion has also been delayed, now to the spring of 2022.

Heads should roll at City Hall but they never do nor have they on the ballooning cost of the Nathan Phillips Square renovations or on Union Station, which if we’re lucky, will be done at the end of this year — some 20 years after the original budget was set at $640-million.
The cost of the Union Station reno is now 30% higher at $823.5-million.
More... https://torontosun.com/news/local-n...north-st-lawrence-market-project-keeps-rising
Click to expand...
You know that any story published in the Toronto Sun is only half the story, right? Especially if written by Sue-Ann Levy. She does to mention that the City is required to choose the lowest qualified bidder. That system is what has got us in trouble with Bondfield both here and at Union. Bondfield has certainly had the size and skill set to make it onto the qualified bidders list for years, but its under-bidding has finally caught up with it and us in the last couple of years (and sent it into bankruptcy). There are other jurisdictions where it's the second lowest qualified bidder that jobs go to, which pretty much guarantees that low-balled bids don't come in and scoop up jobs from companies that are pricing the job realistically. The law needs to change so that the City can accept the realistic bids…

…so if heads should roll, it's ones at the Province that tell the City what it can and cannot do in this regard. I'm not sure how long the law has been as it's now written, but it should have been changed long ago.

42
 
I should also have highlighted that Levy seems to scoff at the idea that rising construction costs in the real world could have been responsible for escalated costs here. What does she not understand about that, or what is she failing to express clearly? And by extension, how does she still have that writing gig? Oh yeah, it's the Sun.

42
 
Approval of the requested budget amendment and the award of the contract will allow construction to begin in the third quarter of 2019, with the Market expected to be completed and operational in 2022. Once complete, the new Market will transform the historical site into a modern public space that will service both residents and visitors alike.
Click to expand...

 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top