Winspear Centre Completion Project | 29.87m | 4s | Winspear Centre | Andrew Bromberg

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    53
Winspear Vote1.PNG
Winspear Vote2.PNG


As a reminder, here's what option five is:

Interim financing to complete construction until final funding can be secured
Under the MGA municipalities are able to loan money to non-profit organizations. Such a loan would require an amendment to the current lending bylaw. Given the challenges in identifying an appropriate funding source discussed throughout this report, interim financing is considered risky for both parties. The Winspear has indicated that any interim financing would need to be guaranteed and permanent, as they would be unable to take on any additional repayment obligations similar to the existing $12.9 million parkade loan if final funding cannot be secured. This option is risky for both the City and the Winspear. If Winspear is unable to secure funding current options would not be sufficient to repay the interim financing which would require the City to identify an alternative source of funding.
 
It is probably in everyone's interests for this project to be completed at this point, although questions arise about how well this project has been managed which should also be looked into further.

So I feel further funding by the city should only be provided if the city auditor is permitted to review the cost increases fully and the Winspear provides adequate security and guarantees for any additional loans.
 
Feels like Council chose the best option here. Making this an endless construction site is in nobody's best interests.
 
Surely this delta in funding was known to some degree for a while, no? Why wasn't this brought up in the fall budget adjustment?
 
SarcasticMarmot said:
The idea that the province is going to pitch in for the demolition of the Coliseum is a fantasy. The old unspoken tit for tat treatment of Edmonton and Calgary by the province is over. Calgary will get money and we won't, it's not right but it's reality. The Coliseum needs to go, its been a dead blight on our neighborhood for nearly a decade now. It's an ugly concrete pile that is not worth saving as any potential reuse would be much cheaper to build from scratch. Better to use that money to save truly significant structures like the powerplant or filling in the 118 ave LRT hole and building the two new LRT stations. Its an embarrassment that the City has yet to deal with the Coliseum.

This is distracting from the real issue, a DOUBLING of the Winspear project cost since the funding was awarded. It's not even primarily inflation! They kept adding bells and whistles until the project ballooned way out of budget. I am a regular patron of the ESO and most years buy a subscription. Love the Winspear but this this project has gotten way out of hand. The City should think very carefully about rescuing the Winspear foundation from this, we have our own financial problems to deal with. This chart from the report is very informative.

View attachment 626843
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting this. Despite force majeur on initial project timing, there is so much wrong with this it's hard to even know where to start. Hair under $40m (75% increase over original cost) in changes before accounting for inflation, delay and interim capital costs. Shameful.

Also of note: what's the implications of the Winspear Foundation carrying a $12.9m loan? Even from the City on basically gifted money terms
 
constance_chlore said:
I can only speculate, but I could imagine that there are some powerful donors/administrators who considered it a priority to be able to zip in and out without interacting with the various characters downtown, and who would certainly never deign to take public transit.
Click to expand...
Probably Thomas and Martha Wayne's idea. They should walk down alley to their car after a night at the theatre like the rest of us.
 
northlands said:
Thanks for posting this. Despite force majeur on initial project timing, there is so much wrong with this it's hard to even know where to start. Hair under $40m (75% increase over original cost) in changes before accounting for inflation, delay and interim capital costs. Shameful.

Also of note: what's the implications of the Winspear Foundation carrying a $12.9m loan? Even from the City on basically gifted money terms
Click to expand...

Marmot is on it.

Keep in mind that the current design has been value engineered already... this could have easily much more.

The car elevator, significant parkade component, north facade art infrastructure, cantilevered grand terrace etc.

Regardless, it is a small price to pay to add another landmark element to the core.
 
IanO said:
Regardless, it is a small price to pay to add another landmark element to the core.
Click to expand...
And that is it in a nutshell. Mandated redesigns especially after a contractor is onboard never lead to a good place, especially when the design is atypical to begin with. This can be analyzed day and night and nothing will change. This building is an incredible addition to Edmonton's cultural and architectural scene. As George Harrison noted so many years ago, "All things must pass."
 
archited said:
And that is it in a nutshell. Mandated redesigns especially after a contractor is onboard never lead to a good place, especially when the design is atypical to begin with. This can be analyzed day and night and nothing will change. This building is an incredible addition to Edmonton's cultural and architectural scene. As George Harrison noted so many years ago, "All things must pass."
Click to expand...
Yes, I remember many years ago when our current city hall was built and the big concerns about the cost, likewise about the convention centre.

Now those concerns are mostly forgotten, but the buildings remain for our benefit. I do feel this building will be a great asset in the future too.
 
You guys are missing the entire point. I celebrate the expansion and improvement of the Winspear, and I don't even necessarily take issue with the cost, per-se, but rather the entire project delivery to where we are now.

Is it too much to ask that those requesting tens of millions of public dollars understand their requirements and be realistic in defining the project scope prior to procurement? I guess why care when you know the City will bail you out regardless, because it's the freakin' Winspear.
 
David A said:
Yes, I remember many years ago when our current city hall was built and the big concerns about the cost, likewise about the convention centre.

Now those concerns are mostly forgotten, but the buildings remain for our benefit. I do feel this building will be a great asset in the future too.
Click to expand...
In a similar vein, I'm not sure we'll ever fondly look at buildings like the downtown library "because they were originally delivered on or under budget" vs those that were completed as initially contemplated.

Having said that, there's also no reason that more accountability shouldn't be part of the initial designs and project delivery as those three things aren't mutually exclusive of each other. They all simply need to be at the table together from conception though to completion.
 
northlands said:
You guys are missing the entire point. I celebrate the expansion and improvement of the Winspear, and I don't even necessarily take issue with the cost, per-se, but rather the entire project delivery to where we are now.

Is it too much to ask that those requesting tens of millions of public dollars understand their requirements and be realistic in defining the project scope prior to procurement? I guess why care when you know the City will bail you out regardless, because it's the freakin' Winspear.
Click to expand...
I agree it should not be a bail out, which is why I still feel it is not unreasonable to both have the city auditor go over this and have any loan from the city secured. I really hope this is something the city considers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top