All Hail Perth Arena

[Barfridge]

You know that piece of shit looking stadium just off the freeway? Well it went to tender for $160 million, and so far has cost us $548.7 million.

Perth Arena price tag nears $550m | Latest Business & Australian Stock market News | Perth Now

Is this seriously taking the piss, or what?
And why are we suddenly paying 3.5 times as much as the original estimate. That would not fly in any private industry on the planet.

Does anyone have any inside info on this one, because on face value it's pretty fucking appalling.

[rharris]

I don't think it's that far out for a government job

[Barfridge]

quiet you, I've seen what you put on your invoices

What's your record, $3500 for a 9 volt battery?

[rharris]

If you just wait a bit longer we can have a $50 million inquiry into why it ran over budget

[Algy]

It’s understood that the previous Labor Government came back to the builder with more than 1000 design changes during the tender process

its all the governments fault

[chew]

Build it and they will come. They may not be able to afford to get in, but they will come.

[GETAGRIP]

I remember tendering the fire, electrical and security systems on it. We were beaten on tender by roughly 2.5 times. If the same can be said for the rest of the contracts with them coming out at the actual cost, it is not surprising.

Also the best thing about a government tender vs. private tender is the cost of modifications. Government will not hesitate in approving an extremely large amount of modifications off plan, which means big $$$.

[Roger Explosion]

Well consider the highly motivated individuals we have toiling away on construction sights accross the CBD, colour me shocked.

[Sonik]

a raft of design changes

Im going to have a guess and say this is partially to blame, there are ALWAYS changes to the plans during construction. I used to hate seeing suits walking around site as it usually meant things were going to change and usually at a bad time, like after we have already finished one area and moved on. That then leads to excessive labour costs as most of the time we (sparkies) were already built out of an area and it isn't as easy to complete the job as it would have been in the start.

I don't miss construction at all

On the topic of this fugly building, I do hope the colour scheme that is visible from the freeway isn't going to stay that way. It reminds me of some kind of dodgy treehouse built by kids with shit they found around the neighbourhood.

EDIT: beaten again!

[Barfridge]

I like this comment, puts it in context pretty well.

On Ya Bike of Perth Posted at 12:01 PM December 28, 2011

Why are people so concerned with the aesthetics of this building?? Perth taxpayers just paid $550 million dollars for a 14000 seat "Arena"!! Some Comparisions Forsyth Barr Stadium For Rugby World Cup 2011 Cost $190 million Seats 35 000 people London Olympic Stadium (2012) Cost $700 Million Seats 80 000 people London Olympic Arena (2012) Cost $70 Million Seats up to 12 000 people (scaled down post games) Glendale Arena(Arizona, USA) 2008 Cost $180 Million Seats 18 000 people

[Irishphil]

Im going to have a guess and say this is partially to blame, there are ALWAYS changes to the plans during construction. I used to hate seeing suits walking around site as it usually meant things were going to change and usually at a bad time, like after we have already finished one area and moved on. That then leads to excessive labour costs as most of the time we (sparkies) were already built out of an area and it isn't as easy to complete the job as it would have been in the start.

I don't miss construction at all

On the topic of this fugly building, I do hope the colour scheme that is visible from the freeway isn't going to stay that way. It reminds me of some kind of dodgy treehouse built by kids with shit they found around the neighbourhood.

EDIT: beaten again!

It seems to happen in most commercial jobs you go do some work leave it perfect according to the plans. Next day you need to go and rip it out and change it as the plans have been changed.
One of my mates was working on the design and the coloured sheets you can see are going to be covered. Think he said that possibly one side of the building has the finished materials on it

[Xuaxace]

Not surprised for a government jobbie, I am more surprised that the Fiona hospital is supposed to be on budget.

[P.J]

And what is it supposed to be used for? Couldn't hold a concert there... And isn't parking an issue? 14,000 seats and 2500 parking bays or something?

[Commander Keen]

14000 is a lot of seats for a netball court...

[g0zer]

And why are we suddenly paying 3.5 times as much as the original estimate. That would not fly in any private industry on the planet.

It’s understood that the previous Labor Government came back to the builder with more than 1000 design changes during the tender process

Treasurer Christian Porter said the long standing contractual claims, which have now been settled under confidential terms, were directly related to the previous Labor government’s decision to change the contract with BGC which made the State liable for design changes.

Major changes to the design, including the decision to move the arena car park to the basement during the middle of the tender process, were also put in place.

its confusing because porter explicitly states 1000 changes were made, 'during the tendering process' rather than after ie: if BGC has signed their acceptance to a scope of works, obviously it must be against the final agreed scope of works not revision 0. furthermore it is only changes made POST tender closure that can be fought over so i dont see how a turmultuous tendering process is even relevant, i expect porter mentions it because he is a politician and more interested in blaming spinning cost blowouts as labours fault than addressing a question (noting that the actual settlement between govt. and BGC was conveniently negotiated confidentially and behind closed doors).

also 1000 is a completely meaningless number, for a small project it might be a lot and visa versa for a large.

seems to me that the argument is regarding penalties for not meeting the specified delivery date. its funny that BGC and the govt are fighting about it. a entire legal cottage industry employed to create excruciatingly detailed legally binding tender frameworks which create potential for the parties involved to sue and countersue each other.

perhaps if they spent the money and time they spend on lawyers, on getting the scope of works right and accurately tendering they could get a project to come in on budget and on time.

[Brougham]

The biggest blowout was the carpark. There was no parking in original tender apart from a few bays. Then some bright spark decided to add a basement (underground) carpark as a VO.

Not retender. A VO. With massively inflated costs as per a VO plus the usual builders 10% margin. I "think" that alone was a $100-150m cost add as there was a LOT of redesign and structural/civil work to make the building work on a suspended slab over the carpark.

[BenG]

its confusing because they explicitly state the 1000 changes were made, 'during the tendering process' rather than after ie: if BGC has signed their acceptance to a scope of works, obviously it must be against the final agreed scope of works not revision 0. furthermore it is only changes made POST tender closure that can be fought over so i dont see how a turmultuous tendering process is even relevant, i expect porter mentions it because he is a politician and more interested in blaming spinning cost blowouts as labours fault than addressing a question.

seems to me that the argument is regarding penalties for not meeting the specified delivery date. its funny that BGC and the govt are going to go to court to fight about it. a entire legal cottage industry employed to create excruciatingly detailed legally binding tender frameworks which create potential for the parties involved to sue and countersue each other.

perhaps if they spent the money and time they spend on lawyers, on getting the scope of works right and accurately tendering they could get a project to come in on budget and on time.

The $160 million original estimate was from 2005 prior to the project going to tender. Changes to the design during the tender process would clearly impact the cost.

In August 2006, the pre-tender estimate was $320 million. The post-tender price in 2007 was $343 million. Clearly the original estimate was insufficient, or the scope changes were large.

In April 2009, the budget was further increased to $483 million. The changes comprised:

• management and procurement has increased by $2 million, and design has increased by $7 million
• failure to achieve anticipated construction savings and changes to building design have added
$55 million
• inclusion of the $42 million for fit out and transition to operation
• car park costs have increased by $34 million.

In addition, as at March 2010, BGC had submitted $53 million in claims for additional time and cost. Since the project is now 3 years behind schedule, this is hardly surprising...


Source: http://www.audit.wa.gov.au/reports/p...ort2010_01.pdf


The media aren't telling the full story, as always...

[Sonik]

Perth media motto - Never let the truth get in the way of a good story

[Daise]

I wouldn't mind the extra cost if it meant it would be prettier to look at.

It looks like a meccano set made by a blind kid.

[Roger Explosion]

I actually don't mind the design myself. Always go ugly over boring. My biggest gripe is the paint scheme. As it stands, it looks like a 1980's artist's rendition of a Bunnings warehouse from the not too distant future