In a letter to the editor (Symptom of Neglect, Wednesday, September 30http://thechronicleherald.ca/letters/1313939-voice-of-the-people-sept.-30-2015) WJ Phillips of Halifax asks if anyone had given consideration to gutting the VG rather than tearing it down and constructing a totally new building? It’s a question many of us have had.
Under the NDP as well as the current government, health executives have talked of tearing down and constructing a total new building for the VG. Do we know that’s the only option? Have those who have conducted structural surveys been tasked only with developing plans for a new hospital as opposed to considering the potential to save the shell? If the exterior walls and floors are sound, why not rip out the plumbing, wiring, windows and walls and design something that does work?
Preserving the shell not only saves money, it reduces downtime. There is a lot of talk about it being an old building. But there are many other older buildings still in service. For example, there are at least seven hospitals in London constructed between 1828 and 1859 which still function as hospitals.
We have plenty of other examples of older buildings which still work. Halifax’s Lord Nelson and Westin Nova Scotian hotels were both built in the 1920s. They have been maintained so they can still cater to several thousand people each week. The Chateau Frontenac (1899) in Quebec City underwent a $75 million renovation that saw 611 bedrooms remodeled, and several lower floors reconfigured. This was done while going to the additional expense of observing heritage status. The Royal York Hotel (1927) in Toronto has spent $100 million restoring 800 bedrooms, as well as their public areas. And these have been conducted while the hotels remained open for business.
Remodeling the VG would be different because of the state of the plumbing and wiring. But if the structure is sound why isn’t saving that part of the conversation?
And why, if the Nova Scotia Health Authority considers this a crisis, are executives content to accept “several years” to design a new hospital coupled with a construction process that stretches over seven-to-ten years? That timeline doesn’t suggest urgency.
Whether the VG is gutted or demolished and replaced, this won’t be the first hospital ever built. We should be able to access the expertise to speed the process along. Perhaps these lengthy timelines are because we are expecting people to work outside their skillset and juggle two jobs at once? Health executives trained to deliver health care, not oversee construction projects and that’s been a problem.
For example, the Auditor General concluded that problems with the Truro hospital, which was two years late opening and 78 percent over budget, were the result of an insufficient original budget and a health authority with no experience overseeing large construction projects.
The Auditor General’s budget warning is a concern. In 2012, Capital Health suggested a replacement for the VG would cost $100 million. Three years later that price tag has escalated to over a billion dollars. This is worrisome because Nova Scotia hasn’t a history of bringing government projects in on budget. Our budget problems started with Government House. It was budgeted to cost £ 10,000 pounds, but by the time Governor and Lady Wentworth moved in in 1805 the cost had tripled to £ 30,000. In 210 years, what capital project in what was the colony and later the province has come in on budget? Yet, with every overage the government of the day acts surprised.
Let’s see if there’s a potential to do more than knocking the Centennial Building down, which also costs money, and rebuilding from scratch. Whatever the course of action, we should bring in professionals who have construction experience and whose sole focus is to push this through to a faster completion.