I have some questions, maybe you could answer them before I vote:
- Was it considered any other project at lower cost than this? (If the reason for this is to safe the place, you could opt for some renovation that doesn't need all this expansion)
- How much money the café makes? Can't it make renovations with the profit it generates? Btw, where does the profit go to? To GSAED, I suppose?
- Are you guys taking in consideration that only grad students are charged while the majority of people on the café are undergrads? (I don't mind particularly, i think the space has to be share - but why charge only grads?)
I'm initially against the cause specially because of its huge price (over 4 Million) and I like how the cafe is right now. But maybe you could clarify these questions.
Cristiano.
- Was it considered any other project at lower cost than this? (If the reason for this is to safe the place, you could opt for some renovation that doesn't need all this expansion)
- How much money the café makes? Can't it make renovations with the profit it generates? Btw, where does the profit go to? To GSAED, I suppose?
- Are you guys taking in consideration that only grad students are charged while the majority of people on the café are undergrads? (I don't mind particularly, i think the space has to be share - but why charge only grads?)
I'm initially against the cause specially because of its huge price (over 4 Million) and I like how the cafe is right now. But maybe you could clarify these questions.
Cristiano.
Guillaume Lemieux March 17 at 9:43pm
Good evening Cristinano,
First of all thank you for inquiring and trying to better understand the reasons and logic behind the referendum.
Here are my answers to your questions:
1. At first we considered just a ground floor renovation of the Café, Which would have expanded the main floor by about 40%. And at first seemed to be the most cost effective. After speaking with architects and the physical resource team of the University the cost rose quickly,
First, as soon as we start renovating the Café we have to bring it to "code". Furthermore any renovation project would need to address two crucial life lines that are the cause for most of our troubles. a) The Residential Plumbing and b) The Residential Electrical System. To do so, extensive work to the infrastructure was necessary. By adding these components together, which also included adding an elevator to make the second floor accessible and to standard, the cost of patching the problems was estimated at over $1M by the architects. (I will send a separate message quoting the architects' numbers.
We also looked at different variations of the plans. And after 2 town hall meetings, many discussions at council and recommendations from the Café Committee, the current plans have been drafted and chosen. Although these plans are not final, they were necessary to finalize a cost estimate, which is the grounds for the referendum question.
2- The Café never made money. Before I started in my position the Café was losing $50k-$75k per year. Since I changed most of the processes and hired a qualified manager (which is a first at the Café), we have been operating a balanced budget. Not making, and not losing any money. Part of the reason why we don't make money is because of our mandate to first Serve students. Therefore we provide discounts to Grads and free shows almost daily. At first the Café borrowed money from GSAED. Once the amount reached $180k a few years ago, the money was not given as loan anymore, but has donations because Accounting wise it was not realistic for GSAED to expect the Café to pay them back. Future profits generate from improvements in the infrastructure will be re-invested in the cost to speed up the mortgage payments. And potentially same goes to GSAED surplus, which could also be used to pay off the mortgage of the Grad House quicker.
3- Only Grads pay because Governance of the Space on all levels will be managed and organized to always put Grads first. If we brought in the undergrads we would have been minority partners and we would have lost any decisional power. At one point it was going to be a joint project with the undergrad and we would have join them in the University Centre deal. The overall cost was going to be way more for us than by splitting up. The Student Centre project is estimated at $120M. The timeline for the Student Centre project also changed, which is why we branched off.
4- $4.2M is a lot of money, but we are investing in real-estate. One day if the organization needs to vacate or is in a financial crisis there would always be the option of selling it off and generate a profit from the transaction. I doubt this will ever happen but the money is not gonna be lost. When you break it down $22.50 is 0.45% to 0.75% of tuition. And I agree that any increase is not to be taken lightly. But the pay-off and improvements to Graduate Student Spaces will be tangible. Furthermore, the investment of $22.50 can be mitigated through your Graduate Discount of 20% at Café Nostalgica.
I hope this helps. Let me know if you have additional questions.
First of all thank you for inquiring and trying to better understand the reasons and logic behind the referendum.
Here are my answers to your questions:
1. At first we considered just a ground floor renovation of the Café, Which would have expanded the main floor by about 40%. And at first seemed to be the most cost effective. After speaking with architects and the physical resource team of the University the cost rose quickly,
First, as soon as we start renovating the Café we have to bring it to "code". Furthermore any renovation project would need to address two crucial life lines that are the cause for most of our troubles. a) The Residential Plumbing and b) The Residential Electrical System. To do so, extensive work to the infrastructure was necessary. By adding these components together, which also included adding an elevator to make the second floor accessible and to standard, the cost of patching the problems was estimated at over $1M by the architects. (I will send a separate message quoting the architects' numbers.
We also looked at different variations of the plans. And after 2 town hall meetings, many discussions at council and recommendations from the Café Committee, the current plans have been drafted and chosen. Although these plans are not final, they were necessary to finalize a cost estimate, which is the grounds for the referendum question.
2- The Café never made money. Before I started in my position the Café was losing $50k-$75k per year. Since I changed most of the processes and hired a qualified manager (which is a first at the Café), we have been operating a balanced budget. Not making, and not losing any money. Part of the reason why we don't make money is because of our mandate to first Serve students. Therefore we provide discounts to Grads and free shows almost daily. At first the Café borrowed money from GSAED. Once the amount reached $180k a few years ago, the money was not given as loan anymore, but has donations because Accounting wise it was not realistic for GSAED to expect the Café to pay them back. Future profits generate from improvements in the infrastructure will be re-invested in the cost to speed up the mortgage payments. And potentially same goes to GSAED surplus, which could also be used to pay off the mortgage of the Grad House quicker.
3- Only Grads pay because Governance of the Space on all levels will be managed and organized to always put Grads first. If we brought in the undergrads we would have been minority partners and we would have lost any decisional power. At one point it was going to be a joint project with the undergrad and we would have join them in the University Centre deal. The overall cost was going to be way more for us than by splitting up. The Student Centre project is estimated at $120M. The timeline for the Student Centre project also changed, which is why we branched off.
4- $4.2M is a lot of money, but we are investing in real-estate. One day if the organization needs to vacate or is in a financial crisis there would always be the option of selling it off and generate a profit from the transaction. I doubt this will ever happen but the money is not gonna be lost. When you break it down $22.50 is 0.45% to 0.75% of tuition. And I agree that any increase is not to be taken lightly. But the pay-off and improvements to Graduate Student Spaces will be tangible. Furthermore, the investment of $22.50 can be mitigated through your Graduate Discount of 20% at Café Nostalgica.
I hope this helps. Let me know if you have additional questions.
Guillaume Lemieux March 17 at 9:47pm
Quote of patching up the Café (status quo) from the architects at GRC:
"Estimate of probable costs for the existing building :
Elevator - $ 225,000
New stair. - $ 50,000
Code related - $ 25,000
Windows and doors - $ 75,000
Washrooms and accessibility - $ 75,000
Electrical and Mechanical - $ 75,000
General refinishing - interior - 50,000
Roof , exterior masonry re pointing ,
cladding repairs $ 75,000
Kitchen and Bar $150,000
Contingency $100,000
Soft Costs $ 350,000
This totals. $ 1,250,000 . It does not include furniture replacement and various FFE. Expenses you may have . The usable area would be reduced significantly as stairs , elevator , accessible washrooms.etc. are added . No provision is made for enlarging / raising the basement . It is order of magnitude only. ... Probably more accurate as an overall total than for individual items. Not to be used as a shopping list .
If substantial remodeling is contemplated ...then it will be more .... You might suggest a range from one to one and a half million ... And as noted ...less facility ."
"Estimate of probable costs for the existing building :
Elevator - $ 225,000
New stair. - $ 50,000
Code related - $ 25,000
Windows and doors - $ 75,000
Washrooms and accessibility - $ 75,000
Electrical and Mechanical - $ 75,000
General refinishing - interior - 50,000
Roof , exterior masonry re pointing ,
cladding repairs $ 75,000
Kitchen and Bar $150,000
Contingency $100,000
Soft Costs $ 350,000
This totals. $ 1,250,000 . It does not include furniture replacement and various FFE. Expenses you may have . The usable area would be reduced significantly as stairs , elevator , accessible washrooms.etc. are added . No provision is made for enlarging / raising the basement . It is order of magnitude only. ... Probably more accurate as an overall total than for individual items. Not to be used as a shopping list .
If substantial remodeling is contemplated ...then it will be more .... You might suggest a range from one to one and a half million ... And as noted ...less facility ."
Guillaume Lemieux March 17 at 9:48pm
At $1.25M we would have needed a referendum to achieve this. And it was voted that if we are going to invest we should do it properly.
You've changed my mind, I'll vote in favor of it. If you wish (I suggest you do), you can publish this conversation (at least the answers).
No comments:
Post a Comment