Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2006-11-13 Item 4B - Discussion - Tukwila International Boulevard (TIB) Phase II and Phase III Construction Costs COUNCIL AGENDA Siwosis k �,W1 t ygs',, O 2 I nitials ITEM NO. Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review I r'ouncil review .4 g 11/13/06 RT -C' I u Vic' rsoa ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 06-130 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2006 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Tukwila International Boulevard Phase II III Construction Costs CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 11/13/06 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date: SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW" SPONSOR'S Due to escalating construction costs, discuss available options to reduce scope to fit within SUMMARY the established budget for Tukwila Int'I Blvd Phase II and III. Three general areas have been identified; eliminate undergrounding of overhead utilities, eliminate some improvements within the WSDOT limited access area at the north end of the project and redesign the retaining walls to a less expensive type. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/23/06 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Approve recommended scope changes COM IIYFEE Unanimous approval; forward to COW for direction COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED 0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 11/13/06 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/13/06 Information Memo dated October 19, 2006 Construction Cost Comparison Scope and Budget Alternatives from November 2004 Transportation Committee Meeting Minutes from October 23, 2006 INFORMATION MEMO To: Mayor Mullet From: Public Works Directo Date: October 19, 2006 Subject: Tukwila International Blvd v Phases 2 and 3 (S 116 th St to S 138 St) Construction Cost Increases vs. Budget Project Nos. 95 -RWO3 and 95 -RWO4 ISSUE Present current construction cost estimates as compared to the cost estimates used at the start of final design. Discuss available options to reduce construction costs to fit within the established budget. BACKGROUND This project was presented to the City Council in November 2004 to discuss the project budget and design alternatives in order to proceed into final design of the project. See attached table. At that time, the selected alternative was estimated to cost approximately $16.15 million with a budget of $16.2 million. Since that time, the design has progressed to 90% completion, the environmental phase has been completed, and state funding in the amount of $2.851 million was eliminated and reinstituted in the spring of 2006. The 90% construction cost estimate has increased to $20.2 million (a 25 increase over two years). This increase is due to several factors, primarily from industry -wide inflation of labor and material costs. Tukwila and other agencies have recently seen bids submitted that range between 10% 30% over the engineer's estimate and costs are continuing to rise. In order to construct this project within the available budget, cost savings and reduction measures are necessary. Any significant changes to the scope of work need approval from the City Council as well as the funding agencies. ANALYSIS City staff has met with the design consultant to discuss options to reduce the estimated construction costs for the project. Three general areas have been identified that may produce enough savings and /or reductions to bring the project within budget. They include: 1. Eliminate the undergrounding of overhead utilities and have existing poles and facilities relocated as necessary. 2. Eliminate some of the proposed improvements within the WSDOT limited access area at the north end of the project. 3. Redesign some of the retaining walls from cast -in -place concrete retaining walls to a less expensive wall type. Mayor Mullet Page 2 October 19, 2006 A construction cost comparison is attached that shows the estimated cost savings by implementing the revisions listed above. A plan will be presented to the City Council showing the impacts and changes of redesigning the project. RECOMMENDATION Discuss the alternatives presented and provide direction to staff on desired scope changes in order to bring the estimated construction costs within budget. Forward to the Committee of the Whole for presentation to the full City Council. Funding Sources for Construction Only State Transportation Improvement Board 4,200,000.00 Federal Hwy. TEA -21 Grant 7,111,609.00 State "Nickel Package" Funds 2,706,000.00 Tukwila City Revenue (104 412 Funds) 2,051,000.00 Total 16,068,609.00 Estimate for Construction Costs Construction Contract 13,484,800.00 Contingency (7.3%) 983,809.00 Construction Engineering (11.8 1,600,000.00 Total 16,068,609.00 attachments: Construction Cost Comparison Scope and Budget Alternatives Table (from November 2004) (P:Projeczs\A- RW RS Projects \95RW03 TIB2\Memo Phase 2 Alts Round 3) CITY OF TUKWILA 10/19/2006 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Tukwila International Boulevard, Phase 2 3 S 139th St to S 116th Way CONSTRUCTION COST COMPARISON, (All costs based on recent 2006 bid results.) ORIGINAL REVISED SCOPE SCOPE General Conditions 2,404,700 1,659,000 Roadway 3,559,400 2,769,200 Sidewalk 485,400 420,900 Retaining Walls 6,591,700 4,947,300 Storm Drainage 1,978,200 1,926,300 Utility Adjustments 93,300 70,500 Traffic Signals 529,200 555,200 Illumination System 731,900 475,700 Electrical Undergrounding 2,557,900 0.00 Telecommunications Undergrounding 627,000 0.00 Resolve Aerial Utility Conflicts 0.00 210,000 Traffic Control Devices 64,500 44,300 Roadside Development 605,200 406,400 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $20,228,400 $13,484,800 Changes 1) No undergrounding of overhead utilities; pole relocations by utility owners. 2) No roadway improvements (except trench restoration) north of existing signalized Department of Homeland Security's driveway. 3) Install MSE walls on east side of roadway in lieu of cast in place /soldier pile walls. TIB Constr Cost comparison.xls 1 v o to o o o a v o_ 1 0 21 F 04), 40 03 G Q S O N v CO O C o J d 6 i CO t o r ca a 1 L 0 I N r 1\ ch a E �I a cc IS C L 11 m U 'L L c� C w 03 1 0 O N N i Y v 0 o 0 Q? 0 N E i 3' N o To Z V" s.. .Y a a ca o N 4.. 3 J N c m 'CS t 2' N tv C a r v 2 o C C7 0' Y y r 4 m TO R O Q '�O o a c 7 N d o oo I .—c 000 CO .bc -0 2. E -4:: c t 0- o c d o .v CO 0 S '0 .....1..... z 0 ci to d 1 1 1"' o 1 VI. "...1 N c6 `S' O V 4 O m a Q t.... 1 Z w 0 -0 th ..e 4 4 0 Is TA d u? c h i 7 0 (a) t0 O r-- 0 s c ur Lam O 1 3 to v tt ms a} o- ..F., 1 Ii CL 0 C o 1 t3 is 1s o G N '0 to O 3 .4 a+ m tato 0c� try 3° 30 d s Q rn �oN o r. m 0 a) ca O 1 O 2 o t, o= o +n Z. Q E c t 3 .w y L 0 N 0 ac 0 u) m N d c� o 1 1 0 E tD P- 4 o too a u p m O Gk.r• Z. oc as a Q o Vt' -1\--- Transportation Committee October 23, 2006 5:00 p.m. Present: Joe Duffle, Chair; Pam Carter, and Joan Hernandez, Council members. Kevin Fuhrer, Director of Finance; Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator; Jim Morrow, Director of Public Works; Frank Iriarte, Deputy Director; Bob Giberson, Acting City Engineer; Pat Brodin, Operations Manager; Gail Labanara, Public Works Analyst; Robin Tischmak, Senior Engineer; Diane Jenkins, Administrative Assistant to the Council; and Chuck Parrish, community member. Business Aeenda A. Tukwila Urban Center Signal Interconnect and ITS Traffic Signal Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) Units Bid Award Mr. Giberson reported that it is being recommended to award a contract for the Tukwila Urban Center Signal Interconnect and ITS project to Cascade Signal Corporation for traffic signal uninterruptible power supply units (UPS). On page 4 is a listing of items to be supplied by the City. The UPS units are not available on the State bid. Only one bid was received. Ms. Carter questioned why there was only one vendor. Mr. Giberson replied that this is very specialized traffic signal controller that has back -up power. Unanimous approval. Forward to COW. B. Construction Contract Price Increases Mr. Morrow presented information on construction contract prices which have steadily increased over the last couple of years and continue to rise. Mr. Giberson noted that last year there was a dramatic increase in supplies and materials. Many agencies are scrambling to amend their construction budgets due to the price increases. Mr. Giberson noted that every year a project is delayed, it impacts the budget. Mr. Morrow expects that the increases will continue to rise as much as 10 -30% per year. This is occurring in both the private and public sectors. Mr. Giberson referred to page 15 which provided a summary of the number of bidders per project over the last six years; it has been steadily decreasing. Competition is keeping the numbers down. Ms. Hernandez noted that if this trend continues, it would impact the City's CIP and proposed LIDs. Mr. Morrow cautioned that it is difficult to put cost estimates on projects with costs escalating like this. Ms. Carter asked if inflation and materials can be estimated when developing estimates for LIDs. Mr. Morrow replied that detailed cost estimates are provided using the best information available and that information can be figured into the costs. He pointed out that it is better to reduce the cost than to increase it at a later time. It was requested that this information be shared with the entire council at a future meeting. Discussion only. C. Tukwila International Boulevard Phases 2 and 3 Construction Cost Increases vs. Budget Mr. Morrow conveyed that the scope of work on the Tukwila International Blvd, Phases 2 and 3, had to be reduced because of funding and increased construction costs. Mr. Tischmak reviewed the funding of this project. The options to bring this project within budget were: eliminate undergrounding of utilities; eliminate some proposed improvements within DOT limited access area at the north end of the project; and redesign some retaining walls from cast -in -place to a less expensive wall type. Mr. Tischmak reviewed the location of the sidewalk and indicated that there is not much pedestrian traffic north of Homeland Security but noted that there would be an 8 foot asphalt shoulder. So, the sidewalk will stop at that new intersection. He highlighted the changes in the type of retaining wall to be installed. Mr. Duffle noted that others are asked to underground utilities and yet the City isn't doing that. Mr. Morrow conveyed it was due to budget restraints. The City has granted waivers due to prohibitive costs of undergrounding. Ms. Carter noted that this is also zoned an industrial area. Ms. Carter asked if decorated blocks would be used on the retaining wall. Mr. Morrow related that a decorative finish would be used. Unanimous approval. Move to Committee of the Whole and then to regular council.