7a supp
Item No: _____7a_supp________ Date of Meeting: __April 5, 2011__ RCF Construction March 4, 2011 February 1, 2011 RCF Construction CSB Vaulted Ceiling Installation Progress BMF South Ramp Retaining Wall Placement NW Support Building Cladding Installation ORI Forming and tying rebar at Abutment 1 2 Rental Car Facility Program Contract - Status Summary Base Contract Revised Additional Costs * Unallocated Billed to date Amount Balance (as of Feb 2011) In review ** Executed Consolidated Rental Car Facility Total Construction Costs $224,837,739 $211,421,525 $214,455 $202,606,715 $8,600,355 $194,465,051 Construction Contingency Summary Non Suspension Contract Changes $5,953,159 $17,031,082 $11,830,698 $8,765,318 ($3,564,934) $6,001,387 Suspension Related Contract Changes $16,800,000 89,202 $8,640,600 $8,070,198 $8,474,182 $13,105,619 Off Site Roads Construction Contract Amount $7,627,485 $7,627,485 $0 $2,467433 Construction Contingency $1,087,000 $134,060 $1,274,344 ($321,404) $100,005 Bus Maintenance Facility Construction Contract Amount $13,086,444 $13,086,444 $0 $185,828 Construction Contingency $1,611,000 $20,400 $0 $1,590,600 $0 NOTE: * updated as of March 9, 2011 ** includes costs in dispute for entitlement or quantum 3 Construction Contingency Trending to Date $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $ 0 o, 6) > 0; o o o o N, N, o 00 go o o o o m x m w '0 '0 '0 o'\\ o"'\ o' ~9\ '4') 6"\ o"\ o"\ -Construction Contingency Budget Executed Suspension + Non-Suspension Change Orders Suspension Change Orders Total Executed Change Orders + In Review 4 Consolidated Rental Car Facility Program Costs as of 3/14/2011 Project 6/30/09 2/2/10 Approved Pending Remaining Expended to Forecast to Budget Authorization Transfers/ Transfers/ Contingency Date complete Trends Trends RCF $350,772,000 $350,772,000 $17,405,918 $12,252,900 $13,105,619 $272,291,136 $350,772,000 (1) BMF $28,282,000 $28,282,000 ($1,900,000) $20,400 $1,590,600 $4,313,841 $26,382,000 ORI $19,542,000 $19,542,000 ($1,954,656) $134,060 $648,596 $6,476,473 $17,203,000 (2) (2) MTI $3,383,000 $583,746 $0 $0 $338,300 $160,247 $3,383,000 Buses $17,327,000 $16,000,000 ($4,911,269) $0 $219,897 $212 $12,415,731 Unallocated $0 $0 $9,070,269 ($333,000) $8,737,269 $0 $0 Contingency (1) Total $419,306,000 $415,179,746 $17,710,262 $12,074,360 $24,640,281 $283,241,909 $410,155,731 (1) Pending transfer will augment budget (2) Pending transfer includes $970,000 requested in Commission memo. Once approved, transfer will augment contingency and budget. 5 SEATTLE-TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CFC REVENUE FORECAST TO ACTUAL COMPARISON UPDATED 3/1/11 $147. 5 eumuwveeewsuues AS OF SEP 2012 ,X RICONDO FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS ,' $146.6 M x 5142.5 5137. 5 $132. 5 5127.5 MILLIONS 5122. 5 IN $117. 5 REVENUES $112. 5 CFC $107. 5 $102. 5 $97.5 $92.5 $87.5 582.5 Jan 10 --K- FORECAST llSeriesZ 837 91.2 | 93.9 | 96.4 | 98.7 103.9 | 105.5 | 107.0| Notes: The forecast is from the Ricondo Feasibility Analysis which was the basis for the RCF bond issuance No interest proceeds are reected in actuals shown above 66 Rental Car Facility Funding Plan Update 7 Background 2009 funding plan for the Consolidated Rental Car Facility included use of variable rate debt Initially in the form of a line of credit up to $100 million to be replaced with variable rate bonds in the future Line of credit expires this year Currently no outstanding balance 8 Estimated Project* Funding July 2009 Sources of Funding - July 2009 ($mil.) non-CFC funded costs 12 CFC cash 69 tax-exempt bonds 19 taxable bonds 248 future variable rate debt 51 future Airport deferred interest loan 20 TOTAL 419 * Excludes bond related costs 9 Line of Credit can be replaced by Commercial Paper (CP) Port's current program has capacity no additional bond issue needed Program totals $250 million Flexible draws - as needed, no over-funding Consistent with original plan to include a portion of variable rate debt Lower interest rates Flexible re-payment Can be converted to a longer-term solution when appropriate 10 Status of the Port's CP Program CP Program ($ mil.) Column1 Bank of America Letter of Credit 100 Bayerische Landesbank Letter/line 150 TOTAL 250 Projected Uses ($ mil.) Current outstanding 42 Liquidity 50 Rental Car 51 TOTAL 143 11 Alternatives Issue new variable rate bonds Additional costs and debt management No benefits compared to CP Issue fixed rate bonds No variable rate risk Higher cost Risk of over-issuing 12 Next Steps Cancel Line of Credit Use CP as needed to complete the project Report to Commission on the final funding plan Based on final project costs Reflecting updated CFC forecast 13 Walker Parking Consulting Contract Original Solicitation and Selection competitive. Original Contract Method: Award base ($100k) and amend (current total $31.5m) as work progressed. Project History was multiple stops, starts and changes over 10 years. Rules changes include a new State law, two Commission Resolutions and two Port Policies. Actions were each consistent with then current requirements as understood at the time. Procedural details would be different today, contract method may change or not. 14 Service Agreement Rules Changes Resolution 3181 as amended by the Commission in November of 1994 and Policy PUR-2 dictated requirements for Professional Services Agreements. Senate Bill 3274 in June 2008 clarified limits on amendments and required staff to inform Commission when contract value grew by 50%. Resolution 3605 in August of 2008 replaced Resolution 3181, restricted adding new scope to contracts and required notifying the Commission if amendment to a contract grew value by 50% of the original contract value. CPO-1 in January 2009 replaced PUR-2, implemented the service agreement provisions of 3605 and defined the project-specific service- directive type consulting contract. Amended Resolution 3605 in November of 2009, added a requirement to specifically request Commission authorization for any amendment to a Professional Services Agreement over $300,000. CPO-6 in January 2010 states Port procedures for competition waivers. 15 Legend Procurement procedures in place Walker Parking Contract Authorizations RCF Rental Car Facility History ORI Off-Site Roadway Improvements BMF Bus Maintenance Facility RCI Rental Car Improvements Cumulative Approach If Done Today (RCW 53.19.060 & Amend No. Date Amount Authorization or Purpose Project Amended 3605) Obligation Authorization 11/1/94 Resolution 3181 Amended Updated 3181 & PU-2 Authorization 3/22/01 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Program Schematic Development Program Service Agreement Base 3/5/04 $100,000 $100,000 Initiate Team, Design Procedures Program Service Directive Authorization 4/22/04 $3,330,000 Rental Car Improvements RCI New Solicitation 1 6/2/04 $50,000 $150,000 Detailed Programming RCI Not in Original Solicitation 2 6/10/04 $50,000 $200,000 Concept Validation RCI Not in Original Solicitation 3 6/17/04 $879,000 $1,079,000 Concept Validation Program Service Directive 4 7/8/04 $436,162 $1,515,162 Finalize PS&E RCI Not in Original Solicitation 5 9/27/04 $61,213 $1,576,375 Construction Support Services RCI Not in Original Solicitation 6 10/15/04 $500,000 $2,076,375 Detailed Programming Program Service Directive Authorization 11/9/04 $18,675,000 $22,175,000 Design RCF, Procure GC/CM Program Amendment & 50% Notification 7 12/29/04 $84,000 $2,160,375 Main Garage Improvements RCI Not in Original Solicitation 8 6/3/05 $300,000 $2,460,375 Shelve Project Program Service Directive 9 12/1/05 $550,000 $3,010,375 Restart Programming, ADPR RCF, ORI Service Directive 10 6/7/06 $750,000 $3,760,375 Restart Concept Re-validation RCF Service Directive 11 12/14/06 $2,249,615 $6,009,990 Schematic Design RCF Service Directive Authorization 2/27/07 $6,460,183 $28,635,183 Additional Design; Pre-Construction Program Amendment & 50% Notification 12 3/14/07 $320,000 $6,329,990 Site Design RCF Service Directive 13 5/8/07 $5,000,000 $11,329,990 Design Development RCF Service Directive 14 6/4/07 $517,659 $11,847,649 Design Development ORI Service Directive 15 9/10/07 $180,062 $12,027,711 Conceptual Design BMF Not in Original Solicitation 16 10/5/07 $6,500,000 $18,527,711 Finalize PS&E RCF Service Directive 17 12/18/07 $422,255 $18,949,966 Schematic Design BMF Not in Original Solicitation 18 1/30/08 $136,644 $19,086,610 Temporary Facilities; ORI Cost Estimate RCF, ORI Service Directive 19 2/21/08 $51,600 $19,138,210 Traffic Signal Design ORI Service Directive 16 Authorization 5/13/08 $3,574,300 $32,209,483 Additional Design; Award GC/CM Program Amendment & 50% Notification Legislation 6/12/08 HB-3274 in effect Port Contracting 20 6/22/08 $200,000 $19,338,210 Construction Support Services RCF Service Directive 21 7/22/08 $1,340,595 $20,678,805 Finalize PS&E ORI Service Directive 22 7/21/08 $5,700,000 $26,378,805 Construction Support Services RCF Service Directive Authorization 8/26/08 Resolution 3605 Replaces 3181 Revamps Past Procedures 23 8/27/08 $104,070 $26,482,875 Purchasing Support Services RCF Service Directive 24 9/25/08 $127,380 $26,610,255 Design Claims Resolution RCF Service Directive 25 10/21/08 $0 $26,610,255 Rate Changes Program Amendment Authorization 11/11/08 $552,000 $32,761,483 Additional Design ORI Amendment Policy 1/31/09 CPO-1 Replaces PUR-2 Service Agreement Procedures 26 4/17/09 $265,172 $26,875,427 Design Modifications; Complete PS&E RCF, ORI Service Directive Authorization 6/30/09 $591,670 $33,353,153 Additional Design ORI, BMF Amendment 27 9/3/09 $6,879 $26,882,306 Revise Small Operator Area RCF Service Directive 28 9/18/09 $275,331 $27,157,637 Design Claims, Additional Design RCF Service Directive Authorization 11/3/09 Resolution 3628 Amends 3605 $300,000 Amendment Limit 29 12/4/09 $111,863 $27,269,500 Additional Design Services ORI Service Directive Authorization 12/15/09 $300,000 $33,653,153 Additional Design ORI Amendment Policy 1/10/10 CPO-6 Competition Waiver Procedure 30 2/9/10 $36,677 $27,306,177 Additional Signal and Lighting Design ORI Service Directive 31 4/14/10 $42,433 $27,348,610 Design Claims Resolution RCF Service Directive Authorization 6/8/10 $4,000,000 $37,653,153 Additional Construction Support RCF Amendment & 50% Notification 32 7/7/10 $3,770,000 $31,118,610 Construction Support Services RCF Service Directive Authorization 1/25/10 $350,000 $38,003,153 Construction Support Services ORI Amendment 17 33 2/3/11 $347,506 $31,466,116 Construction Support Services ORI Service Directive What would we do today? Allowable contract scope is defined by the solicitation. Service-directive contracting is preferred in part because it makes ultimate contract total more visible. Base and amendments contracting still considered when course of project is uncertain. Contract scope limits strictly enforced. Projects and contracting go better when decisions and events don't delay progress. 18 Wayfinding and Signage Issues Consolidated Rental Car Facilities Other Facilities SeaTac's solution Early recognition of signage issues so conducting several Lack of way-finding signs directing passengers to Facility full-sized on-site mock-ups with Industry to test the from airport, especially if multiple terminals exists or RCF adequacy and visibility. Identified sign to in areas of poor across from terminal (no busing). lighting to be back lit. There was a lack of consistency withthe terminology Captured lessons learned from other facilities, so working between other cities airports and facilities. Lack of timely very closely with the Industry on use of common planning and time to make changes. terminology, logo's and branding. Conducting site walk through tours with Industry reviewing Inconsistent sign size, color, location, lighting, directional sign placement and key decision points customers will arrows and font size hard to see/follow which confuses experience within both the RCF and Terminal and between. customers. Lack of timely planning and time to make changes. Must consider driving or walking to the facility or Working closely with the Port's signage department and the terminal(s), bus pick up/drop off, terminal way finding Turner's sub-contractor for consistent sign size, color, and visitors to the facility. location, lighting, directional arrows and font size. The bus identification and busing signage at terminals and Busing Committee developed criteria to make RAC buses RCFs not clear which confuses customers. Closing counters clearly marked for easy identification. Includes brand logos and directing people to bus stops a challenge representing companies in the RCF. Signage for vertical movement confusing. Also, the human Developing dedicated escalator signage to make it easy for factor where passengers simply follow others and end up on the passenger to follow or to re-direct if they make a the wrong floor, though very large clear signage provided. mistake. 19 Activation Recommendation to test our wayfinding and signage After construction is complete and before the facility opens, Port staff will be recruited as pretend customers, given mock "assignments", directed to find their way either to a specific location in the RCF or between the RCF and Terminal and to critique the signage. Mock customer testing will be done in time to allow for signage enhancements, if necessary. Examples of mock "assignments" include: Return vehicle to the RCF, stop to use the restroom before boarding a bus back to the airport. Meeting someone from another flight (1 hour behind yours) in the Central terminal to get something to eat before you both make your way to the Rental Car Bus together. Drop off a friend at the RCF to rent a car that are not traveling from the airport. Disembarking plane from the North satellite, retrieve bags from baggage claim and make your way to the Rental Car Bus. You are renting a car without a reservation. 20
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.