to 2018 and they agreed to adjust their fees to 7 percent that resulted in a 2 passenger seat $.7 million reduction and 3 point plus million dollars over budget the amount we need to reserve for the thirty percent is 71 point plus million dollars we were able to meet are the fta and gives them an update on the budget they raised no observations moving forward and we were able to identify various program savings with the amount of $2.7 million our total needs up to date is 2 hundred plus $.6 million. >> question. >> go ahead. >> obviously bigger than what we saw a couple of weeks ago not

one hundred and $5 million? >> the next slide shows - this slide shows a breakdown it was shown in orange the trade packages we've bid on or negotiated a price one in bolted are - the trade package is the slabl we've shared with you last month the amount is the same and the awning price is the same the middle ceilings we've shared that price last month we sthard are shared this that price was 16.77 and alternate it reduced the price we'll present later on this day and we've shared or

shared this price with you as well as the signage and graphics the curtain walls we negotiated a price the price we showed you last was $50 million but that price included the metal covers the 3 items we negotiated the curtain walls for 59 point plus million dollars and the middle covers that scope as we moved from the glass curtain walls the contractors choose one the intraushgz by us prep we've saving $7.2 million we have that directly with one of the substances there network and the overhead are the same as green before we opened the rooftop bids the lottery was that $3 million and that took

place since last meeting the rooftop part as you recall we were innovative in march and april this pre-qualified bidder only one remaining and we extended the bid to june 30th we offered $50,000 to the second and thirds lowest bidders if their price was lower we received 3 bids the person that was the acceptance lowest bidder so the previous received was that million dollars one for 37 and one for 44.5 in theory we've saved $4 million if you compare the second and first bid so that breakdown shows you a need of $33 million plus to award those packages.

>> so i'm not sure i follow all that. >> so the glass curtain walls represents $10 million of the thai million dollars increase from the last time what are the other elements. >> the glass floors and the walls and covers are $50 million when we presented to you last month. >> the 49 for 6 and a half so that's part find increase then the rooftop park was soon to be 6 point plus million dollars that also 2rb9d to the

>> czechs i'm not sure it does by. >> the park and glass curtain wall package is now the packages went from 27 to 40, to 7575. >> i should be more clear so the glass curtain wall was one item we assumed a vail of $350 million it is $7906 million that is 10 millions for the glass floor and other maims for amounts for the covers that's part of the increase the glass part came in $5924 million i my apologies i should be more

clear. >> okay. >> with that, i'm going to turn it over to steve from web core to talk about the trade packages the top slab the 7.6 the interior and the glass curtain walls. >> good morning steve humphrey's with the web core at last months board meeting i presented on two of those bid packages t go the slabs and the glass rail and joints this particular package is scheduled for presentation to the board for award in september but i'll recap where we are today we received bids on may 7th the budget was $9.13 million for the t go estimate was the lowest

bids was 2 point i6r million dollars we have 3 bids one the $26.8 million we've continued to look for reasons for the differences in the bid amount and price we've identified scope that was added to or shifted to it $5 million i'll recap that on the next slide and identified the unit price for the extension price we were low in our estimateovided in the project the design a $4 million difference and other facts and circumstances of $5 million that we really can only identify as labor prosperity between our estimate and what the low bid included the addressed scope of

$5 million includes elevated slabs those are shown in the doktd documents not shown and the polished concrete was a bus tech level to reduce the costs slabs and prefabricated buildings were part and the pads were originally included in the packages and removed at the request of the bidders and added ramps with curved walls were changed in the documents and reinforcing the slabs those add up to $5 million we'll be bringing up this to the board in september we continue to analyze this particular package and we'll update you in september if we are able to identify any other differences between our estimate and the bids received at this time. >> the $5 million transfer

don't that have to do with the baby transfer. >> what the transferred scope a theme shouldn't there been an offsetting phasing from the scope was transferred to the package before us today. >> theoretically yes, it would have been embedded in the packages for those estimates that is. >> most of those came out of an estimate. >> some did some didn't. >> the tjpa 6.0 package includes the masonry and drywall and building installation and the deterrent and i enthusiastic ceilings and architecture artwork and cleaning in our analysis we have determined the difference in price is to largely due to the

difference in prices on the masonry and the framing and the other prices appear to be close to budget to our estimate so we focused our efforts on the drywall pricing so the bid date was may 21st 2015 with a c m g s with the low bid to $33.03 bids received with one low bidder. >> as i mentioned the major component for the cost differential are masonry walls metal framing and drywall we've identified the access platform we included that was originally estimated to in a logistics package we didn't include that in the scope that was bid for

this package. >> and just real quick question. >> are were the masonry walls omitted how do we have such a huge difference in the walls. >> in the can say of the masonry walls some additional walls identified there were differences in quantities between the estimated documents and the documents issued for bid that is a relatively small amount of differences we've gone back to look at the prosperity rates and quite frankly we're having a hard time looking at the difference between the estimates we've been burger to pinpoint the exact cause of amount so there were quantities added

the ditches is $3 million we did look at the labor productivity the masonry and dry wail and determined we used aggressive costs for the drywall and in talking with the bidders they view it lower as a variety of reasons a difference of $4.5 million we realize we didn't include costs for the schwartz for the drywall we believe is $4.8 million and there's again other scopes shifted around in the different packages from other trade packages that the for $2.5 million that altogether is 11.8 the 8 point one over range we've been able to identify at this point this is as close as we're going to get.

>> monarchy to t g8.11 glass curtains this is a package that was ordinances for design it is two part award the design was awarded earlier this year and we're receiving prices from the design build ground floor for the construction part this is not all but most of the systems in the project so again the design was bid out police chief and awarded in february of this year with the ground floor being the low bidders and one of the prices for low bridge so we moved into design with crown and meet with the design team to work through the detailing and systems we're at a price proposal of $79 million compared to another

estimate and the systems again are if he tell me that designed in price we have the pricing for the job including labor all the materials quotes and equipment and have reviewed that in detail on the next slide is the breakdown of the direct costs with ground floors overhead with the negotiation did fee they bid the design was 18 percent in negotiation they agreed to reduce the cost to 13 percent it went from 25 to thirty there was an original reduction in price for the early pay retention and other scopes to reduce the cost of that package to get down to the $59 million some of the alleged items in trying to understand the

difference between ground floors price and our estimate at the retail areas that are pop outs in the design were originally scheduled to be temporary partitioned and in reviewing the engineering required for the blast ref resist curtain wall it is difficult to install those later there are large embeds and specific engineering into the systems it will be difficult for whoever the contractor it build out the space to install those small areas one at a time and comply with the criteria so that is an added cost of $2.9 million that is worth it to what have to be done later it is more efficient now.

>> the design loading for the curtain wall when we priced the w-2 system which is the system around the retail areas we had an assumption we would be able to use an off shelf system and comply with the blast resistance and working through the details with ground core this is determined not to building feasible so there is an added cost we learned over the course of the design the there was a lot of design with the wall and understanding what the structure can handsome and in working through that there had to be large embedded into the curb and embedded in the be upper level they're larger than the anticipation and it was greater than anticipated to handle the

design for the curtain wall systems labor productivity i think we this were you a bit optimistic for the systems in reviewing the ground core the fact they have to staff the project with a large crew there assuming a lower productivity rate than estimated because of the fact we're late in procuring the system and have to lock in the carriers there's a premium to be paid and lack 6 reduced expedition the curtain wall manufacture are busy with a minimum of 16 months out to procure the material and again, we have procurement times built into to meet the schedule and there's been glasses lax of 20

percent last year that accounted for a percentage of it and with that are there any other questions. >> i guess the first one on the interiors and finishes your memo says there are 55 different wall types of of partitioned i am wondering in a designer can speak to 45 different wall types of from a construction ability stand out how you avoided that during the construction go review. >> i'm randy building is a unique building i'm sure you're aware of there's a great variety of conditions throughout the building it is no a typical office building because you know maybe 10 or 20

different types of partitioned our floor to floor height averages 24 feet quite at all the rereinforcing the walls and some fire conditions to be met we're designed the building to say a maintenance friendly as possible and reinforcing some of the walls with steel plates with glass high impact which i said wall boards to keep the maintenance moving through the back areas of the building inspection and the pedestrian moving through the front areas of the building don't damage the walls they never look as good as at the start depending on the location i'm sure you're aware of it a big building and all the conditions we have we tried optimize the specific walls to the locations and you know that

is how we arrived at the larger number of wall types of we were doing it for the long term for the building as well as the efficiency in constricting that based on the floor heights and so forth. >> during the construction ability review did that arrive at an impact. >> to be honest i don't know if this was raised we've have's a lot of discussions about issues such as a this and honestly can't tell you if we talked about this this is a unique building is unlike the other buildings around the area has a unique requirement and i think at the end of the day that's largely why we're seeing a difference in price between what we estimated and the bidders that bit the project

>> i agree with steve we did look at this throughout the economics the right way to do things and as you sit here now e designing the building and i don't remember that was brought up as a specific where we ought to reduce the number of wall types it didn't occur. >> okay. next question it may apply to all 3 in our note on this topping slabs you say that our estimate was based on a hundred percent of documents in may 2013 but the final bid documents seems like we're ready two years later april of 2014 and you seem to be suggesting a significant

difference between the hundred percent design documents and whatever the final bid documents were can you speak i guess why did it take two years and why big differences and the hundred percent construction documents were issued to the building inspection issued to the various stakeholders in the project work went through a careful analysis various groups and individuals as to how thing were designed and why they were designed that way that was a lot of during that period of time of time bidding packages and questions from the bidders and questions from various contractor in corresponding those issues in satisfying the needs of the puc to make sure their equipment fit within the rooms that we had and

then to re-evaluate their equipment the building inspection in their final analysis required an additional tower to be added interests not one specific thing that happened a variety of issues during the process and the commenting and review process in incorporating those documents and changes into 9 documents it just took a while to get through that i'll say the set that was issued the a s i took the information and updated it contractors their estimates have been based web coerce estimates and our e commissioners, on that motion estimates were bans the hundred percent documents so those changes that occurred during the process just caused you know the changes in the

costs and the kwntsz we see i don't know if you have any more to add to that. >> no, i really don't from our standpoint we try to quantify the differences why the changes are made i can't elaborate further. >> okay. so it appears that there are because of details we need not hit itself higher point in thees causation but a bunch of scope increases or shifts because work was being done in a different sequence and anticipated there are numerous mratz there and an ability to court reporter the equipment and it turns into million dollars dollars so the details in getting the program finalized it

got us into a higher costs added to the work because of the changes in subsequence in understanding your documents; is that correct. >> not so much changes in subsequence we need those contractor on board to court reporter with we're blocking out slabs for the curtain wall system and starting fire proofing soon and need the parish contractor on board to we would clips to steal beams and things like that before we fire proof not to have come back costs later we really are at a critical stage where if we don't award those contract we'll have significant costs additional delays we're not going to be

able to do that effectively going forward. >> because of that we have thoughts for the patching of fire work one half a million dollars and installed out of sequence one million dollars i'm not suggesting we shouldn't be do doing that but a compounding of impacts of getting the designs for the work the contractors on board. >> we bid the bandage as soon as we felt we had the completed set of documents the alternative would w have been likely change orders speaks to the importance of getting those people on board now it didn't get cheaper as we move forward. >> and then on the glazing it is $3.8 million associated with

the design guidance criteria loads does it over and above a more typical blast design so if we want or went to a more typical blast design do we knock 8 point plus million dollars. >> typically we would but not with the design for the project. >> and in light of not having the money to build the project at it moment should we revisit. >> i'll ask my colleague and their recommendation on the blast balance design comes through this guideline criteria to ankle a change 24 this is the board making the will direct change i couldn't recommend my view is public safety first and

$3.9 million is if you're going to save one life denice will explain. >> i'm denise the guidelines is based on a level 4 facility a high value go target the criteria that goes into the criteria i'll explain in a minute are buildings greater than hundred and 50 thousand square feet with more than 4 hundred and 50 employees in house at any given time the high-level of public assess those are gsa standards we use the federal standards to protect life in those facilities there are no private sector or public standards so we rely heavy on the gsa standards for them this particular building is a high value asset a high value

target as a transmitted center especially in phase two design based introduce threat for if building was established to protect the building from blast which does occur there are historical facts that support that that is why those standards are put in place true and accurate factor is the balanced design which is if there are a blast event the mechanism that hold the glass in place will fail in a particular manner so it will not have as many fatalities or injuries we have caused the glazing to be more expensive it is a standard way we protect life in a building of this nature very unique building

so i would not recommend that i relax that rp a the guidance criteria further i've spoken with 3 blast companies that don't blasts throughout but itself that are very highly regarded across the industry stone consulting and wide linger and blast none of them would recommend that the design guidance criteria be removed from a facility of that nature. >> i was urban aware we had that choice to reinvite in your opinion we don't but from a design standpoint is there something that - because i think getting into this high security post 9/11 was a big mistake i