Travis County Commissioners Court
July 25, 2006
Item 19
Number 19 is to consider and take appropriate action on budget amendments, transfers and discussion items.
>> morning, Commissioner. I don't know if there's any questions on the amendments or transfers portion of it. There was one discussion item and it was to give the court an opportunity to get an update on the gardner-betts project from roger.
>> t-1 is affiliated with 14-b, so I guess dealing with --
>> what's that?
>> the amount of funds that need to be placed.
>> correct.
>> that's the 15,000, that would augment that contract, that is correct.
>> 14-b.
>> correct.
>> good morning. We triedat facility management to supplement any project under budgeted, but any project that we can find some saving. I did find a saving of 459,065 from another project, so -- I think pbo and the lawyer, they agreed that it can be moved to gardner-betts phase b project. Let me tell you a little bit what we did on gardner-betts project. First, the gardner-betts project, we did some value engineerings and we removed some of the possible additional costs, now it's 100% to rebuild -- build a she shell out. So we put it in for bid again and I think the bid's going to open in about two more days. The original construction budget, I handed a spreadsheet to you to -- that you can see where the money is. Original budget was budgeted in fy '05 was 838,825 is the construction budget, but the total budget was 911. Now project a, which is to include the security and the doors, hardwares and now with the installation of those hardwares, doors and security, the cost right now is not the budget anymore. We have a hard number from a -- from isi. This is a manufacturer and installer for the project for 289,000. So what's left on projt is 549780. As you recall when we bid this project one time and the budget -- the low bidder was $1,200,000. And we said this would give us -- we reject the bid with a -- the bid was rejected and was approved and we did the value engineering and now there's a cost estimate, it's on row number 6, is about $885,000. So in order to supplement the shortage in funds, we found a 459,000 in the other project. The other project is this. It's an a.d.a. Renovation for the bank of america buildings, and when we started the negotiations with the landlord, they hired I'll call them ras specialist in a.d.a. Deficiency. They came out with the cost to be about $600,000. When we negotiated the price, the price was $3.3 million. Then the price went down to 2.7, which is a 600,000, they give us 600,000 so we can take care of the a.d.a. Issues. Well, we did some -- we hired an architect, facility management hired an architect to work together on this renovation for the a.d.a. And the correction, and we found out that we can do away with the changing the elevators, which that's a high cost item. There's also the building structure which housed the elevators, so this is a big number. And also we did not do the second floor of the bank of america building because the second floor was done by the landlord because they were renovating the bank and it has to be done, the second floor a.d.a. Correction, in order to get the approval for the bank. So what happened for us is just to do the third floor and the basement -- I'm sorry, the second floor and the basement. So as you can see, I explained on my memo that we have a bid from a contractor for 121,796 to do all the a.d.a. Correction, plus we have $75,000 set aside for the tenant improvement, which is going to be very minimum,, carpet, painting and some walls to create couple more small offices. And we estimated that the costs would be minus -- would be about -- it would be 75,000 plus 121, and then we deducted the amount from the 675 which was budgeted. Now what's left on the project is about 459,965. I'm asking the court to approve the transfer from that fund to phase b project of gardner-betts.
>> help me understand how we thought we may have to do the work with the elevators in the bank building, only to find out later that we did not.
>> we find out because our architect find out that if we don't change the configuration of the building, we don't change the usage of the building, then tdrr, which is the state agency controlling the a.d.a. Corrections and implementation, they say that it will not be a requirement to change the elevator. Because if you remember whrks we bought the bank of america building, after we went through the negotiation and all that stuff, before we signed the lease, we said we're not going to put any detention cell or courtroom over there because those were a requirement from the landlord or the bank of america. And that's how it came about. Now, after six months of doing architectural design, we find out that it's not needed. And just let me remind you, the $600,000 was part of the negotiation that they came out with the a.d.a. Issues that it's going to cost that much. So we took it in part of our negotiation and we're moving forward. I did ask the lawyer on that if I saved some money on this a.d.a. Issues, do I have to reimburse the landlord. No, we don't. So this was an agreed price, 2.7, whenever whatever I could make this project happen, correct a.d.a. Deficiency, whatever saving is ours.
>> what happened on the second floor? We discovered we doesn't dint have to do work that we had funded on the second floor either?
>> I'm sorry, let me take it back. Back: there is a basement, first floor and second floor. On the first floor, the bank of america level, they did their renovation at that particular level, level one. Because the project went beyond $50,000, so a.d.a. They have to look not only about the limit of construction on the first floor, they have to look at all first floor. So they did and then the landlord has to design and renovate the restroom at the first floor and take care of all the a.d.a. Issues at the first floor, so therefore we don't have to do anything on that. It passed by the tdrr the first floor. Now, the second floor and the basement we have a plan and we run it through the tdrr and it has been approved and the only thing right now is we need to execute the correction. In order for me to execute the correction I need to purchase the building first because the 675 we cannot use them to do any correction because they are co fund and this bank of america we are under lease at this time.
>> so we have a plan and the funding.
>> that's correct. And I believe that we're going to close on this project on July 31st. It's a time certain at this time. So after we close on that particular building, then the fund is released for me to do the renovation for a.d.a. And start the ball rolling.
>> was the $600,000 that was refunded from bank of america, was that independent of us having any opinion on what that amount needed to be? I mean, that just seems odd to me that bank of america just said okay, we're going to give you a 600,000-dollar deduction for you to take care of your a.d.a. Only for us to find out that, guess what, we've only got to do 150,000? Legally if somebody is saying, you guys did a bad deal, y'all gave us $600,000 before you really knew whether that was needed --
>> it was a real estate negotiation and we said that we would take on that obligation, we did, and so they gave us a reduction in the price. And after the fact we find out that we don't have do it, well, we made a good deal.
>> I mean, we have to do it.
>> in my house I had an allowance to get the roof fixed and the roof came in cheaper. It's an allowance.
>> I say facility management really went hard with the architect on that and try to find any savings in there and we found it.
>> good deal.
>> I also remember grousing in terms of oh my goodness, if we do this, it could cost as much as 600,000. Thank goodness if didn't have to be as much.
>> and understand the long-term plan that I imagine that roger's been talking to you all for that building, the results in need for that money may have been different depending upon the long-term plan of that building. From what roger has told me, there will never be a need for that a.d.a. -- for those two a.d.a. Needs for that building.
>> and besides that, you remember we are buying this building for the short-term. We're only buying the land, but the building is going to be like -- it's a short-term. Until the need comes for gardner-betts to expand for their detention. So we thought that if we don't have to do it, why do we spend that 459 to do an elevator and after three or four years that building might go away or something.
>> it seems appropriate if we're not going to need it for that particular thing and we don't want to do something needlessly, it it seems we would move it to someplace where we already have a good sense that there's a budget that's going to need it. And they're right across the street from each other.
>> absolutely.
>> I would move approval, thank you. The whole point of us having the discussion is so that we are completely updated as to why we're doing what we're doing. But I would move approval of all the budget transfers, including the discussion item.
>> seconded by Commissioner Daugherty. Any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:34 AM