tv [untitled] May 10, 2012 10:00am-10:30am PDT
is what is going to extend as far asbecause we havet the budget before we excavate. when we bring in the bring in the it structure across the east end, and when we do that structural steel, we will start in the middle of the building and work in both directions so that as we bring the steel across we will be bringing the substructure up in the eastern zone and then be able to continue as they move across it. >> where is the bus terminal? is it in the east or west, zone 1, down two, or what? rex it covers the -- >> it covers the eastern side. the bus back level runs from the zone one of a way to the east end in zone four. >> you think sometime in 2014 we
will start seeing little walls going up? >> by 2014 we should be completing the substructure in zone 1. made in 2014 we will start the steel erection. by the end of 2015, the superstructure should be topping out. the structural steel should be complete. >> thank you. >> and i can work with steve and we can incorporate -- you know, it has been awhile since we have shown the overall schedule. we can incorporate that into the future presentation as well. >> i appreciate that. >> this kind of just shows our overall site, the west end, and zones 1 and two. these -- the excavation is under way. the first cross level being is going in. we are now preparing for the
second level of racing at the far end. the trestle system is -- the installation is beginning. and the purple portion is the buttress construction in progress. here in zone four, we have a couple of images. the current image, we have taken it from the opposite side. where the march image looks from the east end of the facility toward fremont street, the updated photograph is looking from the main center zone three of the transit center toward beale street. you do not necessarily see the progress it and activity there, but we are working on the buttress. the shafts are all constructed below grade and then as we excavate down, we will excavate three those. the other thing that we started
last week, the contractor has started working three of the drilling rigs simultaneously. we had previously been working two, so that may take the production of further. but there is a limited duration on which they will be able to work three rigs simultaneously because of the congestion within the site. eventually, they will have to go back to working two rigs. but they're looking at getting additional incremental progress while they have that flexibility. this shows in green olive be buttressed shaft that have been completed to date. the three yellow ones are those that have are in progress. this week, we are working with three rigs. but you can see that a certain point in time, as the badgers can -- the back risk --
buttressed becomes completed, the three rigs will be able to work simultaneously. and some of our progress photos, the individual in the orange on the right hand image is one of our geode-technical engineers who is on site. he is certifying each shaft has reached bedrock and is completed. he is out there and as the contractor completes each shaft, whether it is evening, early mornings, whenever time of day so that they can begin the concrete floor. -- pur. the central and western zones, we refer to that sound as sometimes zone 3. at its fremont and first street. and then west of first-rate barzun's two and one. -- of fremont street are zones 2 and 1.
all of those teams have gone into the shoring wall. the blue ridge, which is still in the image on the right has now been demobilized and moved off the project site. this area in zone 3, the contractor is now set up, prefabricating the steel structure of the bridge that is going to go in on first street. zones 1 and 2, use the that angle corner bracing and the beginnings of the trestle system coming in from howard street and then coming down to the access of the station. that is going to be topped with 12 by 12 would and timbers, which will be working platform for the cranes that will be operating on top of that system.
and here, you see in zone 1, the contractor is actually now moving down below the first level of bracing to continue excavation and has progressed that to the point where they are starting to install some of the whalers, which are the horizontal steel beams that get well that the -- get well that directed -- directly to the shoring wall of steel. >> those are temporary? >> yes. the contractor has estimated that we have more temporary activation than we will have more -- then we will have permanent steel in the final structure, just to resist the forces. this is an image of the bridge piles going in on first street. this is to support the temporary traffic bridge. they're going down the concrete piles to support the temporary
price -- traffic bridge. they also support the abutments at the excavation, the concrete abutment that to -- that tie into the shoring wall and will support that construction of the bridge. again, some slides of the cds wall project construction, as we just completed at two weeks ago. and the aws work going in on howard street. we will be button in this up next week, so that when data breakers comes through, we do not have any conflicts are hazards. all of the excavation will be back filled and paved. in terms of our budget and commitments to date, all you can see that we have about two hundred $50 million in current commitments, $85 million
incurred to date. and with the packages that we described earlier, that is roughly $80 million more that we will be looking to commit between now and the end of the year with those bids. >> that's current budget mean camp -- mean projected budget at completion? >> yes. >> right now, we're running a little under? >> yes. >> -- >> yes. the phase one project status, this is perhaps more detail than we will try to bring back next month where we can't show you how the work is going to unfold over the course -- we can show you how the work is quite to unfold over the course of the construction. in terms of the bay area labor, we have now over two hundred 80,000 kraft hours worked, 180,000 of that, or 64%, has been bay area local labor.
and you have the regional bank -- breakdown by san francisco, east bay, north bay, and south bay. >> what is "other"? what is that from? other locations, the source of labor. >> that is the non-bay area. the first four lines account for the 180,000 in bay area labor. the other, the non-bay area, a lot of that comes from central valley or sacramento, or areas that we would be considering beyond strictly the bay area. and here, you have the breakdown by the various trades that have been working on the site.
a lot of laborers, and a lot of operating engineers. operating engineers are doing be buttressed construction, as well as cranes and the shoring wall construction, and now the bracing and trestle construction. and the apprentice data by the key, the largest contractor and being there set for the shoring wall construction, and phoenix during the utility relocation work. >> maybe you talk about this at a previous meeting, but why does dnd have such a low percentage of apprentice practice? >>they have between 5% to 9%.
>> i would need to consult with steve and give you a better update next month. i am sorry. >> it would be helpful to not just understand why, but what we are doing to get these out to at least 20% where they are supposed to be. >> absolutely. braques and do we know on the trade by trade on the previous -- >> and do we know on the trade by trade, on the previous like, how this shakes out? are there trades that are drawing more from the outside of the bay area, or is it fairly even? >> the operating engineers is where we are trying more from outside of the bay area. part of that is becko, the buttress subcontractor, they have a core team that they have moved around the country with
their equipment. but also, a total number of operating engineers we have on the job is greater than we would see on a typical project because of the amount of heavy equipment that we have. >> i think there is a slight distance fortunate amount there. -- of heavy equipment that we have. i think there's a slight disproportionate amount there. but we can give you trade by trade both local and non-local. >> thank you. with respect to the recycling efforts, we are doing really great. we have an 81% rate based on tonnage. that means to date, 14,000 t out of 15,000 t of materials have been recycled out of the project. that is a great diversion rate. we have been recycling asphalt, concrete, cardboard, lumber. we are doing really great on the
recycling fraud. and this is all going toward meeting the lead requirements. as a reminder, we are going to get a goal lead on the project. that concludes my report. >> moving on to the next item, which is public comment. i see we have one card. mr. jim patrik. if anyone else would like to speak at public comment, please come up. >> i have two topics to discuss. i recently saw this report that i have a little bit of that just come out in april. -- came out in april. the district improvements. it is the first peek into the notion of the route and how it will play itself out. as i read it, the members -- melarus tax will be up to 5%
of the district. that is very expensive. this is going to put affordable housing at a disadvantage, office tactic -- office tenants leasing at a different -- a disadvantage and others as well. the property values will not quite double, but very close to that. property tax is about 1% and we're going to add another half a percent to the value of the property. this is very expensive. i suggest you need to look at this. item number two, which is of real concern, we might be able to -- we might be building a park that no one can get to, much as a bridge to nowhere. when i say that, there's only one viable entrance to the park. if we budget for more entrances to the park, based on this report i see here, but they will not occur until the next phase. i believe the budgeting items, to get access to the park, and
make a real, a viable entity should be in the construction phase of the park. the timing of the budgeting and the paying for these things is incorrect we need access to the park. we do not have it right now. it needs to be put into the budget, so we can get it. i do not want a park that no one can get to. and we need to control the costs would be melarus district, very expensive. thank you. >> are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? the trend that -- the transit district plan is being heard currently. the initiation began last week, but you can come to the final eir plan of action on the 24th. seeing no other public comment, public comment is now closed. we now live to our consent calendar. can we hear them separately? but we just have a regular
calendar today. item #7 is a presentation of and public hearing for draft fiscal year 2012-13 capital budget in an amount not to exceed $221,000. correct our chief financial officer will report on this item -- >> our chief financial officer report on this item. >> the draft budget will be brought to you next month for final approval. this is just for your final information and for your comment. it is a capital budget, fiscal year budget of $223 million and an operations budget for the temporary terminal for $4.4 million. this is an estimate of the overall baseline budget for the project as a whole. this is our looking at cash flow projections, the estimate of what would be spent in the upcoming fiscal year.
obviously, the large majority of that is for professional and specialized services, 94%, or $210 million, and $159 million or well over half of the budget is anticipated for construction next year. director kim had asked about revenues at the last meeting. on the expenditure side, where there is an estimate of what would be spent next year, it is also an estimate of correlating revenue pain for those expenditures. next month, for instance, we will have an allocation for an mtp grant of $7 million, however, only 10% is included in the next year's fiscal budget. what ever is not spent in the fiscal year remains allocated for future fiscal years. same with the lands. while the block 67 proposal
price was $30 million, only a little over $12 million was included in the fiscal budget for next year because that is what we expect to spend of the $30 million. the rest would remain in a trust account and be invested per hour -- her our investment policy. >> i noticed that we still have $7.5 million to be determined. and i noticed that number drastically increased last year, where it was only $760,000. do you have a lot of confidence that we will get that funding from tciu? and what will be have from the bridge toll, the $73 million that we are in discussion with at the mctc?
there are two grants of $2 million each, roughly. >> i will take the easy one first, the ntt -- allocation of $73 million, it really is just a formality. it was their commitment to us. this board will approve the initial project report and will be brought to the ntc board in june as well. >> is this a flow of $73 million? is it a onetime grant divided up over time? >> it is a broad scope, largely construction base. as we incur the expenses we invoice them and are able to pay the contractors when they reimburse us.
ac transit, because those are state applications, we're not sure on the timing of those. as things become awarded, we move them into the committed revenue section. the revenue to be identified, the reason that is larger this year is that there have been, as i'm sure you are aware, discussions with all of the bay area family agencies regarding high-speed rail funding, etc., and as part of those discussions, the mtc have provided revenues to move forward with the bay area revenue.
mtc is committed to helping us find that funding. i know the -- we will not incur the revenue expenditures -- will not incur the expenditures if the revenues do not come through. perhaps another our timeline issues and potential revenue -- >> i know there are timeline issues and potential revenue questions. i wonder if we have expenditures dependent on next year's fiscal budget on the tower revenue. >> next year as in fiscal year 2013-14, yes. not the current budget we are proving. >> are there any other questions from directors? thank you so much. >> see you next month with that. >> there is no action to be taking. it was a public hearing, though. no members of the public have indicated they want to address that. we can move on.
>> item number 8. >> approving the transit joint powers committee. drugs -- >> this year, in january we started the process of doing out reached to try to recruit members for the cac. the we have reached out to the operating agencies advertise in several community publications, as well as reaching out to members of chambers of commerce and cbo's within the city for applicants. we had originally scheduled that application to run through the end of february, at which time we had 10 new applicants. we made the decision to extend the application time frame through the end of march, and it
read you again some of our outreach, which resulted in additionally -- an additional five applicants. and we are bringing to you today list of applicants. five would be returning candidates, who all have one term of service on the cac. one of them is one of our inaugural members of the cac. the other of four have a single term of service. and we have three new applicants to the cac. i can answer any questions you may have. >> we have a question from director ortiz. >> i see it is not required to put down ethnicity. would you say that it is a very representative -- and i know it is difficult to try to attract
applicants. >> it is a challenge. of the 15 applicants that we received, i believe all of them did indicate their ethnicity. there would be 10 caucasian applicants, three hispanic, one african-american, and one who indicated mixed ethnicity. >> i have some comments. first, thank you for spending the time on the outreach. as director ortiz said, is typical to out reached for these committees. i appreciate the expenditure of time. i was impressed with the applicant, but those that were reappointing -- both those that were reappointing and the new ones. i really liked sandra and her background. another one, pascal, he also has
a planning background. i thought both were great. i did have concerns. i will now be supporting -- not be supporting the standard oil. -- sandra boil. she had a very impressive real- estate and environmental background, but i think we need to find someone who actually works in environmental work, since we have only one position for that seat. but i was happy to see their real applications. i know that these individuals that reapply, they are very active in their districts and neighborhoods and i'm happy to see that they want to continue to serve. i will be supporting applicant seats won, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and eight, but not two. gregg's you bring to mind -- >>
you bring up the point that this is an environmental position and she does not seem to have that background, so how did you select her as an environmentalist? >> the candidates indicate what areas they are engaged in. we do have several people who indicate more than one area. but it is difficult to fit people into all of the slots. in that situation, we were relying on herself -- on her self reporting and trying to find a candidate to fill that slot. id will have one other applicant -- i would have to go back and look at all of them -- who indicated that they had an environmental interest or background.
>> we do not have a duty to fulfill that specific requirement? >> we do have a duty. our bylaws specify 15 individual seats. and in this instance, she indicated to -- she indicated that was an area of interest or competency, and we relied upon that. >> her professional affiliations with usdbc, i think you looked at that. lee tep was also a consideration. she did lift herself as an environmentalist. what she does not have technical, she did mention affiliation. we basically took her at her
word that she is an environmentalist. grex i'm agreeing with jane. but that is fine. -- >> i am agreeing with jane. >> that is fine. >> any other comment from directors? i do not know if we have to do an amendment to the resolution. at this time just to delete sandra boil. and i'm also glad todd williams will be here. >> he is very committed. >> very committed, right. if we can just delete that. it wrecks -- >> motion to amend. it ranks second. -- >> second. >> we will revise the resolution
to remove sandra boiled as one of the applicants and approve the item and come back to you for another candidate for that position. with that, a motion and a second. >>can we get that without opposition? any opposed? >> move approval. >> second. >> now to the resolution as amended. i'm sorry, i want to clarify. we made a motion to amend the resolution, which was approved, and now we're going to vote to approve the amended resolution. >> first and second. any opposed? seeing none, all in favor? ok.