← Back to the list of projects

City of Ann Arbor SSWWEP - Citizens Advisory Committee Coordination — City of Ann Arbor

← Back to messages

FDD Alternative cost estimate - Gravity and External Sump

Posted by Greg Marker on 11 Mar, 2014
Category: Category 1 - SSWWEP Questions and Presentations

Hello,

Through Basecamp and the February 27th Panera meeting the CAC has discussed couple of different alternative FDD options and their variations.  Attached are two cost estimates that document my professional opinion of what two of those options would look like and their preliminarily estimated cost. 

Greg


Comments

Lori Byron on 12 Mar, 2014:

Hi Greg, 

Can you click on the edit option in the upper right corner of this message and then scroll down below the message and check the options to send it to everyone? I think this would be of wide interest. 

Thanks!

Patricia Marten on 12 Mar, 2014:

Greg--Thanks, we did talk about this at Panera and just having sewer line repairs done, thought it would be a very expensive option.

LORI--- please add to Question list.  

I was wondering about the Engineering and contingency - 30% charge.  Is this something that is added to every mandatory FDD also?  I would think, the city (we the tax payers) would pay for the consultants to work out details of plan, but from then on, we would pay the plumbers and city inspectors.  Did the city sign a contract for 30% fee for every ongoing FDD -- as long as the program lasts?  

In my previous question about the number and cost of FDDs... we got the number, but not the cost yet.

Can the city please give us a cost, so far on the FDD program.  Money paid to plumbers and to engineering firms.  The SSO report estimated $80-130 million for the whole program.

On the 1/28/14 FDD-CAC meeting report, it lists:
Bidigare $3,630,982  and
CDM      $2,359,794
Please supply any other costs.............. thanks

Robert Czachorski on 12 Mar, 2014:

Hi Pat.

The 30% contingency that Greg included in his estimates is simply that: an estimation contingency.  It is not a charge, or a contact rate, nor is it implied to correspond to any specific cost in the FDD program. 

When engineers prepare cost estimates, it is customary to estimate the construction costs as a build-up of specific quantifies of materials and multiply those quantities times typical bid rates for those items.  Those unit costs typically reflect the labor and materials of construction.  However, the sum of the construction cost does not represent the "total project cost".  There are several other factors that need to get added to a construction cost estimate to get a total project cost, such as an estimation contingency (or a cushion), fiscal costs in the event the money is bonded, engineering for design and construction management, administration costs to manage the contract, and legal costs for the contract.  

When preparing a cost estimate at this stage, the details of all of these costs are unknown, so it is customary to lump them all together as a bottom-line contingency.  For underground work, a contingency in the range of 30-50% is common. 

This is a good primer on cost estimates, as we will be using a similar format for all of our cost estimates that we prepare for alternatives, as well as the recommendations that Greg makes from his house investigations. 

Hope this helps!

Take care,
Robert

Patricia Marten on 12 Mar, 2014:

Thanks, there is a tremendous amount of technical data to digest.  
I may not comment of every post, but do sit down and read all the messages, each day. So much more discussion then the previous CAC I was on.

Judy Hanway on 13 Mar, 2014:

To all,

Is there a summary somewhere of what was discussed at the Feb. 27 Panera meeting? Not all CAC members were present. 

Kathy Boris on 13 Mar, 2014:

I agree with Judy’s request above. Could we make it the CAC’s policy that
when a subset of the CAC meets, someone will send a few sentences to the
whole group summarizing what was discussed? The summary should include
the date and location of the meeting and the names of those in
attendance.
kb

Jim Osborn on 13 Mar, 2014:

That would be extremely nice. I didn't attend since I thought it was at Wol. Brewing and did not see the change of venue.

Michelle Lovasz on 14 Mar, 2014:

The 30% contingency that Greg included in his estimates is simply that: an estimation contingency.  It is not a charge, or a contact rate, nor is it implied to correspond to any specific cost in the FDD program.

The 30% contingency "charge" that is not a charge is substantial for unknowns.

 "However, the sum of the construction cost does not represent the "total project cost".  There are several other factors that need to get added to a construction cost estimate to get a total project cost, such as an estimation contingency (or a cushion), fiscal costs in the event the money is bonded, engineering for design and construction management, administration costs to manage the contract, and legal costs for the contract. "

Perhaps we could apply this consideration to the homeowners undertaking this event.  They might not "bond" but they might have to finance on an individual level.  They might not need a system-wide-capable engineer to make things work, but they might benefit from a Greg.  They too, might have construction management costs, albeit on a smaller scale.  And administration costs.  And, perhaps, legal costs.

Lori Byron on 24 Mar, 2014:

Earlier in this thread and on another thread, the question was asked: "Can the city please give us a cost, so far on the FDD program? Money paid to plumbers and to engineering firms. The SSO report estimated $80-130 million for the whole program."

[CITY]

As of 2/8/14, the City costs for the City’s FDD program are $20,020,569.40.  Developer Offset Mitigation (DOM) is performed by, and at the expense of, the developer.  The developer covers all of the costs for the mitigation work.   The City does not have record of what these costs have been.    

The single exception was for one project by the University of Michigan, where the University contributed funds to the City to cover the costs of the FDDs for its required offset mitigation.  The contributed amount was $1,405,600.