My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
O-2006-2959
LaPorte
>
Legislative Records
>
Ordinances - GR1000-05 Ordinances & Resolutions
>
2000's
>
2006
>
O-2006-2959
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2016 3:39:21 PM
Creation date
5/10/2008 12:38:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Legislative Records
Legislative Type
Ordinance
Date
11/6/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />CITY OF LA PORTE <br />PUBLIC WORKS <br />DEPARTMENT <br /> <br />Memo <br /> <br />To: La Porte Area Water Authority Board <br />From:Steve Gillett, Director of Public Works ~ <br />CC: John Joerns, Interim City Manager <br />Michael Dolby, Finance Director <br />Date: 10/12/2006 <br />Re: LPAWA - Additional Capital Cost Update <br /> <br />I have previously provided reports on the Progress of the expansion and upgrade of <br />the Southeast Water Purification Plant, as well as the cost estimates for the <br />Authority's share of the upgrade (the Authority is not participating in the expansion). I <br />will summarize the history of the cost estimate to the Authority, and then report on the <br />recent progress made by the Co-Participants in reducing the scope and cost of the <br />Project. <br /> <br />The City of Houston originally informed the Authority of its estimated cost totaling <br />$669,059 in December 2002. This cost was upgraded to $742,003 in March 2003, <br />$784,756 in October 2003 and $833,181 in January 2004. In March 2004 the <br />Authority's cost estimated was $904,800, and was expected to increase to over <br />$1,000,000 by the time design was complete and bids issued. Co-Participants <br />began questioning Houston on individual cost elements of the Project, and after <br />several months, Houston supplied information on major elements of the Project. It <br />quickly became apparent that several components that were previously presented as <br />regulatory requirements were in fact Houston's estimate of future regulatory <br />requirements, some as far as 10 years in the future. Additionally, it appeared that <br />some security improvements were excessive for threat levels, and the Co- <br />Participants began to demand input into the process. <br /> <br />At the February 10, 2005 Co-Participant's monthly meeting, two committees were <br />formed. The Technical Review Committee would review the need for various design <br />elements, and recommend changes and/or reductions in scope. The Financial <br /> <br />. Page 1 <br /> <br />-----~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.