Rec Center: $58.3 Million

After the design preference was settled back in July, the costing out of the Rec Center project has been able to proceed with more certainty.  As eagle-eyed observer Lorne has noted on that July post, the new numbers going to Council are sizable--more sizable than expected just a couple of years ago.  The parameters from the Staff Report are:

The project hard costs include local prevailing wage construction costs based on a design-bid-build procurement process with competitive bidding for all sub-trades of the construction work, general contractor’s job site management costs, general contractor’s insurance and bonding costs, and general contractor’s profit. The project soft costs include allowances for engineering and design fees, construction management, permit fees, inspections, and testing. The project contingency allowance is calculated at 10% of the project hard cost and 5% of the project soft cost, and the escalation allowance is calculated at 5% per annum on the project hard cost estimated to the midpoint of construction. Construction is anticipated to be January 2020 to December 2022.

I'm having trouble copying and pasting the chart from the Staff Report, so here are the totals by line item using the parameters above, i.e. all in with contingencies and escalations and rounded off to the nearest $100K:

Playground, Multi-court, Picnic Area            $2.4 million

Building, Associated Sitework, Parking        $49.9 million

Furniture, Equipment, Technology                $2 million

Everything Else                                            $4 million

                                                                   -------------

Total                                                            $58.3 million

Many thanks to Lorne for spotting this in a timely fashion.  We'll have to wait and see if there is any value engineering to be done.  In the meantime, here is the financing plan

In November 2017, the voters of Burlingame approved Measure I, a ¼ cent sales tax measure that will generate an estimated $1.75 million to $2 million annually. At the January 27, 2018 goal- setting session, the City Council discussed the City Manager’s recommended expenditure plan for the Measure I funds, which included an annual pledge of $1 million toward debt service on the issuance of lease revenue bonds. The City Council approved the recommendation on February 20, 2018. An additional $1 million annual General Fund transfer was approved in the 2018-19 fiscal year budget, also intended to fund the debt service, to allow for a lease revenue bond issuance of approximately $30 million for the Community Center project.

Comments

[hollyroller@gmail.com]

How about putting up an Opaque 10 foot high Fence around the "East" side of Washington Park for "Glamping" to rest our Peninsula Medical Hero's who can not go home to their Families.
Trees, Grass, Good Rest, before our Medical Hero's have to go back to work?
Make Washington Park Special.
Give thanks to the people who need it the most... Before they start to Give Up.
Do it TODAY!

[Joe]

I did not realize until now that the $58 million price tag for the new Rec Center did not include solar panels. But in his DJ column, Mark Simon is relaying that:

BACON IS BACK: Federal budget earmarks, dismissed by congressional Republicans a decade ago, are back, now that Democrats are in charge, and Peninsula representatives Jackie Speier and Anna Eshoo have not stood idly by.

Speier has requested a fairly modest $4.9 million for projects from East Palo Alto to Brisbane, including a sewer project in Millbrae, solar panels on the roof of the Burlingame community center, repairs to the Pacifica Pier and affordable housing renovations in Brisbane.

https://bit.ly/2QjXWap

Long time locals will recall when Jackie opposed earmarks and even put a long-time critic in place to watch them from our district:

"Transparency overall represents a shift in power," Harper says, praising experiments like done by new Congresswoman Jackie Speier. Speier put together a citizen's oversight panel that would review and sign off on earmark requests, then installed earmark critic Stanford professor Lawrence Lessig as the chair. ("Earmarks are a cancer," Lessig has written. "They feed the system of corruption that is the way Washington works. They are the cornerstone of a system feeding the worst of the lobbying mafia.")

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/07/crowdsourcing-government-earmark-requests/

One would think that with $58 million to work with we could fund our own panels, but I guess not.

[Paloma Ave]

In the latest Burlingame Newsletter, I see our new Community Center has received an award, "Community Center Wins All-Electric Award!"

I am curious as to what form of energy will power the recently installed back-up generator?

Oh, you mean that doesn't count?