HomeMy WebLinkAboutproject overview formI. DATE:
NAME
HISTORICAL
DEPARTMENT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
1� PROJECT OVERVIEW FORM
f
co t. ,'
9/21 /04 DISTRICT: 2
OF.PROJI3CT: AJ PLICATJON FOR THE PAN AMERICAN SEAPLANE TERMINAL,
AND STJIIJCTURAL REHABILITATION GRANT
INITIATING
INITIATING
Sarah F atot.(305)
DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Grant Administration
CONTACT PERSON/CONTACT NUMBER: Robert Ruano (305) 410-1532-Grants &
416-1409 Planning & Zoning
C.I.P. DEPARTMENT
RESOLUTION
ADDITIONAL
CONTACT:
NUMBER: CIP/PROJECT NUMBER: 327001
PROJECT NUMBER:
tIFAPm-ie./ I4)
2. BUDGETARY
TOTAL
$1.547.5001,
INFORMATION: Are funds budgeted? I:/YES •NO !lye',
DOLLAR AMOUNT: $ 745.000 (5 Million allocated, 2.75 Million in "series, Approximate balance iS
SOURCE
ACCOUNT
If grant
AMOUNT:
Are matching
Estimated
OF FUNDS: I1DNJ bgnds Historic Preservation Initiatives
CODE(S): CIP # 327001 8395.000
funded, is there a City match requirement? CI YES ❑ NO
S350.0Q0 EXPIRATION DATE.
funds Budgeted? ❑ YES ❑ NO Account Code(s):
Operations and Maintenance Budget
3. SCOPE
Individuals
DESCRIPTION
surge and
OF PROJECT:
/ Departments who provided input: Robert Ruano & Sarah Eaton
OF PROJECT: The prai has two inter -related eirments to safeguard die structure from storm
wind damage, The first element isanisessing damage to structural columns by rcmnvine their concrete
casings_to examine for corrosigfl,nd to.seplace columns subject to failure. Structural engineers will develop
S ,'
replacing the entrance building front with impact resistant glass doors and windows that meet 100-year storm code
speci fteations.
ADA Compliant?
❑ YES ❑ NO ■ N/A
Approved
Approved
Approved
Revisions
Time Approval
by Audit Committee? ® YES 0 NO 0 N/A DATE APPROVED: 8/26/04
by Bond Oversight Board? 0 YES ❑ NO ❑ N/A DATE APPROVED: 9/21/04
by Commission? • YES ❑ NO 0 N/A DATE APPROVED:
to Original Scope? ❑ YES • NO (If YES see Item 5 below)
0 6 months • 12 months Date for next Oversight Board Update:
4. CONCEPTUAL
Has a conceptual
DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
Is conceptual
If not, have
Source(s)
COST ESTIMATE BREAKDOWN
cost estimate been developed based upon the initial established scope? 0 YES ■ NO If yes,
COST:
COST:
estimate within project budget? ❑ YES ] NO
additional funds been identified? ❑ YES ] NO
of additional funds:
Approved
Approved
by Commission? • YES ❑ NO N/A DATE APPROVED:
by Bond Oversight Board? ❑ YES ❑ NO 0 N/A DATE APPROVED:
5. REVISIONS
Individuals
TO ORIGINAL SCOPE
/ Departments who provided input:
Justifications
for change:
Description
of change:
Fiscal Impact
Have additional
Source(s)
■ YES ❑ NO HOW MUCH?
funds been identified? • YES ❑ NO
of additional funds:
Time impact
Approved
Approved
by Commission? 0 YES 0 NO ■ N/A DATE APPROVED;
by Bond Oversight Board? ❑ YES ❑ NO ❑ N/A DATE APPROVED:
6. COMMENTS: Attached is Sarah Entgn'a recommeentlationa (trail) yp LI1 allocations the Historic
Preservation Funds,O14/
APPROVAL,
i.
ATE:"'—B
ND OVE SIGHT ARD
nclosures: Back•Up Materials ® YES ❑ NO