We asked the bidders not part of your bid but for this particular scope would you also have a deduct and this has been one of the other components of that. And in this particular case the bid that we received from shim mick was a credit and with that value we felt it was very appropriate to take that value engineering at that point with that deduct ive alternative so before i leave the slide ill bring you back to the upper left. That ve proposal scope was to give you an if you are on the cable stray bridge you got the pylon in the middle you have got the various cables that go into the main pylon. For design it basically attaches the cables on either side attach right into the pylon itself what shimmick proposed was to put a saddle system that would go through we went through the seismic safety analysis of that and the engineer of record went through this and we were able to accept that one so that was the 500 thousand and the deductive alternative the accent lighting for 450 thousand
Mitigation measures to reduce risk and make the project as attract active as possible. Secondarily most of the bidders thought the design was unique and very custom and designed to an extremely narrow tolerance that was almost un constructible and so you pay for that level of complexity and in the trade packages currently on the street several of the bidders mentioned that the language in the bidder manual gave a perception to the perceived responsibility for the design even though the package is essentially complete and that added risk in their eyes and language in the bidding manual possibly made them feel they had some responsibility for certain elements of previous subcontract ors work and that also added to the risk and potential costs and where you are bidding out trade packages over long periods of time to make sure the project came together also adds risk to the project. In terms of general requirements a few subcontractors mentioned that certain items like site logistics there
Waiting for the drawings to be fully completed to reflect those changes were working with the design team to come up with ways to describe those changes to the bidders in narrative form or sketches so they can clearly understand what they are being asked to bid so if we can bid the packages out now not later ill show you later our schedule. But we want to get the bids out as soon as possible. We have been working closely to streamline the timing of payments to the subcontractors and that has been there was a problem in the past were getting caught back up and working closely to make sure that process runs more smoothly in the future so the payments to the subcontractors are timely were just getting caught up in the last 2 months of progress payments and if we can establish a consistent track record i think that will go a long way to letting the potential bidders know that were serious about getting people paid on time weve had a very successful sbe Outreach Program and continuing with
That deduct ive alternative so before i leave the slide ill bring you back to the upper left. That ve proposal scope was to give you an if you are on the cable stray bridge you got the pylon in the middle you have got the various cables that go into the main pylon. For design it basically attaches the cables on either side attach right into the pylon itself what shimmick proposed was to put a saddle system that would go through we went through the seismic safety analysis of that and the engineer of record went through this and we were able to accept that one so that was the 500 thousand and the deductive alternative the accent lighting for 450 thousand so now this is how we get to the proposed award number. We accepted the deduct alternative of the accent lighting thats how you get to the award number. As part of our analysis we looked at why the number was above the estimate and initial engineers estimates the cable stray is a unique structure its a pylon structure requires specialize
Hundred and 64 though we settled that claim for 18 thousand. The you didnt recall trial was set for june 16th of this year, the Property Owners submitted a proposal for the 2. 75 million plus we had a single date for january 2011 for one mile 75 thousand in january of 2014 we were successful in persuading the court to have the days other than january of 2011 that left the Property Owner with the appraisals for 3. 5 million plus. 2 million seven hundred thousand plus in may 2014 we had an offer of one million plus that was only 10 percent on behalf of the appraisal the final settlement was that. 5 million the Property Owners accepted our offer and i cant emphasize how what a wonderful outcome that was this is a very hard fought case the other thing 26 properties we needed for phase one when we have settled 25. Thats just an unprecedented project for this size and complooekt complexity we have one more property on howard im sure youre aware of we won a 5 day trial the court rejected thei