A320 EOW
Jun 6, 02, 10:03 am
I like the part about "Fall" ending in December. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/business/3411207.htm
The date for the grand opening of the $450 million international terminal has been pushed back to sometime around Christmas, at least two months later than city airport officials had projected late last year.
The latest delay means the project, which would add 13 new gates, has fallen 19 months behind the original 22-month schedule, with the latest problems stemming from design changes required by beefed-up security measures after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"The date's sort of slipping," conceded David N. Siegel, US Airways Group Inc. president and chief executive officer, last week during an interview about the challenges facing Philadelphia International Airport. Financially struggling US Airways is the project developer, the result of a financing deal with the city in an attempt to speed up the construction.
Contractors working on the terminal project, which began in 1999, say not all the delays are security-related. They complain that incomplete designs have forced parts of the project to be put on hold until the design phase was finished, leading to higher costs.
"You can't expect the contractors to do the project later for the same price they quoted to you two years earlier," said Edward Z. Zaucha, chief executive officer of APG-America Inc. His Glassboro company is a subcontractor installing the glass on the terminal's exterior.
Such conflicts over construction culminated last week with US Airways' firing of a major electrical contractor, Williard Inc., of Jenkintown, which was hired to do $50 million worth of work at the terminal. It was unclear why the contract was terminated.
Whatever the cause of the delays, the result is ballooning costs related to changes to the original design of the 800,000-square-foot terminal. The biggest costs are in construction changes which, totaling $46 million so far, account for 16 percent of the construction price tag that was initially proposed, according to the City Controller's Office.
"It just seems like it's a never-ending pit," said City Councilman James F. Kenney, a critic of the project. "At some point in time, someone ought to be held accountable for what's going on down there."
The international terminal is part of the airport's $631 million expansion, to build new terminals. None of the work is being financed with local tax dollars.
Rather, under the special financing deal with US Airways, the project is paid for with bonds sold by the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, a quasi-government agency. In turn, the majority of those bonds will be paid for with a $4.50-per-passenger airport-departure tax on tickets. The rest will come from landing fees, rental rates, and other general airport revenue.
The idea behind the financing arrangement was to skirt the city's procurement rules, allowing the airline to hire contractors without following the city's bidding rules. But as a result of doing so, City Council and the city controller have almost no say-so in directing the project or its expenditures.
The terminal is now about 80 percent built - and both Siegel and city Aviation Director Charles Isdell say its completion depends on how quickly decisions are made by the federal Transportation Security Administration.
To meet requirements of a new aviation law, the airport needed to redesign the terminal to accommodate about 10 explosive-detection machines - each the size of a minivan, but heavier. In some cases, that meant moving built ticket counters.
Despite a federal mandate for all the machines to be installed by Dec. 31, the security agency still has not told the airport when the machine will be delivered or what the guidelines are for their installation.
Meanwhile, delays - security-related and other - are costing contractors.
"When you bid a job, you suppose it will be done in a certain time. When it is not, there are costs," said Roy Cohen, a Philadelphia attorney specializing in construction, who has been hired by about 10 of the contractors.
Cohen said the project's construction delays predated security concerns from the terrorist attacks.
"It's not completely clear," he said, "but many people believe the drawings [needed to guide construction] were not ready for issuance and construction when they were put out to bid."
His concerns are reflected in US Airways construction documents updating the status of work on the new terminal.
A December status report relayed a significant hold-up in the roofing work because of design issues. "Some of the areas in question have no details indicating how the interface between the roof and curtain wall can be closed to maintain a watertight building," the report said.
Another section of that report referred to a request by Glasgow Inc., a site utilities contractor, for "relief due to the labor rate increases incurred as a result of the project schedule extending beyond the original contract completion date."
None of the disputes has resulted in lawsuits, but there have been several claims settlements.
Williard Inc. was one such company. It received claim settlements, a total of $6.4 million on two contracts valued at almost $50 million.
On May 29, Williard was notified by US Airways that it had been "terminated by owner for convenience." Neither US Airways nor Ron Zemnick, Williard's president and chief executive officer, would say why the company was fired.
Said Zemnick: "There are additional cost issues that we have put US Airways on notice for, but we don't know how they plan to address those."
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/business/3411207.htm
The date for the grand opening of the $450 million international terminal has been pushed back to sometime around Christmas, at least two months later than city airport officials had projected late last year.
The latest delay means the project, which would add 13 new gates, has fallen 19 months behind the original 22-month schedule, with the latest problems stemming from design changes required by beefed-up security measures after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"The date's sort of slipping," conceded David N. Siegel, US Airways Group Inc. president and chief executive officer, last week during an interview about the challenges facing Philadelphia International Airport. Financially struggling US Airways is the project developer, the result of a financing deal with the city in an attempt to speed up the construction.
Contractors working on the terminal project, which began in 1999, say not all the delays are security-related. They complain that incomplete designs have forced parts of the project to be put on hold until the design phase was finished, leading to higher costs.
"You can't expect the contractors to do the project later for the same price they quoted to you two years earlier," said Edward Z. Zaucha, chief executive officer of APG-America Inc. His Glassboro company is a subcontractor installing the glass on the terminal's exterior.
Such conflicts over construction culminated last week with US Airways' firing of a major electrical contractor, Williard Inc., of Jenkintown, which was hired to do $50 million worth of work at the terminal. It was unclear why the contract was terminated.
Whatever the cause of the delays, the result is ballooning costs related to changes to the original design of the 800,000-square-foot terminal. The biggest costs are in construction changes which, totaling $46 million so far, account for 16 percent of the construction price tag that was initially proposed, according to the City Controller's Office.
"It just seems like it's a never-ending pit," said City Councilman James F. Kenney, a critic of the project. "At some point in time, someone ought to be held accountable for what's going on down there."
The international terminal is part of the airport's $631 million expansion, to build new terminals. None of the work is being financed with local tax dollars.
Rather, under the special financing deal with US Airways, the project is paid for with bonds sold by the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, a quasi-government agency. In turn, the majority of those bonds will be paid for with a $4.50-per-passenger airport-departure tax on tickets. The rest will come from landing fees, rental rates, and other general airport revenue.
The idea behind the financing arrangement was to skirt the city's procurement rules, allowing the airline to hire contractors without following the city's bidding rules. But as a result of doing so, City Council and the city controller have almost no say-so in directing the project or its expenditures.
The terminal is now about 80 percent built - and both Siegel and city Aviation Director Charles Isdell say its completion depends on how quickly decisions are made by the federal Transportation Security Administration.
To meet requirements of a new aviation law, the airport needed to redesign the terminal to accommodate about 10 explosive-detection machines - each the size of a minivan, but heavier. In some cases, that meant moving built ticket counters.
Despite a federal mandate for all the machines to be installed by Dec. 31, the security agency still has not told the airport when the machine will be delivered or what the guidelines are for their installation.
Meanwhile, delays - security-related and other - are costing contractors.
"When you bid a job, you suppose it will be done in a certain time. When it is not, there are costs," said Roy Cohen, a Philadelphia attorney specializing in construction, who has been hired by about 10 of the contractors.
Cohen said the project's construction delays predated security concerns from the terrorist attacks.
"It's not completely clear," he said, "but many people believe the drawings [needed to guide construction] were not ready for issuance and construction when they were put out to bid."
His concerns are reflected in US Airways construction documents updating the status of work on the new terminal.
A December status report relayed a significant hold-up in the roofing work because of design issues. "Some of the areas in question have no details indicating how the interface between the roof and curtain wall can be closed to maintain a watertight building," the report said.
Another section of that report referred to a request by Glasgow Inc., a site utilities contractor, for "relief due to the labor rate increases incurred as a result of the project schedule extending beyond the original contract completion date."
None of the disputes has resulted in lawsuits, but there have been several claims settlements.
Williard Inc. was one such company. It received claim settlements, a total of $6.4 million on two contracts valued at almost $50 million.
On May 29, Williard was notified by US Airways that it had been "terminated by owner for convenience." Neither US Airways nor Ron Zemnick, Williard's president and chief executive officer, would say why the company was fired.
Said Zemnick: "There are additional cost issues that we have put US Airways on notice for, but we don't know how they plan to address those."