For discussion PWSC(97-98)35
on 4 June 1997
ITEM FOR PUBLIC WORKS SUBCOMMITTEE OF FINANCE COMMITTEE
HEAD 703 - BUILDINGS
Air and Sea Communications - Port Works
47AP - Improvements to Government Dockyard - remaining works
Members are invited to recommend to Finance Committee the upgrading of 47AP to Category A at an estimated cost of $214.2 million in money-of-the-day prices for the proposed remaining improvements to the Government Dockyard.
PROBLEM
The present repair and maintenance facilities for the government fleet at the Government Dockyard (GDY) on Stonecutters Island are inadequate. We need to provide all weather dry berthing facilities, proper workshops and office accommodation in the GDY.
PROPOSAL
2. The Director of Architectural Services (D Arch S), with the support of the Secretary for Economic Services and the Director of Marine (D of M), proposes to upgrade 47AP to Category A at an estimated cost of $214.2 million in money-of-the-day (MOD) prices for the provision of covered bays for the dry berth, proper workshops and office accommodation at the GDY.
PROJECT SCOPE AND NATURE
3. The scope of the proposed improvement works comprises -
- the provision of four numbers covered berthing of 20 metres clear height for repairing large boats and six numbers covered berthing of 12 metres clear height for repairing small boats;
- the construction of a grit-blasting and painting shed and a steel fabrication shed; and
- the construction of proper office accommodation and workshops for the on-site liaison staff of the Marine Police.
JUSTIFICATION
4. The present facilities at the GDY at Stonecutters Island are inadequate to meet the increasing demands of a modern and expanding government fleet. We have completed the first two phases of improvement works to the new GDY under based a phased improvement programme1. We now need to proceed with the remaining phases of the GDY improvement works so as to enhance efficiency of the repair and maintenance works and to meet the needs of the government fleet.
1 In June 1993, Finance Committee (FC) approved the upgrading of phase 1 of 47AP to Category A as 48AP at an estimated cost of $ 125 million in money-of-the-day (MOD) prices. FC approved the upgrading of phase 2 of 47AP to Category A as 57AP at an estimated cost of $25.5 million in MOD prices in June 1994. 48AP and 57AP were completed in April 1995 and May 1996 respectively. The remaining works, phase 3 and phase 4 of the GDY development, will be carried out under 47AP and 62KA respectively.
5. The new GDY does not have all weather dry berthing facilities at presentproper office accommodation for liaison personnel of the Marine Police. This affects the quality and efficiency of the services rendered as well as the overall availability and reliability of government vessels. In addition, we need to improve the existing facilities by the construction of a grit-blasting and painting shed, and a steel fabrication shed. We also need to provide proper office accommodation for the on-site liaison personnel of the Marine Police who are currently accommodated in two pontoons located on shore.
6. The construction of covered bays for the dry berth will enable us to carry out repair and painting works on ship hulls under all weathers which will significantly improve the efficiency and turn-around time of the repair works. The construction of a grit-blasting and painting shed is essential to preserve ship hulls and mooring buoys properly which would minimise the need for costly replacement of steel plates on the hulls and buoys. The construction of a steel fabrication shed will enable us to carry out steel work more efficiently and systematically under reduced fire hazard conditions. The construction of proper office accommodation for the on-site staff of the Marine Police is needed to improve the unsatisfactory conditions in which they are accommodated at present as well as to facilitate their work with the maintenance staff in the GDY.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
7. We estimate the capital cost of the project to be $214.2 million in MOD prices (see paragraph 8 below), made up as follows -
|
$ million
|
|
|---|
|
(a) Piling
|
20.7
|
|
|
(b) Building
|
85.6
|
|
|
(c) Building services
|
28.3
|
|
|
(d) Drainage and external works
|
2.0
|
|
|
(e) Furniture and equipment
|
10.0
|
|
|
(f) Consultants fees
|
9.3
|
|
|
(g) Contingencies
|
15.0
_____
|
|
Sub-total
|
170.9
|
(at December
1996 prices)
|
|
(h) Inflation allowance
|
43.3
_____
|
|
Total
|
214.2
_____
|
(in MOD prices) |
A breakdown by man months of the estimate for consultants fees is at the Enclosure.
8. Subject to approval, we will phase the expenditure as follows -
|
Year
|
$ million
(Dec 1996)
|
Price
adjustment
factor
|
$ million
(MOD)
|
|---|
|
1997 - 98
|
2.6
|
1.06750
|
2.8 |
|
1998 - 99
|
68.8
|
1.16358
|
80.0 |
|
1999 - 2000
|
66.9
|
1.26830
|
84.9 |
|
2000 - 01
|
21.2
|
1.38244
|
29.3 |
|
2001 - 02
|
11.4
_____
|
1.50686
|
17.2
_____
|
|
170.9
_____
|
|
214.2
_____
|
9. We have derived the MOD estimates on the basis of the Governments forecast of trend labour and construction prices for the period 1997 to 2002. We will tender the works under a fixed price lump-sum contract because we can clearly define the scope of works in advance, leaving little room for uncertainty.
10. We estimate the additional annually recurrent expenditure of the project to be $1.9 million.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
11. No public consultation has been conducted asas the proposed project mainly consists ingof in-situ improvement works within the boundaries of the GDY which would not affect the public at largethe .
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
12. The Director of Environmental Protection conducted an Environmental Review in April 1997 and concluded that the potential for the project to create adverse impacts on the environment would be limitedcarried out in the open, there will not be any adverse environmental impact. . Therefore, no Environmental Impact Assessment would be required. of Environmental Protection agreed that an Environmental Impact Assessment was not necessary. We will control dust, noise and site run-off nuisances during construction by implementing the recommended pollution control measures in the works contracts.
LAND ACQUISITION
13. The project does not require land acquisition.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
14. To tie in with the construction programme of the Western Harbour Crossing / West Kowloon Expressway, we completed the reprovisioning of the previous GDY at Yau Ma Tei to Stonecutters Island in April 1995 under 366CL 2 "West Kowloon Reclamation, northern area, phase I" on a like-for-like basis.
2 In July 1992, FC approved 366CL at an estimated cost of $530 million in MOD prices to reprovision the GDY at Yau Ma Tei to Stonecutters Island.
15. We first upgraded 47AP to Category B in May 1993. We have completed the phase 1 and phase 2 improvement works to the new GDY under 48AP and 57AP in April 1995 and May 1996 respectively. We engaged consultants at an estimated cost of $4.95 million for carrying out detailed design and preparing tender documents for this remaining phase of the improvement project. We have charged this amount to the block allocation Subhead 3100GX "Project feasibility studies, minor investigation and consultancy fees for items in Category D of the Public Works Programme".
16. A related paper, PWSC(97-98)34, for the upgrading of 62KA, "Provision of permanent facilities to Government Dockyard on Stonecutters Island" to Category A is also submitted for Members approval at this meeting.construction work concurrently with KAfor the GDY such as modification of existing security fencing, guardhouses, workshops and stores; construction of new office accommodation; etc within the GDY We plan to commence the works for 47AP and 62KA in January 1998 for completion in November 1999.
Economic Services Branch
May 1997
(LL227)
Enclosure to PWSC(97-98)35
47AP - Improvements to Government Dockyard - remaining works
Details of Consultants' Fees
Breakdown of estimates for consultants' fees
|
Consultants' staff cost
|
|
Estimated
man
month
|
Average
MPS
salary
point
|
Multiplier
factor
|
Estimated
fee
($million)
|
|---|
|
(I) Architectural discipline
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) Contract administration
|
Professional
Technical
|
13.1
17.7
|
40
16
|
3
3
|
2.17
0.99
____
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-total
|
3.16
|
|
(II) Quantity surveying discipline
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) Contract administration
|
Professional
Technical
|
11.5
12.5
|
40
16
|
3
3
|
1.91
0.70
____
|
|
Sub-total
|
2.61
|
|
|
|
|
(III) Structural engineering discipline
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) Contract administration
|
Professional
Technical
|
6.5
12.5
|
40
16
|
3
3
|
1.08
0.70
____
|
|
Sub-total
|
1.78 |
|
(IV) Building services discipline
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) Contract administration
|
Professional
Technical
|
6.5
12.0
|
40
16
|
3
3
|
1.08
0.67
____
|
|
Sub-total
|
1.75
____
|
|
Total
|
9.30 |
|
Say
|
9.3 |
Notes:
- A multiplier factor of 3 is applied to the average MPS point to arrive at the full staff costs including the consultants overhead and profit, as the staff will be employed in the consultants offices. (At 1.4.96, MPS pt. 40 = $55,390 p.m. and MPS pt. 16 = $18,595 p.m.).
- The figures given above are based on estimates prepared by the Director of Architectural Services. We will only know the actual man months and actual fees when we have selected the consultant.
(LL227)
Last Updated on 16 August 1999
