HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-09-049 - Consolidated Maintenance Facility Update ReportREPORT
REPORT TO:
Finance & Corporate Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:
September 14, 2009
SUBMITTED BY:
Pauline Houston, General Manager of Community Services
PREPARED BY:
Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management (ext.
2424)
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
All
DATE OF REPORT: September 8, 2009
REPORT NO.: CSD-09-049
SUBJECT:
CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY (CMF)
PROJECT UPDATE - SEPTEMBER 2009
RECOMMENDATION:
That the scope of the Consolidated Maintenance Facility Project be increased to include
the necessary components to achieve a LEED Silver designation; and,
That Infrastructure and LEED components totalling $14 million as outlined in report CSD-
09-049 be approved, $9.3 million of which to be funded from the approved Federal
Provincial Infrastructure Stimulus program allocation and the balance to be funded from
the proceeds of land sales of surplus properties related to the project; and,
That the following funding adjustments to the Consolidated Maintenance Facility Project
be approved:
$2.1 million allocated from the Business Park Reserve Fund
$1.5 million contribution from each of the Gasworks, Waterworks and Sewer
Enterprises; and further,
That the environmental remediation costs related to the surplus lands to be sold upon
completion of the CMF project be funded through the Brownfield Remediation Program
(TIEG) and the Environmental Remediation Capital Account.
BACKGROUND:
On January 19, 2009, Council received staff report CAO-09-002 which provided a status update
on the CMF project from December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2008. The report included
information on activities related to the project charter, the project vision, a communications plan
and staff engagement in the design of the facility and the development and design of work
processes in the new facility.
ïð ó ï
REPORT:
The report provides a status update on the CMF project from December 31, 2008 to August 31,
2009 in the following areas:
1. Vision for the Consolidated Maintenance Facility
2. Significant Project Scope Changes
Snow Management
Infrastructure Stimulus Funding and LEED Components
Scope deferrals and deletions
3. LEED designation options
4. Revenue and Funding Changes
Battler Yards Operations
Land Sales Projections and Environmental Remediation
Development Charges and Enterprise funding
Future Land Needs
5. Project Budget
6. Project Risk Assessment and Management
7. Schedule Update
8. Managing the Change
9. Transition and Business Continuity Planning
10. Solar Roof
1. Vision for the Consolidated Maintenance Facility
A vision for operations and services to be delivered from the CMF was developed by
staff and presented to Council for information in January 2009. This vision and the
supporting desired key results and work plans provide a framework for planning, action
and decision-making, both within the project itself and for staff in the future as people,
processes and services are integrated at the site. The Vision supports the City’s overall
strategy as well as the organization’s People Plan.
Three Components:Three Components:
WorkplaceWorkplaceWorkplaceEnhancedEnhancedEnhanced
FacilityFacilityFacility
CultureCultureCulture
ServiceServiceService
The new facility will…
Be modernized and physically comfortable.
Allow staff to perform their jobs easier, faster and better.
Contribute to achieving the highest levels of employee safety.
Facilitate the integration and coordination of business processes where practical.
Give staff quick and easy access to equipment, vehicles and supplies.
Take advantage of technology and best practices to improve processes and
service delivery.
ïð ó î
workplace culture
The will ensure staff…
Work together.
Treat each other with respect.
Collaborate and cooperate within and between divisions and work units.
Have fun and enjoy their work environment.
Engage in discussions and decisions on operational and workplace
improvements.
Share a common pride and commitment to the city team.
Value the differences and contributions of individuals and work groups.
Use the same procedures for practices that are common to work areas.
Continuously look to innovate and improve skills, processes and services.
Make personal, organizational, and community health, safety and wellbeing a
priority.
The new facility and workplace culture will support staff in providing enhanced
services to the community by:
Delivering services more efficiently, leading to faster response times and
improved quality.
Meeting and exceeding service and safety standards.
Offering services that are responsive to the changing needs and growth of the
community.
Making a positive difference in the community.
Responsibly using the city’s physical assets (e.g., vehicles, equipment, land,
buildings).
Going the extra mile to serve their customers.
2. Significant Project Scope Changes
On November 27, 2007, Council received staff report CAO-07-052 and passed
resolutions to accept the recommendations contained therein, including:
“That an upset budget limit for the CMF project be set at a range of $46.1M to
$48.2M.”
At that point in time, a potential funding shortfall of $2.2 million (4.5% of total project
budget) was identified. Staff recommended at that point that the potential shortfall may
be mitigated through a variety of approaches, including:
Use of city staff and winter works budget to undertake some site preparation or
o
building renovations;
A reduction in scope of work to fit costs within funding available;
o
Increased Funding from development charges, utilities and capital out of current;
o
and/or
Funding from the Asset Management Reserve Fund generated through
o
additional land sales.
The project budget was based on cost estimates prepared by an independent cost
consultant, A.W. Hooker Associates Ltd., in October 2007 as part of the site selection
process and report completed by the IBI Group for the City of Kitchener.
ïð ó í
Since October 2007, the following work has been done to better define the project scope
and details to ensure that the vision for the facility is achieved while honouring the
original budget limit:
A full complement of consultants has been retained to prepare functional and
detailed layout and servicing details for the building and the site and to better
define the mechanical and electrical requirements.
A detailed space program and schematic drawings of the building and site with
significant input from staff have just been completed to better define the details of
the project. The next step is the preparation of detailed construction drawings.
Two LEED sessions have taken place and options have been provided and
evaluated. A recommendation for LEED designation is contained in this report.
The approach to the construction of the project has been reviewed and a change
has been made to retain a construction management services firm to take on the
role of construction project manager and site superintendent.
A storm water management report and scoped environmental impact
assessment report have been completed for the entire former Goodrich property
resulting in design/construction requirements for the CMF specifically related to
more hard surface to prevent infiltration and careful management of the runoff
from the snow storage area.
The project budget was based on 2008 construction costs. An escalation factor
has been added to allow for construction in 2010.
A cost consultant was engaged to ensure the budget projections for the various
components of the project were consistent, as accurate as possible and all
opportunities to minimize costs were considered.
Snow Management
As a result of the conclusions in the stormwater management report and environmental
impact assessment report noted above, the cost estimate of a snow storage area on the
CMF site increased significantly, such that other alternatives were explored.
Further analysis is underway which includes a collaborative investigation with the Region
and other area municipalities for a more suitable location in closer proximity to the
downtown.
In conjunction with this review, a permanent snow melting depot using natural gas as the
fuel source to reduce annual operating costs is also being explored.
Based on the analysis to date, it has been concluded that the CMF site is not a practical
location for snow management operations. $0.5 million in project funding has been
allocated to fund the final solution, once determined.
Infrastructure Stimulus Funding and LEED Components
Earlier this year, the City received approval for funding under the Federal Provincial
Infrastructure Stimulus Program which would allow for $14 million of optional
infrastructure components and LEED components on the project to proceed (i.e. $9.3
million in Federal/Provincial funding and $4.7 million City funding).
ïð ó ì
These components include: vehicle wash bay, salt storage facility, fuel distribution
equipment, some emergency generators, block heater hookups, enhanced lighting, plus
the LEED silver components outlined below.
Scope Deferrals and Deletions
As part of the exercise to review opportunities to minimize costs, staff reviewed major
components as they related to service provision. Components were identified for
inclusion in design, deferral, reconsideration for inclusion in scope, eliminate or explore
partnership opportunities.
Some examples of these items are:
Item Result Reduction Future
defer
Number of covered except for those $100,000Re-assess over the first 5
external storage required for material years of operation
structures sensitive to the
elements
nd
2 vehicle wash bay Equipment purchase $145,000Re-assess need and
deleted
, infrastructure justification over the first 5
to add will be in place years of operation
Work Stations for Facility is designed and
$160,000Provision to accommodate
future growth space allocated for future growth needs will be
2025 growth, all included in the Capital
workstations are not forecast similar to the City
required day 1 Hall budget
Size of greenhouse Reduce the size of the $233,000
greenhouse to meet
needs
Emergency back up Assessed the critical $500,000
power (100% of the building functions to be
facility versus critical on back up emergency
functions) power
Number and types of Assessed the need & Savings in
vehicles stored priority of vehicles to be M&E
indoors parked indoors/heated. requirements
(i.e. 120 priority 1, 2 & 3
vehicles to 80 priority 1
vehicles)
Size of salt storage Reduce the size of the $300,000
facilitysalt storageto meet
needs
Deleted
Bulk water sales from site $250,000Exploring alternatives and
functionpartnerships
Snow management Removed from CMF $2,000,000Exploring alternatives and
options design once area was partnerships
designated a well head
and environmental
protection requirements
in creased the cost
significantly.
Deleted
Aggregate recycling from CMF site Alternative to retain a large
and storage options design portion of Battler yards for
aggregate recycling
ïð ó ë
3. LEED Designation Options
Introduction
The Consolidated Maintenance Facility project as it was originally formulated and
budgeted (in 2007) envisaged a typical building structure with mechanical & electrical
systems designed to meet Minimum Code Requirements and Program Driven needs.
The City has since engaged design teams (Giffels/IBI – Architecture; Morrison Hershfield
- M&E; MTE – Site Services & Structural). Over the last few months, key stakeholders
from the City and the design teams have conducted joint LEED sessions to explore
opportunities to design the new CMF to a LEED Silver or possibly a LEED Gold
Certification.
Design Options Analysis
The base construction budget includes the key mechanical & electrical design elements
required for a basic Code Compliant Building. Design enhancements, along with costs
required to achieve a LEED Silver and LEED Gold Status are summarized below.
All the design enhancements required to achieve a LEED Silver or LEED Gold Status
have inherent benefits and paybacks that the City will realize. However, not all the
paybacks lend themselves to a ready quantification in monetary units. A number of
benefits associated with a LEED Silver o Gold Design are of a Qualitative Nature;
examples include:
Improved indoor environmental conditions = increased productivity, less
absenteeism, etc.
Improved building system monitoring = increased operating efficiencies, better
scheduled & preventive maintenance programs, etc.
Payback Analysis
Designing the CMF to a LEED Silver or a LEED Gold certification level will impose
additional initial costs. These premium costs (over base case Code Compliant Design)
along with a simple overall project payback period are as follows:
LEED Silver Design:
LEED Silver component examples:
Low Flow Fixtures and Dual Flow Water Closets
Expanded drainage system within shops to support gray water harvesting
Heat Recovery, Geothermal loop tied to heating and cooling systems,
hydronic heating plant with high efficiency condensing boilers
Real time system monitoring
Lighting and Building Systems Controls, Daylight harvesting
Premium Costs: $3,295,000.00 over base budget
Simple Payback: Approximately 5-6 years
LEED Gold Design:
LEED Gold component examples:
Increase grey water capture/harvesting
ïð ó ê
Enhanced Measurement & Verification Strategies for Mechanical & Electrical
Systems
Increased Daylight harvesting (using skylights)
Personal (task lighting) occupancy sensors
A new 1200 kW generator with exhaust gas recovery to increase maximize
geothermal potential
Entire facility on Emergency power
Premium Costs: $2,225,000 over and above the LEED silver budget
Simple Payback: Approximately 6-8 years for some initiatives and >20 years for
some of the major initiatives
Staff recommend that the CMF facility should be designed and constructed to achieve
LEED Silver designation.
4. Revenue and Funding Changes
Battler Yards Operations
The original approved budget was based on the assumption that the aggregate recycling
activity at the Battler Yards location would be scaled back in size and relocated to the
CMF site. The rationale for this conclusion was that by changing the frequency of
crushing from a bi-annual to annual process, less aggregate would need to be stored on
site.
As part of the project planning process, a more detailed analysis of the operation with
input from staff involved in the operation, was undertaken. In terms of the aggregate
recycling operation, it was concluded that this continues to be both a cost effective as
well as environmentally responsible approach to handling of waste concrete and asphalt
from city road construction projects. Based on further analysis of the operation and the
revenue potential of the land sale at both sites, it was concluded that the 4 acres of land
freed up at the CMF site would yield approximately the same net proceeds as the 10
acres of surplus lands at the Battler Yards site, after considering environmental clean up
and undevelopable acreage due to easements and flood plains. Other considerations
taken into account in this analysis include potential impact on the surrounding
neighbourhood of moving this operation to the CMF site, as well as potential for volume
of recycling activities to increase on site. With the accelerated infrastructure program
gearing up, there will be a higher volume of aggregates that we can recycle on site.
There is also an opportunity to explore revenue generating partnerships with Waterloo
and Cambridge for aggregate recycling. The larger site at Battler Yards will give us
more flexibility in the future to address these changes. Land space requirements for this
operation have been reassessed, such that a portion of the property can be sold for
development (1.5 acres). Staff recommend that 10 acres of the Battler Yards location be
retained for aggregate recycling operations.
Land Sales Projections and Environmental Remediation
The land sale projections in the project budget have been reassessed based on current
economic conditions and considering environmental remediation costs. The
environmental remediation costs will be funded through the Brownfield Remediation
Program (TIEG) offered by the City of Kitchener and Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
as well as the Environmental Remediation Capital Account.
ïð ó é
Development Charges and Enterprise Funding
The revenue projections for the development charge contribution has been updated
based on the recently approved Development Charge By-law. In addition, the
contributions from enterprises (gas, water and sewer) have been reassessed based on
their proportionate share of square footage at the new facility as well as including the
infrastructure/LEED components of the project that have been added as a result of the
Federal/Provincial Infrastructure Stimulus funding.
Future Land Needs
As a result of the decisions related to Battler Yards and the Snow Melting operation,
approximately 7 acres of land at the CMF site that were originally earmarked for these
functions have been freed up. These lands have been strategically located on the site,
fronting on Wabanaki Drive, such that future consideration can be given to selling this
prime property for industrial development. It is recommended that we continue to hold
these lands and complete a site growth assessment in five years after completion of the
CMF. At that point, a decision will be made as to whether or not the lands are required
for future CMF expansion and the appropriate funding for that use would be allocated. It
is recommended that the cost of this land be funded by the Business Parks reserve fund,
on a temporary basis until that decision is made.
5. Project Budget
The overall project budget has been adjusted to reflect inclusion of infrastructure and
LEED components, which are now possible because of the Federal/Provincial
Infrastructure Stimulus program funding, as well as adjustments to detailed revenue and
expenditure lines as a result of updating estimates.
Budget Summary:
Approved Budget Revised BudgetInfrastructure/LEED
(November 2007)Base ProjectComponents
Revenues$46.0 million$47.0 million$14.0 million
Expenditures$48.2 million$48.3 million$14.0 million
(Surplus)Deficit $ 2.2 million$ 1.3 million$ 0
Budget details are provided in Appendix 1.
6. Project Risk Assessment and Management
This project has a strong focus on risk management. Since the original risk assessment
prepared in July 2008 by KPMG where 45 active risks were identified, 40 of which were
rated high in priority, a rigorous risk review process has been put in place, requiring
regular monitoring and management of identified risks by both the project team and the
Internal Auditor. It is not uncommon in projects with a broad scope such as the CMF
project, to have the number of active risks fluctuate a great deal throughout the life of the
project as mitigation strategies are put in place and new risks identified. Currently, the
project is tracking 18 active risks, of which 9 are rated high in priority. Key risks that will
continue to require diligent and careful monitoring include project scope and budget and
well as project completion schedule.
ïð ó è
7. Schedule Update
Following is a summary of some of the projected key milestone dates in 2009-2011:
The detailed design stage for the project is anticipated to be completed in
December 2009 followed by construction.
The planning stage for the move-in and for staff integration will continue through
2010.
The project is being undertaken using the construction management process.
This approach will result in numerous, sequential tenders and staged
construction activities.
Construction completion and operations moves will be scheduled on a phased in
basis over the fall of 2010 through spring of 2011.
The construction of Wabanaki Drive from Wilson Avenue to Goodrich Drive will
take place in 2010.
8. Managing the Change
The City’s Consolidated Maintenance Facility represents not only a major construction
project, but a significant change management initiative from a people and service
delivery standpoint. Following is a summary of work underway on components of the
project which will ensure a successful transition for staff, operations and services.
A subgroup of the Project Steering Committee was created in March to focus on Service
Maintenance/Enhancement and Process Improvement/Integration – to analyse and
assess issues and opportunities presented by the transition of staff and services from
multiple locations into one, within the context of the Vision for service and operations of
the CMF. Staff identified 640 tasks, business processes, services and physical areas of
the site which require review. These items were prioritized in terms of
services/tasks/areas impacted by relocation, opportunity for process or service
ïð ó ç
enhancement, and affects business continuity. From this process, 200 items were
identified and prioritized by: criticality to design of the site/facility; requirement that a
process review must occur for relocation and integration to be successful; and little or no
impact on business continuity. Over the next 4-6 months focused analysis of processes
will be undertaken to ensure successful transition and continuity of public services during
transition to the CMF. Focused review and business cases for change will be brought
forward to the Project Steering Committee.
Staff is developing a strategy for change to ensure successful transition of staff and
operations, including refined or enhanced working arrangements to align with the Vision
in creating a collaborative positive work environment. A staff working group has taken
an issue -based approach in this work and identified and prioritized a number of areas
for inventory and review including working arrangements/terms, and management
practices. This review will include a gap analysis between current varied practices and
enhanced common practices, as well as assessment of outcomes from the service and
process integration work. Recommendations for change including financial and time
costs, communication, training and orientation requirements will be brought forward to
the Project Steering Committee. This work will also identify practices to be addressed
through changes to management approaches, those subject to the collective bargaining
process, as well as potential jurisdictional challenges which will need Union agreement
for any change to occur. To supplement this issue-based work, staff has also
undertaken an analysis of data and findings from the City’s 2009 Employee Culture
Survey, to identify additional areas of opportunity for change and integration.
In addition to learning needs to support a successful transition and orientation to new
work practices, education and training is planned for senior and middle management
and supervisors in change management practices to ensure that they are equipped to
lead and implement the changes required.
9. Transition Planning and Business Continuity/Relocation Plan
In order to ensure successful transition and continuity of public services during the
physical relocation of people and equipment to the CMF, a subgroup has been formed to
develop a detailed strategy. Integrating people, major equipment, furniture and records
from various City of Kitchener Divisions and various locations, while striving to continue
the highest level of business continuity, is an exercise in logistics management. This
;
subgroup will develop a comprehensive transition plan for the project
• Identifying items, material and equipment which can be purged or re-located
• Identifying a schedule to deplete material from existing location and delivery
dates to our new location
• Identify and securing resources necessary for smooth transition
• Clearly communicating the plan and details to those staff relocating, the
corporation and to our public customers
• Identifying necessary training
• Implementing, evaluating and adjusting the full plan
With 450 staff members and 640 services transitioning to the new facility, this plan will
be critical to minimizing impacts on staff members and ensuring we can continue
providing maximum service.
ïð ó ïð
10. Solar Roof
As you will recall, the Solar Roof Project is a stand alone project of approximately
$4,000,000, which was also approved for funding under the Federal/Provincial
Infrastructure Stimulus Program - Environmental Initiatives. This sub-project will be
incorporated into the overall CMF project plan, whenever the Ontario Power Authority
program moves forward, which is currently estimated to be Autumn of 2009.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
In order to accommodate revised projections in land sale revenue, provide matching funds for
the infrastructure stimulus program enhancements and a refined analysis of operational needs
(i.e. Battler Yards Operations), the following funding adjustments to the Consolidated
Maintenance Facility Project are recommended:
$2.1 million allocated from the Business Park Reserve Fund
$1.5 contribution from each of the Gasworks, Waterworks and Sewer Enterprises
An initial review of the enterprise related capital project priorities has been completed with
Finance, Engineering and Utilities staff to ensure that there is sufficient funding capacity within
the enterprises in order to accommodate the additional funding as noted above. This review
concluded that this funding can be accommodated over 2010-2012, based on some deferral of
other projects. The exact timing of the funding and specific projects affected will be finalized
and presented to Council as part of the 2010 Capital Budget process.
In addition, it is recommended that the environmental remediation costs related to the surplus
lands to be sold upon completion of the CMF project be funded through the Brownfield
Remediation Program (TIEG) and the Environmental Remediation Capital Account.
COMMUNICATIONS:
A full and detailed communications strategy for the consolidated maintenance facility (CMF)
project was developed and approved by the project steering committee in July 2008. The
communications strategy targets all of the audiences and stakeholders who will be affected
either directly or indirectly by the new facility, including city staff, city council, the general public
and the residents of nearby Hidden Valley. The strategy also includes tools and methods for
reaching all of these audiences with information as the project progresses, and especially at
significant project milestones.
Communications objectives through the course of the project centre around ensuring major
decisions related to the new CMF are made in an open, transparent and engaging fashion
between the city and its stakeholders.
Internal staff involvement has been extensive over the course of the project to date. In the past
year, more than 200 management and front-line staff from across the corporation have played a
role in this project. Opportunities for staff to engage themselves in the project have included
sitting on process-design focus groups that were formed to analyze the city’s current practices
and make recommendations on future processes for the CMF; and providing feedback at key
milestones, such as the development of the project vision and the unveiling of the architect’s
block drawings.
ïð ó ïï
Other examples of methods the city has used to engage staff in the CMF project, and keep the
public informed on its progression, include:
Regular updates by way of the intranet, all-department e-mails and messages on TV
monitors at the city’s outside facilities (Bramm Street, Chandler Drive and Elmsdale
Drive;)
Regular updates to the public, by way of the city’s website, media releases, and e-mails
targeted at interested residents from Hidden Valley.
Since the spring, and as work continues on the project budget, as well as the integrated project
plan, staff has been kept up to date as much as possible on the progress of the project --
including recent changes to the structure of the project team and the project steering committee.
The integrated project plan will assist the communications team in anticipating and planning for
upcoming project milestones, using the tools and methods laid out in the approved
communications strategy; while monitoring project-related issues that may require triage-style
communications.
Once the integrated project plan is near completion staff will review, revise and expand the
overall project communications strategy.
CONCLUSION:
The Consolidated Maintenance Facility project continues to be a high priority project for the
organization, which will create the opportunity to deliver enhanced service for our residents.
The original project budget commitment for the base project continues to be maintained while
allowing adjustments to the project schedule and funding sources in order to accommodate the
City’s contribution to the Infrastructure Stimulus program enhancements to the project. The
funding shortfall identified in the original budget has been reduced and mitigation strategies as
previously identified will continue throughout the life of the project.
The next Project Status Report will be provided to Finance and Corporate Services Committee
in January 2010, based on a quarterly update schedule.
This report is submitted on behalf of the CMF Project Steering Committee comprised of:
Pauline Houston, General Manager of Community Services (Project sponsor and chair)
Troy Speck, General Manager of Corporate Services
Larry Gordon, Chief Purchasing Officer
Wally Malcolm, Director of Utilities
Don Miller, Director of Fleet
Jim Witmer, Director of Operations
Tracey Hare Connell, Executive Director of People Services and Organizational Development
Michael May, Director of Corporate Communications and Marketing
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, General Manager of Community Services
ïð ó ïî
CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY Appendix 1
PROPOSED BUDGET
Monday, August 31, 2009
A B (B-A)
Original Base Revised Base Infrastructure
Budget Budget Variance Budget
Revenues
Federal/Provincial Grants - - - 9,333,333
20,836,352
Contribution from Capital 22,637,523 (1,801,171) -
330,000
Contribution from Reserve 330,000 - -
1,801,171
Investing in Ontario Grant - 1,801,171 -
3,060,000
Contribution from Gas 1,560,000 1,500,000 -
3,060,000
Contribution from Water 1,560,000 1,500,000 -
3,060,000
Contribution from Sewer 1,560,000 1,500,000 -
6,175,000
Contribution from DC 3,299,000 2,876,000 -
2,100,000
Contribution from Business Parks Reserve - 2,100,000 -
5,976,933
Land Sales 14,650,000 4,666,667
(8,673,067)
573,000
Existing Capital Funds 428,000 145,000 -
46,972,456 947,933 14,000,000
46,024,523
Expenses
Land Costs 22,410,308 22,811,710 401,402 -
Consulting Services 2,597,211 3,499,642 902,431 1,335,500
Art 200,000 200,000 - -
Permits 106,527 150,000 43,473 -
IT System Costs 300,000 300,000 - -
Relocation Costs 300,000 700,000 400,000 -
Building and Site Development 18,000,000 17,737,500 (262,500) 12,664,500
Communication - 5,000 5,000 -
Contingency 2,300,000 2,000,000 -
(300,000)
Interest Costs 1,996,288 477,729 (1,518,559) -
Miscellaneous Project Admin Expenses - 30,000 30,000 -
Building Operation Costs - 350,000 350,000 -
48,210,334 48,261,581 51,247 14,000,000
Surplus/(Deficit) (2,185,811) (1,289,125) 896,686 -
ïð ó ïí