Laserfiche WebLink
r DEC 111985 <br />BOOK 62 PAGE 940 <br />B. Execution of Supplemental Agreement with Frizzell Architects <br />The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/11/85: <br />TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: November 22, 1985 FILE: <br />the -Board of County Commissioners <br />FROM: Michael <br />County A n <br />SUBJECT: Frizzell Architects <br />Supplemental Agreement <br />REFERENCES: <br />ator <br />Commissioner Lyons, Charles vitunac, Sonny Dean and I met <br />with representatives of Frizzell Architects on November 12, 1985 <br />and agreed to recommend the attached supplemental agreement to <br />cover architectural services on the minimum security addition <br />to the Indian River County Detention Facility. _ <br />The original contract called for basic compensation, a percen- <br />tage of construction cost as defined below:. <br />Construction <br />1,000,000 <br />1,500,000 <br />2,000,000 <br />3,000,000 <br />4,000,000 <br />5,000,000 <br />6.,000,000 <br />7,000,000 <br />0,000,000 <br />Cost Fee <br />7.5 percent <br />7.3 percent <br />7.1 percent <br />6.9 prcent <br />6.8 percent <br />6.7 percent <br />6.6 percent <br />6.5 percent <br />and greater 6.4 percent <br />The cost of the initial jail was approximately $3.9 million <br />resulting in a fee of 6.9 percent of the construction cost. If <br />the second phase of the. jail, which has ballpark estimated cost <br />of $1.6 million, had been included in the original contract, the <br />architect's fee would have been 6.7 percent, based on a combined <br />cost of $5.5 million. <br />If the second phase were considered to be a totally separate <br />project, the fee would be 7.3 percent of the construction cost. <br />Since the second phase was not included in the original sub- <br />missions to the Department of Corrections and considerable effort <br />must be extended to obtain additional approvals, the County nego- <br />tiating committee concluded the minimum security building should <br />not be considered a pure extention of the original detention faci- <br />lity. However the minimum security building does not have all <br />the characteristics -of a free standing project:' <br />Therefore, the Committee recommends the architect's compensa- <br />tion. --be determined from the fee schedule by averaging a fee based <br />on the cost of Phase II construction by itself with a -fee based <br />on the cost of construction of Phases I and II combined, or 7 <br />percent. <br />In addition, the architect shall rebate an additional one- <br />quarter of the $40,000 lump sum fee previously paid the architect <br />for the Indian River Criminal Justice Complex study. <br />4 <br />