Laserfiche WebLink
ANALYSIS <br />We have negotiated a Work Authorization with Lloyd and Associates <br />which is attached. The specific scope of this work is outlined in <br />attachment A of their Work Authorization No. 3. <br />The estimated construction cost associated with this work is <br />$201,000.00. The engineering fees are to be set at $22,900.00. <br />Funding for this project will come from the impact fee fund. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the <br />Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Work <br />Authorization No. 3 with Lloyd and Associates. <br />Commissioner Eggert noted that our engineering fees are <br />getting above 10%, and Commissioner Scurlock advised that the <br />engineering fees in the contracts that are on the Agenda today <br />under Utilities range from 10.5% to 9.3%, and include resident <br />inspection fees. He emphasized that he is monitoring these <br />inspection fees and gave an example of what the fees would be on a <br />$200,000 project using the FmHA standard fee curve for engineering <br />services. The standard fee would be 7.7% plus 3.6% for resident <br />inspection fee, which comes out to 11.3%, and we are at 10.5%. <br />Commissioner Eggert felt it would be helpful if the Work <br />Authorization stated that the engineering fees included resident <br />inspection. <br />Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that the Lloyd and <br />Associates contract does not really separate the resident <br />inspection, but it is set out separately in the Masteller & Moler <br />contract which is also on today's Agenda. He felt extremely <br />satisfied with the numbers that we have negotiated, and pointed <br />out that it is lower than the normal professional fee curve for <br />engineering, and that you will find that the FmHA curve is about <br />1-11% lower than the.othe'r professional fee curves. <br />5 7 ROOK 78 FAGE 631 <br />L DEC 1 2 1989 <br />