Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1989.08.17 - 17296August 17, 1989 Miscellaneous Resolution #89193 BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE, DR. G. WILLIAM CADDELL, CHAIRPERSON IN RE: PUBLIC WORKS/FACILITIES ENGINEERING DIVISION - CONTRACT AWARD FOR COURTHOUSE PREDESIGN TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS, by Miscellaneous Resolution #88073, a contract with Minoru Yamasaki and Associates to do a master plan and space needs assessment for the Judicial and Prosecutorial functions of the County was entered into; and WHEREAS, within the parameters established by the Planning and Building Conauittee, that study identified space needs equivalent to approximately $130 million; and WHEREAS, based on anticipated future revenue flows, the County would be unable to afford a courthouse expansion in excess of $80 million; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Committee recognizes need for additional space and that such space must be maximized within the financial constraint of up to $80 million total project cost including construction, remodeling, furnishing, equipping, etc; and WHEREAS, an extension of Minoru Yamasaki and Associates' contract to prioritize space requirements to a maximum of $80 million total project cost is in the best interest of the County; and WHEREAS, the cost for the above mentioned additional predesign work is estimated to be $251,150; and WHEREAS, funding for the above mentioned project is available in the 1989 Capital Improvement Program - Buildings Section; and WHEREAS, user acceptance and participation in the development of the capital expansion of up to a total project cost of $80 million is essential for success and this can be accomplished by a committee consisting of the affected elected officials and representation of the Board; and WHEREAS, Corporation Counsel has approved the contract as to legal sufficiency. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED as follows: I) The contract extension with Minoru Yamasaki and Associates of Troy, Michigan in the amount up to $251,150 be accepted and the contract awarded in concurrence with the Planning and Building Committee recommendations, (2) The Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract with Minoru Yamasaki and Associates of Troy, Michigan on behalf of the County of Oakland, 3) The County Executive's Department of Public Works, Facilities Engineering Division, shall notify the awardee of this award, in writing no later than 10 days after adoption of this resolution. The award shall not be effective until the awardee has been notified. 4) Such predesign work result in a total project cost not to exceed $80 million. Every departmental operational efficiency possible should be included in the building designs to help keep the project cost within the cap provided, and that a project manager be appointed by the Elected Officals Task force with sufficient responsibility and authority to represent and carry out the collective decisions of that body. 5) An elected officials' task force, composed of the affected elected officials and three members of the Board of Commissioners appointed by the Board's Chairman, be established and that they report back to the full Board their recommendations for Courthouse expansion on or about January 18, 1990. Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Finance Committee, I move the adoption of the foregoing resolution. FINANCE COMMITTEE Finance Committee, Dr. G. W. Caddell, Chairperson DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS/FACILITIES ENGINEERING DIVISION- CONTRACT AWARD FOR CO ASSOCIATES OUSE PREDESIGN-M NORU YAMASAKI URI REPORT (Misc. 89193) BY: Planning and Building Committee, Anrze M. Hobart, Chairperson TO: IN RE: Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: The Planning and Building Committee, having reviewed the above referenced resolution, reports with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Planning and Building Committee, I submit the foregoing report. PLANNING AND BUILDING COMMITTEE (313) 589-3500 Telex 499-2254 Fax (313) 589-0335 Minoru Yarnasaki Architects 350 West Big Beaver Associates P.O. Box 4100 Troy, Ml 48007-4100 July 7, 1989 File Ref. 8816/C131-2 Mr. Donald L. Malinowski, P.E., Manager Oakland County Executive Department of Public Works Facilities Engineering Division One Public Works Drive Pontiac, Michigan 48054-1695 Dear Don: The attached Contract Proposal and Scope of Predesign and Preliminary Design Services is respectfully submitted in response to discussion and requests made during meetings with the County Executive Administration and the Commissioners Leadership Committee during the past two weeks. Since it is now clear that the County does not have the financial capability to build the total program requirements identified in our master planning study of the Courthouse Complex and its many departmPnts, we have proposed a scope of work which will accomplish several critically important steps for the County, and allow us to implement the building program for the Courthouse addition and renovations. Our work scope includes the following'major items, and is intended as a direct extension of services provided in our initial master planning study: I. Negotiations of program reductions for all departments. 2. Analysis of operational and other impacts of program reductions. 3. Additional programming, furniture inventory, planning and other interior design services to further develop interior and FF&E costs and budgets, and aid in developing the highest priority interior development program elements. 4. Additional mechanical, electrical, structural, life cycle cost and other engineering studies to evaluate the highest priority systems renovation and new building elements. 5. Budget and estimating refinements. Budget development for the construction program. 195Lee3 RU YAIASAKI ASSOCIAT S ve Officer KY:lb EncloS RU Kim Yam Chief E aki ecut Mr. Donald L. Malinowski Oakland County Executive July 7, 1989 File Ref. 8816/C131-2 Page 2 6. Block planning and master planning of the initial major construction phase which is within the County's budget limitations. 7. Preliminary building design studies of the project and site. The negotiations, programming and design work proposed represent a significant advancement of the definition and design of the project, and will conclude with preliminary schematic concepts for the project, with corresponding budget and program definition. While this proposal is for predesign and preliminary design services only, we are currently developing our full A/E services contract for the project. We intend to submit this document to you for your review in the next week or so. Since we anticipate that the design and study proposed herein will define the project scope for our full A/E design services, we will submit that document in a form that can be adjusted or modified at the conclusion of this phase of work. We feel that this next step is critically important to maintaining the positive momentum that we have jointly built behind this project. We have enjoyed a very productive and beneficial working relationship with Oakland County and look :forward to our continuing work on this exciting project. Best regards, 195Lee4 AcliiTi;e1" ,NC,REEmENT • 1 ,00t EDITION • Al.k• • P,RiK • 'FM. AMERIC AN INSTITI .TE of: ARCHITECTS. 17S NEW YORK AtNtE. N.WA:,1.11N61ON. DC t ttttu AM DOCUMENT 8727 • c),3:'‘:[.I.? B727.1988 AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS TIR E AIA Document 13 -2 - Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect for Special Services 1988 EDITION THIS DOCIlIENT HAS IMP0R7;1NT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES: CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AGREEMENT made as of the day of July in the year of Nineteen Hundred and El ghty-Ni ne BETWEEN the Owner: CVains, and wldre.“ Oakland County Board of Commissioners 1200 North Telegraph Road Pontiac, Michigan 48053 and the Architect: (Nam, and addirsx) Minoru Yamasaki Associates, Inc. 350 West Big Beaver PO Box 4100 Troy, Michigan 48007-4100 For the following Project: - (Inetntic dvtepir<X,, prrqc.,/ t.(11;,n1 addrvN. rind tt/u. Additional predesign servicesl in conjunction with the expansion and renovation of the Oakland County Courthouse, including the expansion or addition of library services, at 1200 N. Telegraph Road, in Pontiac, Michigan. The study will utilize the program and budgets developed by the Architect in its April 1988 contract with the County, which accommodate the space requirements of the judicial and non-judicial departments housed in and adjacent to the County Courthouse, through the year 2008. The Architect and its consultants will conduct negotiating sessions with the facility's users to reduce the requirements of the program, wherever applicable, as well as further developing the detail of the current space, furniture, and technical programs, in order to define a construction program of maximum benefit, but which is within the current financial capability of the County. The Owner and the Architect agree as set forth below. Copynghl 19-2. 1979. E-19814 by The Americ3n Institute of Architect:A. 1 7 3-3 New York Avenue, NW.. W.r,hington. D.C. .lotwo Reproduction or he material herein or subst.:mlia/ quotation or itt, provisions without -written perrill.lon .c)f the AIA violites the €-opyright laws or the United State:, and will he suhteci to legal prosecution. ARTICLE 1 ARCHITECT'S SERVICES (Here is those services to be pvovided hn. the Architect under the Terrns and Conditions of this Agreement. Note under each service listed the method and means of Compensation to be used. if applicable. as provided in Article 8.) See Article I attached. AIA DOCUMENT B727 • it fl !1.n .-1 Nc;10.1 .N11:N I • l'rss 1-1111In *N' • - • I III A.!n1::40t A \ 1\ 6411 •11. ": II., st.oK k \vv., 11\4 t \ 2thifitt lit 13727.1988 2 foregoing agreement to arbitrate and other agreements to arhi- trate with an additional person or entity duly consented to by the parties to this Agreement shall be specifically enforce- able in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 4.4 The award rendered by the arbitrator or arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. ARTICLE 5 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION 5.1 This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than seven days written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the term , of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. 5.2 If the Owner fails to make payment When due the Archi- tect for services and expenses. the Architect may. upon thirty days' written notice to the Owner_ suspend performance of services under this Agret-ment*--rmirt received by the Architect within seven days of e the notice, the suspension shall tal-te . further notice In the event of a sus. A-• • of services. the Architect shall have no ,• to the Owner for delay or damage caused 5.3 In the event of termination not the fault of the Architect. the Architect shall he compensated for services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due and all Termination Expenses as defined in Paragraph 5.4 Termination Expenses shall be computed as a percentage of the compensation earned to the time of termination, as follows: .1 For services provided on the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense, 20 percent of the total Direct Personnel Expense incurred to the Time of ter- mination; -and .2 For services provided on the basis of a stipulated sum_ I0 percent of the stipulated stun earned to the time Of termination. ARTICLE 6 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 6.1 Unless otherwise provided, this Agreement shall be gusy- erncci by the law of t - • • • • • the State of Michigan. pertaining to acts or failures to act shill accrued and the applicah mence to tflo hive imitations shall corn. nthe date payment is due the Art-hi- TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT ARTICLE 2 OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 2.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding requirements for the Project. The Owner shall furnish required information as expeditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of the Work, and the Architect shall he enti- tled to rely on the accuracy and completeness thereof. 2.2 The Owner shall designate a representative authorized to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner or such authorized representative shall render deci- sions in a timely manner pertaining to documents submitted by the Architect in order to avoid unreasonable delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Architect's services. ARTICLE 3 USE OF ARCHITECT'S DOCUMENTS ect are instruments of the Architect's service for use 5... - 'y with respect to this Project and, unless otherwise ........- vided. the Architect shall he deemed the author of th .^,- documents and shall retain all common law. statutory ..--. . other reserved rights. including the copyright. The 0 --ner shall be permit- ted to retain copies. including ..•..--i roducible copies. of the Arci-ii,-i -s documents for t . ,, wner's information, reference and use in connection .!..-:. ' the Project. The Architect's docu- ments shall nos he.„-•ed by the Owner or others on other proj,- eels. for add.''..ns to this Project or for completion of this Project0, . others. unless the Architect is adjudged to he in de e f. under this Agreement, except by agreement in writing A ARTICLE 4 ARBITRATION 4.1kllaims, disputes tir other matters in question between the parties to this Agreement arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof Shall he subject to and decided tn.' arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Pules of the American Arbitration Association cur- rently in effect unless the parties mutually agree otherwise_ 4.2 A demand for arbitration shall he made within a reason- able time after the claim. dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event .shall the demand for arbitration be made lifter the date when institution of legal or equitable pn ceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in ques- tion would be harried by the applicable statutes of limitations. shall include. by consolidation, joinder or in any . man- ner, an additional person or entity not a to this Agree- Ment, except by written consen,. wining a specific refer- ence to this Agreement Ltd by the Owner, Architect and ally other per's. r entity sought to he joined. Consent to arbitn.t.:-,:- involving an addition -al person or entity shall not AIA DOCUMENT B727 • (AY.-NEKbARCI iii ici AC.IN:.1-:MENT • i95x 0>1111 r: • Tilt: ANIEKR:AN or Fcr-,. p.-3; yORK AVEN11., . V:NNIIi\t;TCrc. 21111n1, B727-1988 3 6.3 The Owner and Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, suc- cessors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Neither Owner nor Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 6.4 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agree- ment between the Owner and Architect and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either writ- ten or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by writ- ten instrument signed by both Owner and Architect. 6.5 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a con- tractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the Owner or Architect. 6.6 Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Archi- tect and Architect's consultants shall have no responsibility for the discovery, presence, handling, removal or disposal of or exposure of persons to hazardous materials in any form at the Project site, including but not limited to asbestos, asbestos products, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) or other toxic Substances. ARTICLE 7 PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT 7.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE 7.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct salaries of the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary con- tributions and benefits related thereto, such as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions, and similar contributions and benefits. 7.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 7.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the Architect's compensation and include expenses incurred by the Archi- tees and Architect's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project for: .1 expense of transportation and living expenses in con- nection with out-of-town travel authorized by the • Owner; .2 long-distance communications; .3 fees paid for securing approval of authorities hav- ing jurisdiction over the Project; .4 reproductions; .5 postage and handling of documents; .6 expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized by the Owner; .7 renderings and models requested by the Owner; .8 expense of additional coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by the Owner in excess of that normally carried by the Architect and the Architect's consultants; and .9 Expense of computer-aided design and drafting equipment time when used in connection with the Project. 7.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES 7,3.1 Payments on account of the Architect's services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly upon presen- tation of the Architect's statement of services rendered or as otherwise provided in this Agreement. 7.3.2 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 8.1 is the minimum payment under this Agreement. 7.4 ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS 7.4.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses per- taining to services performed on the basis of a multipie of Direct Personnel Expense shall be available TO the Owner or the Owner's authorized representative at mutually convenient times. ARTICLE 8 BASIS OF COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows; 8.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT OF Zero Dolurs(s 0.00 )Shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited TO the Owner's account at final payment. 8.2 COMPENSATION FOR THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES, as described in Article I, Architect's Services, shall be computed as follows; (Insert basrs COmprtiSatm.rr, inaudmg setputated sums, multipleS or percentages, and iclentifr the services to which pat-W-1.41a, methods of compersatum app!y if necessary .) For its services MYA will bill the County at a multiple of direct salary as described in Attachment "A", page 2, or at the gross hourly rates for "other consultants" stated in Attachment "A", page 3, not to exceed the fee limits set forth in Attachment "A", page 1. 4 B727-1988 MA DOCUMENT 8727 'AN NIT %.14( till I•( \IF\ I I \I , I III• ANIHM 1-I 11111 ()F Ntfit. Yt/I-Ek AVI \N. V,M .2"1.0• OWNER ARCHITECT (Signature) (Printed name and title) (Signa Ki — (Printed narn enior Vice President nd ttt/e) L3 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, as described in Article 7, and any other items included in Article 9 as Reimbursable Ex penses, a multiple of One ( 1.0 ) times the expenses incurred by the Architect, the Architec(s employees and consultants in the interest of the Proiect. Payments are due and pay-able ( 10 ) days from the date of the Architect's invoice Amounts unpaid ( 30 ) days after the invoice date shalt bear interest at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the principal place of business of the Architect. (Insen, Tag" of irsteres: agn-ed upon) Prevailing Prime Rate alsury laws and r.E.afra,rnents urto'er the Federal Mutt, in Lendtrrg Act, cfrr firer state and local consumer credo' laws and other regitlatrons at the ()wrier's and 11 fa WI .5 Th-Incipalplaccs of bustness, the iocattorr of the Project and e/setehetv may affect the validtry of this provisgon Speoftc legal adt•tcc should be (..141.,,1PLI with respect to delettons or enochfscattorts, and also regarding other requirements such as written thsciosures or wafters j 8,.5 IF THE SCOPE of the Project or of the Architect's services is changed materially, the amounts of compensation shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 9 OTHER CONDITIONS 9.1 Compensation for additional services of consultants, including additional structural, mechanical, electrical engineering, programming, interior design or other services, not provided by this agreement shall be billed at a multiple of one and five hundredths (1.05) times the amounts billed to the Architect for such services. This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above. AlA DOCU)nNT 8727 - to 1.4 A.tt in tti MRl i•nix Rst..; • Al' lknis in 3N1111 11. 01ARI 1111H -1\. YUINK AVEN11 tiNk .'6XACII1NGION 2111,te, B727-1988 5 ARTICLE 1 PREDESIGN AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN SERVICES: 1.0 MYA's consultant team will consist of: Courts Facilities Programmer Daniel Smith Associates Mechanical/Electrical Engineers Edelstein Associates Structural Engineers LBA (Lefkofsky Bobish Associates) Cost Estimating Jeffsan, Inc. Parking Consultant Rich & Associates, Inc. 1.01 The intent of the scope of services described herein is to further develop the program, budget and technical information provided in the programming and Master Plan Study conducted by the Architect under its April 1988 Contract with the County, which identifies space and other requirements at the County Courthouse complex through the study year 2008. 1,02 Utilizing the above described programming report, the Architect and its consultant team will provide predesign services to the County to assist the County in developing a viable series of program changes and/or reductions which will bring the cost of the total project in line with the County's available financial resources. Negotiations with Departments MYA and its consultant Daniel C. Smith and Associates will conduct negotiations with representatives of all judicial and non-judicial user departments presently proposed to be housed in the expanded courthouse complex, with the intent of developing the impacts and ramification of various program reductions, on departmental operations, and project and operational cost. Items to be examined will include such issues as: o reduction of space standards o non-consolidation of various departments o reduction in projected staff increases for judicial and non-judicial departments o general fine tuning of program requirements o identification of alternative procedures to more efficiently use staff and space 1.1 25TW1 1.1.1 Menus of capital cost reduction items will be developed, including the capital and operational cost impacts of those items, for comparison. MYA and its consultant will then work with the user groups, the Planning and Building Committee and the County Administration to determine which items can most appropriately be included in a cost reduction program. 1.1.2 The Architect and its consultants will provide the Owner with a set of items that affect operational costs identified during the negotiations phase of work. This information will then be used by the Owner to assess the impact these items have on its budget. 1.2 MYA's interior design consultant will refine and expand the detail of the existing program. This information will be used in the development of preliminary space utilization plans, to further test space requirement assumptions. 1.2.1 MYA's interior design consultant will utilize the County's furniture inventory system, during a preliminary furniture inventory in order to assess the quantities of furniture which can be reused as is, which must be replaced, and which must be refinished and/or repaired. In addition, MYA's consultant will prepare estimated quantities of new furnishings to be purchased, and budgets for the new furnishings. 1.3 MYA and its consultants will examine the renovations program for the project, for possible reductions to the scope of total renovations and replanning of existing areas. Cost reduction items will be identified and included in the menu of items to be considered as part of the cost reduction program. 1.4 MYA and its consultants will refine the program of mechanical and electrical euipment renovations, for the project, and develop a conceptual budget for this work. As part of this study life cycle cost analyses of major systems will be performed. Piping and duct systems will be evaluated for reuse. In addition, electrical service revision, telephone system distribution raceway/backboards, electrical distribution systems, fire alarm and detection systems, and other electrical system issues will be further explored, documented and budgeted with greater detail. Optional program items will be identified and included in the menu of items to be considered as part of the cost reduction program. 1.5 MYA will review and revise its parking demand estimates for the project, based on the anticipated reductions to the program, and will attempt to develop reductions to the capacity of the proposed parking structure. As part of its services in conducting negotiations, .departments will be specifically requested to offer methods of reducing the peak parking demand generated by their activities. 25TW2 1.6 MYA will continue to analyze and refine its conceptual architectural and engineering materials and systems quality assumptions and budgets to maximize value to the County. Proposed budget reduction items will be included in the menu of cost reduction items. 1.7 MYA will review the County's elevator renovation program and budgets, and will perform preliminary capacity analysis of proposed and existing elevator layouts, to determine whether elevator cost requirements can be reduced. 1.8 MYA will re-examine its assumptions regarding code upgrades of the existing structures, to cost justify proposed upgrades in relation to deletion of other budget items. Low priority items will be included on the menu of possible cost reduction items, for consideration. 1.9 Final Master Plan Program Based on consensus decisions developed during the program negotiations and fine tuning, MYA and its consultants will document the final master plan and building program, which will be the basis of the design program for the project. 1.9.1 MYA will revise the current master plan to reflect the content of the - final master plan program for all building and site elements in the courthouse complex area under study. 1.9.2 Based on the final building program, MYA will revise the current block plan diagrams to develop a final set of block plan diagrams for the project, showing the organization of courts spaces and all judicial and non-siudicial departments in the courthouse complex. \//1.9,,3 Final Master Plan Budgeting Based on the,final program, and consensus agreement developed on proposed budget reduction items, MYA will revise the project construction budget, which will be consistent with the capital budget limitations given to MYA by the County. It is the intent of this Agreement, that the County will have selected a Construction Man or CM, prior to the completion of this phase of work. will deliver its budget information, programs, drawings, preliminry outline specifications, reports, and other materials to the County's Construction Manager as soon as the CM is authorized to proceed, for review. and confirmation of the project budget. Cost estimating services will then become the responsibility of the County's CM, with support and information provided by MYA. 1.9.4 MYA will deliver its construction budgets to the County Engineering staff, who will prepare project owner cost budgets, for inclusion in an overall project budget. Owner cost budgets will include such .items as fees, cost of obtaining and selling bonds, project insurance, construction testing, surveys, geotechnical engineering, hazardous materials removal, etc. 9gTm/ 1.10 MYA will develop a proposed project design, construction, and move in schedule for the project, and its various elements. This schedule with the participation of the County, 1,4L_fzIJILLilla and MYA will be revised, refined, and updated throughout the course of the design and construction of the project. Presuming active cooperation of the user departments in the negotiation process, MYA projects completion of this phase of work 3 months after authorization to proceed. At that time, full schematic design of the project can proceed. 1,11 25TW4 ADDENDUM TO AIA DOCUMENT 8727, (STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT) BETWEEN OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONS (OWNER) AND MINORU YARASAKI ASSOCIATES, INC. (ARCHITECT) In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between this Addendum and the form agreement (which contains Article 1) to which it is attached, this Addendum shall prevail. Article 3 - Use of the Architect's Documents 3.1 [Delete in its entirety and replace with the following:] All drawings and specifications, computations, sketches, test data, survey results, photographs, computer aided design drawings, copies of program document discs, renderings, models, correspondence, internal memoranda, work product of Architect's consultant team, and other material peculiar to the services proposed by Architect or Architect's consultants (the "Work Product") shall become the property of Owner upon payment to Architect for the services rendered hereunder. Article 4 - Arbitration 4.1 [Insert at beginning] Only in the event that Owner and - Architect mutually agree in writing to elect arbitration, 4.3 [Delete all but final sentence and replace with the following:] Any and all arbitration arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall include, by consolidation, joinder or joint filing, any additional person or entity not a party to this Agreement to the extent necessary to the final resolution of the matter in controversy. Owner shall include its option to arbitrate and consolidate in the Owner-Contractor Agreement and shall provide that similar provisions be included in subcontracts and purchase orders. Article 5 - Termination, or Suspension 5.2 Change "seven days" to "thirty days'". 5.2 [Add at the end of first sentence] In the event of a disbute with respect to the amount due the Architect for service and expenses, Architect shall resume performance upon payment by Owner of the amount not in dispute and payment into an interest bearing escrow account of the amount which is being disputed. Article 6 - Miscellaneous Provisions 6.1 [Delete all after the word "law" and add:] ...of the State of Michigan 6.2 [Delete entire Section 6.2]. 250 $11,250 250 $11,250 $22,500 $7,700 86,000 ATTACHMENT tel.•11. •nnn• TOTAL FEE LIMITS - FROM ARTICLE 9,2 SERVICES MILL BE BILLED DM AN HOURLY BASIS NOT TO EXCEED THE FOLLOOING FEE LIMITS1 HOURS FEE MINORU YPIXT ASSOCIATES, INC. PROJECT EC1PE DEFINITION, INCLUDING COURTHOUSE ADDITION, COURTHOUSE RENOVATION, LIBRARY, PARKING, AND REMOTE BUILDINS REUSE MASTER PLAN REVISIONS BUDGET REFINEMENT SCHEDULE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY SCHEMATIC DESIGN MEETIN8S AND PRESENTATIONS ADMINISTRATION COURTS PROGRAMMER: DANIEL C. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES NEGOTIATIONS AND PROGRAM FINE TUNING MECHANICAL t ELECTRICAL ENGINEERIW EDELSTEIN ASSOCIATES, MECHANICAL 1 ELECTRICAL RENOVATIONS PROGRAM NEN BUILDINS MECHANICAL k ELECTRICAL CRITERIA, AND LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS 600 $30,000 480 $24,000 240 $17,000 120 $6,000 220 $11,000 320 $16,000 160 $8,000 $107,000 850 $51,250 INTERIOR DESIGN: FORD t EARL ASSOCIATES PROSRAM DETAIL DEVELOPMENT, SPACE E PRELIMINARY BLOCX PLANNING 375 $22,500 PRELIMINARY FURNITURE INVENTORY 250 $15,000 FURNITURE BUDDETING 87 $5,200 $42,700 FINAL BUDGETINGt JEFFSAN (PRIOR TO CM INVOLVEMENT) NEW BUDGET STUDIES 200 $10,000 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINEx LBA SYSTEM CRITERIA t BUDGETING $3,000 PARKING DEMAND ARALYSISs RICH AND ASSOCIATES PROGRAM UPDATE $1,400 --------- TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE LIMIT ESTIMATED KIIIBUR-Srl EXPENSE ALLOVANCESt DANIEL C, SMITH --' ASSOCIATES MYA AND OTHE Cf 7"T71T5 $237,450 TOTAL ESTIMATED REIMBURSABLE EXPENSE ALL CE $13,700 R2===XSSI PAGE 1 OF 3 ATTACHMENT SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR ARCHITECT AND PRIMARY CONSULTANTS AVERAGE HOURLY SALARY RATES MINORU YAMASAKI ASSOCIATES, INC. (RYA): PRINCIPALS SEE NOTE DELON SENIOR ASSOCIATES $24.15 ASSOCIATES/PROJECT ENGINEERS $19.40 SENIOR DESIGNERS $14.70 DESIGNERS $11.90 JUNIOR DESIGNERS $9.45 NON-TECHNICAL STAFF $10.75 EDELSTEIN ASSOCIATES, INC.(EA111 PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE $29.00 MECHANICAL TEAM LEADER $21.00 MECHANICAL PROJECT ENGINEER $19.00 MECHANICAL DESIGNER $17.00 MECHANICAL DRAFTSPERSON $12.25 ELECTRICAL TEAM LEADER $28.50 ELECTRICAL PROJECT ENGINEER $19,50 ELECTRICAL DESIGNER $15,00 ELECTRICAL DRAFTSPERSON $13.00 CLERICAL $10.00 LEFKOFSKI, DUDISH t ASSOCIATES IBA): PRINCIPAL * SEE NOTE BELOW ENGINEERS $20.00 DRAFTSPERSON $10.00 CLERICAL , $8.00 MYA PRINCIPALS WILL BE INVOICED AT A FLAT RATE OF $100.00 PER HOUR, IBA PRINCIPALS WILL RE INVOICED AT A FIAT RATE OF $75.00 PER HOUR. BILLINGS FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF THE ARCHITECT AND PRIMARY CONSULTANTS WILL BE BASED ON THE ACTUAL SALARY RATES OF THE INDIVIDUALS SORKIN& ON THE JOB TIMES A GROSS MULTIPLIER OF 2,80. PAU 2 OF 3 SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR OTHER CONSULTANTS GROSS HOURLY BILLING RATES DANIEL C. SNITH AND ASSOCIATES PRINCPAL COURT PLANNER COURT PLANNER $65.00 $45.00 JEFFSAN, INC, PRINC77 EFTW77: $100.00 05.00 ATTACHMENT FORD & EARL ASSOCIATES, INC. PRINCIPALS $90.00 DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS $75.00 PROJECT DIRECTORS $65/75,00 DESISNERS AND DETAILERS $50/55.00 MODELERS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT $37/50.00 RICH & ASSOCIATES1 - PRINCIPAL $175.00 PROJECT MANAGER $75.00 CHIEF ARCHITECT $75.00 PARKINS PLANNING I $50.00 PARKINS PLANNING II $37.50 PAWNS PLANNING TECHNICIAN $25.00 CLERICAL $25.00 BOOKKEEPING $25.00 BILLINGS OF THE 'OTHER CONSULTANTS WILL BE BILLED AT THE ABOVE SPECIFIED GROSS HOURLY BILLING RATES MULTIPLIED BY THE NUMBER OF HOURS WORKED. PAGE 3 OF 3 124 Board April 14, 1988 Meeting called to order by Chairperson Roy •I?awold at 9;37 A.M. in the Courthouse Auditorium, 1200 N. Telegraph Road, Pontiac, Michigan 4(72. Roll called. PRESENT: Aaron, Bishop, Caddell, Calandro, Crake, Doyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, Richard Kuhn, Susan Kuhn, Lanni, Luxon, McConnell, McDonald, Angus McPherson, RueI McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Page, Pernick, Rev/old, Rowland, Skarritt, Wilcox. (25) ABSENT: Law, Price. (2) Quorum present. Invocation given by Commissioner Donald W. Jensen. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Moved by Ruel McPherson supported by Susan Kuhn the minutes of the March 24, 1988 meeting be approved as presented. ' A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the motion carricl. Moved by Doyen supported by Hobart the Agenda be approved as presented. AYES: Oaks, Pane, Perni Hobart, Jensen, R, Kuhn, S. (21) NAYS: None. (0) Revold, powland, Skarritt, Aaron, Caddell, Crake, Onyon, Gosling, 10 Lanni, Lrxor, McConnell, A. McPherson, R. McPherson, Moffitt. A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the agenda was approved. Clerk read letters from employees of the Friend of the Court regarding a request to hold a rehearing on classification change requast. (Referred to the Personnel Committee.) , Misc. 88073 By Finance Committee IN RE: Facilities Engineering Division - GONTRAG.T AWAR7 FOR THE COURTHOUSE Y6STT7, PLANNING To the Oakland County Board of Co,nTissinirs Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemnr: WHEREAS Miscellaneous Resolution #87337 of this Board indicated the intent to have the County Building Authority acquire additional facilities at the County Courthouse; and WHEREAS the 1988-1989 Biennial Budget Capital Improvement Plan included an intent to proceed with this decision; and WHEREAS a comprehensive master plan which includes a comprehensive space needs master plan, a comprehensive parking and traffic master plan and a conceptual budget for the additional courthouse facilities is critical to the success of the program; and _ WHEREAS Minoru YamosW Associates of Troy, Michigan has provided a proposal to complete these tasks at a cost of $27V7ii; and WHEREAS funds are rvallFble in the 1 1G:S Capital Improvement Program, Building Section, and the Facilities Engineering ro.::',ommen ,is Minoru Yam.asaki Associates proposal. NOW THEREFORE BE IT !HT'r,01..w7D. as follos: 1) The contract proposal of Minoru Yama,sa!f.i Associates be accepted and the contract awarded in concurrence with Planning and Buildiog Recommondatiens, 125 Commissioners Minutes Continued, April 14, 1988 2) Funds be provided from the 1988 Capital Improvement Program - Building Section not to exceed $218,240, • • 3) The Chai-person of the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract itb Minoru Yamasaki Associates of Troy, Michigan on behalf of the County of Oakland, 4) The County Executive's Department of Public Works, Facilities Engineering Division, shall notify the awardee of this award, in writing no later than 10 days after the adoption of this resolution, The ed:nrd shall not he effective until the awardee has been notified, BE IT FiTHr.R RESOLVED that it is the expressed intent of the Oakland County Board of Commissioners to inelude in the Bond proceeds sufficient funds to cover the cost of all master planning associated with the Courthouse Complex expansion, Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Finance Committee, I move the adoption of the foregoing resolution. FINANCE COMMITTEE • G. William Caddell, Chairperson Moved by Caddell supported by Crake the resolution be adopted. AYES: Page, Pernick, Rowold, Rowland, Skarriti, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Doyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn, Luxon, McConnell, McDonald, A. McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks. (20) NMS: Aaron, Lanni, R. McPherson, (3) A sufficient majority having voted the resolution was adopted. Misc. 88074 By General Government Committee IN RE: Probate Court - MATCHING FUNDS FOR CHILD CARE EXPENDITURES - LEGAL ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF THE HEADLEE AMENDMENT To the Oakland County Board of Commissioners Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS on two previous occasions, Miscellaneous Resolution #85338 and Miscellaneous Resolution #86202, Oakland County has requested the State Legislature to take appropriate action to meet their obligation under Public Act 87 of 1973 to match 50% of the county's child care fund expenditures; and WHEREAS the cap on the state matching funds for child care expenditures has resulted in a shift of approximately $800,000 in child care costs from the state to Oakland. County for fiscal years 1981 through 1986; and WHEREAS this action by the State of Michigan in .reducing their proportion of the child care fund expenditures is a violation of Article 9, Section 29 (Headlee .,Taelieut) of the State Constitution; and WHEREAS Public Act 101 of the Public Acts of 1979 established a Local Government Review Board for the purpose of hearing and deciding upon the validity of claims from local units of government for alleged violations by the state of Article 9, Section 29 of the Constitution; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners on Miscellaneous Resolution #862CC dated:. September 11, 1986 authorized the Executive's Departments of Management and Budget and Corporation Counsel to file a claim with the Local Government Review Board established under Public Act 101 of the Public Acts of 1979 for the recovery of the matching child care funds withheld by the State of Michigan; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners on Miscellaneous Resolution #86260 further requested the Executive's Departments of Management and Budget and Corporation Counsel to initiate appropriate legal action against the State of Michigan; and WHEREAS the State has continued to underfund their required 50% share of child care fund costs making it imperative that the County of Oakland initiate appropriate legal action; and WK7.5.S the Board of Commissioners currently has a contract retaining the firm of Kohl, Secrest, Lynch, Clark and Hampton, NOW THEE707. BE IT I7,7MVEl that the Board of Commissioners authorizes the hiring of the firm of Kohl, Searest, Wardle, Lyneh, Clark and Hampton to take whatever legal action is necessary, in conjunction with the work performed by the Office of Corporation Counsel, to resolve this issue. Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the General Government Committee, I move adoption of the foregoing resolution. GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Richard C. Skarritt, Chairperson Moved by Skarritt supported by Richard Kuhn the resolution be adopted, AYES: Pernick, Rewold, Rowland, Skarritt, Wilcox, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Opyon, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, R, Kuhn, S. Kuhn, Lanni, Luxon, McConnell, McDonald, A. McPherson, R. McPherson, Moffitt, Page, (22) NAYS: Aaron. (1) A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution was adopted. watira.wavaniENVIMMOING Resolution # 89193 August 17, 1989 r..Jay of August , 1989 . ALLEN, County Clerk/. Regi(ster of Deeds Moved by Caddell supported by Hobart the resolution be adopted. Moved by Caddell supported by Calandro the Planning and Building Committee Report be accepted. A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the report was accepted. Moved by Pappageorge supported by Caddell the Agreement be amended as follows: On page 25TW3, Article 1, paragraph 1.9.3, the first paragraph - add "In developing the final Master Plan, a sufficient reserve fund must be included for contingencies that might otherwise cause the overall cost of the final program to exceed Eighty Million Dollars ($80,000,000)." Also, under the same 1.9.3 delete the 2nd paragraph which reads "It is the intent of this Agreement, that the County will have selected a Construction ManagerCM, prior to the completion of this phase of work. MYA will deliver its budget information programs, drawings, preliminary outline specifications, reports, and other materials to the County's Construction Manager as soon as the CM is authorized to proceed, for review and confirmation of the project budget. Cost estimating services will then become the responsibility of the County's CM, with support and information provided by MYA." Also, the Agreement be further amended on page 25TW4, under 1.10 by deleting "...the County's CM,:..." from the paragraph. Discussion followed. A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the amendment carried. Moved by Pernick supported by Aaron the resolution be amended by adding an additional paragraph to read: H6. The Board of Commissioners hereby directs that the proposed parking deck structure be replaced by expanded ground parking; further that the freestanding Library structure be incorporated within the renovated or expanded Courthouse Complex'. Discussion followed. Vote on Mr. Pernick's amendment: AYES: Luxon, Oaks, Pernick, Price. (4), NAYS: Caddell, Calandra Chester, Crake, Ferrens, Gosling, Hobart, Jensen, Johnson, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn, McConnell, McCulloch, Moffitt, Olsen, Pappageorge, Rewold Skarritt, Wolf, Aaron, Bishop. (21) A sufficient majority not having voted therefor, the amendment failed. Vote on resolution as amended: AYES: Calandra, Chester, Crake, Ferrens, Hobart, Jensen, Johnson, S. Kuhn, Luxon, McConnell, Moffitt, Olsen, Pappageorge, Price, Rewold, Skarritt, Wolf, Bishop, Caddell. (19) NAYS: Gosling, R. Kuhn, McCulloch, Oaks, Pernick, Aaron. (6) A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution, as amended, was CH CAN) COUNTY OF OAKLAND) - I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and having a seal, do hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of the attached resolution adopted by the _Oakland County Board of Commissioners at their regular ,meeting held on August_17, 1989 with the original record thereof no'4 remaining in my office, and that it is a true and correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole thereof. In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County at Pontiac, Michigan this 17th