Loading...
CF-Justice Center-CS 970117PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE: TO: FROM: RE: January 17, 1997 Jim Witt, City Manager Sheri Moino, Facilities Manage~ Coppell Justice Center; PSA Request for Additional Services Please find attached information associated with PSA's request for additional architectural services which extend beyond the original scope for the Justice Center. Wade Goolsby and Chief Dave Miller reviewed this request and recommend that the contract amount be increased by $11,500.00 to reimburse PSA for their services. Please sign below for approval. /sm cc: Ken Griffin, ACM/Director of Public Works Signature Date MEMORANDUM Date: 12/6/96 To-' From: Subject: David C. Miller, Chief of Police Wade G. Goolsby, Operations Captain~,; ' PSA Request for Additional Services Phillips, Swager, and Associates (PSA) formally submitted a request for additional services in a letter dated 10/29/96. In their request, PSA requested reimbursement for additional services totalling $15,255.00 as of that date. I felt that the request was excessive and formulated a response to their letter and recommended a reimbursement of $3700.00. I shared this response with Don Wertzberger shortly after constructing it and it was apparent that he was not satisfied with my response. After we discussed the matter further, we met two more times to review and discuss each item in dispute. We also identified potential items in completing the project that would require the architect's involvement. After reviewing all of the items in dispute and identifying items which were beyond the scope of an average project, the architect reduced his request to $11,800.00 for services that would not only cover reimbursement for services already provided and through the completion of the project. After working with Don Wertzberger, I feel more comfortable that this is a reasonable request. It is my recommendation that we amend the architectural contract to reimburse an amount of $11,500.00 for services provided that are beyond the scope of a typical project and which could not have been anticipated by the architect. //~ The City With A Beautiful Future P.O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 214-462-0022 Phillips Swager Associates Don Wertzberger 12404 Park Central Drive, Dallas, TX 75251-1819 Suite 240 Dear Don, I have reviewed your request for additional services with regard to the Coppell Justice Center project. The project is nearing completion and we are looking forward to completing this project with minimum problems. As you stated in your letter, there have been a number of '°player" changes during the span of this project. This has not only occurred with the City of Coppell, but also with the contractor and with PSA. Any time that participants change during a project, it leaves gaps of communication that can result in changes later in the project. I also realize, however, that it is a rarity that the participants remain constant through the length of any project. Phillips Swager Associates was selected as the architect for this job, in part, due to their expertise in building and designing police facilities. When this process began, there was no one on the City staff that had ever been involved in a police department project. The City staff and the police department staff relied on your expertise to assist them in designing a facility that would function efficiently for the next decade. With that expertise you should have brought into the project a realization that there would be modifications made during the project that were not anticipated at the onset. There were also issues that should have been identified by the architect due to their expertise in this type of facility design. Among those issues are: Redundant communication lines for the Dispatch Center Back-up air conditioning for the communications equipment room Flag pole lighting Telephones in jail cells Wall mounted phones in certain areas ( Sallyport, locker rooms, break rooms) Electrical power for Intoxilyzer machine These issues have all been identified by the owner and involved time on the owner's part that cannot be recovered. After reviewing the list of items provided by your office, it is also apparent that other issues would be part of any job (ie. hardware keying) and that your negotiated contractual fees should have included issues such as these. We have been pleased with the working relationship that we have enjoyed during this project and hope that it continues. However, I cannot agree with your request for an additional $15,255.00 in services. After reviewing the items in question, I find very few that are not typical with any job or items that should have been eliminated through a more thorough design process. In conclusion, it will be my recommendation to grant your firm an additional $3,700.00 for services involving items that were added and could not have been anticipated at the beginning of the project. As stated before, it has been a pleasure working with you and the other members of your firm and we hope that this positive relationship continues. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Wade G. Goolsby Operations Captain Coppell Police Department David C. Miller, Chief of Police Steve Goram, Director of Informational Svcs. Sheri Moino, Facilities Manager OCT ~9 ~96 11:09 Phillips Swaser Associates Captain Wade Goolsby City of CoppeH 255Parkway Blvd. Coppell, Texas75019 Re; PSA Add Services C~ Cl-imiIlal JBstif2 Center PSA Project No. 4087.20 Wade: Phillips Swager Associates (PSA) wishes to formally submit to you our request for additional services for the Coppell ~Iustice Center project. The new Justice Center project is progressing quite nicely, and nearing completion in approximately 30 days. PSA is pl~ with the construction to date and our ongoing working reJationship with the City of Coppoll. However, what initially ~u'ted out several months ago as a few minor change requests from the City of Coppell, has escalated into a significant amount of revisions and modifications to the original construction documents and already completed work. Based on recent conversations with you, thexe are Still several significant revisions anticipated which the City wishes to incorporate into the project prior to move-in. PSA has implemented all requests and modificafioas from the City of Copl~ per your verbal'directives, and now upon review of the project documentation to date we have discovered that a significant amount of time and effort has been expended in an attempt to be responsive to the requests from the City of Coppell. PSA has attached a list of specific irons which have been incorporated into the current ~ contract. The individual items are referenced with respect to the PSA Memorandum No/Item No. Every one of the individual items denoted on the attached list sets into effect a sequence or chain of events required to implement the SlX:cific requests into the ongoing commmfion and contract. The following is the chronology or ~equence of PSA efforts which are typically nece.ssital~ W address out-of-scope requests: · · · · · Field and discuss specific requests fi'om the City of Coppell. Investigate any posxible ramifications Or adverse impact the specific request may have on construction to date, and confu'm with the City of Coppell the feasibikity of implementing the change. Identify and define the specific scope-of-work involved with change based on current construction progress. Originate and issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) to Mid-South. Review and evaluate submitted costs for Mid-South Contractors and their subcontractors relative to the revised scope of work identified in the RFP. Negotiate costs or request additional documentation and/or revised cost submittals from Mid-South and the subcontractors. Forward the submitted costs to the City of Coppell for review and approval, with PSA's assessment and recommendations. Upon directive from the City of Coppell to proceed with the change in ~ and associated costs, originate and issue a Change Order to ofti¢iidl~.~ajtletld ~010 construction contract. ~76 P05 OCT 29 '96 11:10 Captain Wade Goolsby October 29, 1996 Respond to requests for information and clarifications from the contractor(s) rehtive to the change. Include and perform a punchtist review of out-of-scope work during scheduled punchList activities Incorixa~ the change of scope work into all project dose-out documentation. Builts, Warranties, O & M Manuals, etc.). The originally issued construction documents and the awarded bid to Mid-South Contractors complied with the original Coppell task group parameters and programming requests. PSA solicitated the City's input and comments during the schematic, preliminary, design development, and final design phas~ prior to the issuance of construction documents. All individual parties and personnel had ample opportunity to provide specific input and requests regarding functional requirements, spatial relationships, circulation, job task/functions, and final finish selections (colors, materials, patterns, etc.). PSA can sympathize with the fact that many of the original players involved in the original lask group in charge of programming and desig~g the Police and Courts building have changed. There are nnw new individuals involved with different philosophies, issuca, a~cndas, priorifl~, and tastes - - as~many of the s .l~ecifi.c chan~e .r .e~ues?s refl...~I. The City of CoppeJl even now acknowledges a lack of depth aha evaluation relative m specific functional/task requirements during the design process. In addition, the City of Coppell opted not to employ PSA and th..~, expertise for the ~design and selections' of furniture, finishes, and equipment. PSA respected the'City of Coppell s decision; however, throughout the course of construction PSA has had to field and respond to a significant amount of questions from both the Police and the Courts representatives. In an effort of good faith and paxtn~g and client development, PSA has responded and assisted the City with these questions, provided manufacturers catalogs, provided recommendations regarding equipment selections, and color selections, and configurations, all at no cost to the City of Coppell, PSA feels that it is only fair if the Contractor(s) are being pakl to implement the multitude of changes as requested by the City of CoppeJl, that the Architect/Enginecr of record should also bo paid to implement the changes. In addition, the reimbursement of these costs is warranted per the Architect/Owner Contract Article 3.3.3. PSA has been very pro-active and responsive to thc City of Coppell in an effort to minimize cost and scheduling impacts in the implementations of these numerous revisions, lVl~any change issues have occ~ at critical junctures relative to installations and sequencing, ami demanded immediate implementation. Any delay in implementing many changes dramatically alters the scope~f-work as a result of construction progress. PSA performed many of the changes in good faith, with the intent that our efforts would be considered and compensated, just as Mid-South has done. PSA received verbal directives and approval from the City of Coppell for the.se revisions, wkich was also confirmed and documented in writing in the PSA Memonmdums. PSA has implemented many minor changes into the project which are not reflected on thc attached sheets nor included under the request for addMonal monies. Captain Wade Goolsby October 29, 1996 Page 3 It has truly been a positive partnering environment with the City of C. oppeJ1, PSA, and Mid-South. Per the AIA contract between thc City and PSA, we are rcqucating rcimburacment of $15,255.00 for th~ additional scrvi~ 'to=da~% If you have any questions, please do' not hesitat~ to contact Sincerely, PHILLIPS SWAGER ASSOCIATES Donald I. Wert2bcrger, construction Administrator Sheri Moino/COC Oreg Schon/PSA Tim IQ'aft/PSA Project File ~76 P05 OCT ~9 '96 CITY OF COPPELL REVISION/MODIFICATION REVISIONS AND CHANGES-IN-SCOPE ISSUE Flag Pole Site Lighting Holding Cell Pay Phones Telephones raised to Wall Height Mountings Door Hardware Keying Coordination Meeting Concrete Sidewalk Connector from City Hall. to lustice Centex City of CoppeH 911/Security/ Communications Interface and Coordination Rated Assembly Interpretation from Coppell Inspectors Ceiling Height in InTox 192 Wall luff-out in Room 129 Painting Pattern (~ InTox 192 Power to Equipment in InTox 192 Ceramic Tile/Slate (~1 EWC Ice Machine Relocation Window/Door Visual Modifications Courtroom Wall Revision DOCUMENTATION #/# PSA lVl[F2dO~~ RFP - Request For Proposal C.O. - Change Order 6/5, 9/16, RFP No. 3 & 3(1t.) C.O. No. 03 8/9, 10/2, RFP No. 3 & 3 (R) C.O. No. 03 13/1, 17/26, 23/18, RFP No. 3 & 3(R), C.O. No. 03 Memorandum No. 14, 26/4, 29/15 16/1, RFP No. 4, C.O. No. 03 Memorandum No. 5 & No. 18, C.O. No. 02; C.O, No. 05 rSMCCRD EFFORTS-TO-DATE & ANTICIPATED PUNCH LIST EFFORTS 0~OtraS) DJW - 3.5, J'GS - 2.0, DC - 3.0 23/13, 27/3, 29/2 DJW - 4.5, IGS - 2.0, DC - 2.0 DJW - 6.0, JGS - 2.0, DC - 2.0 DIW - 10,0, JGS - 4.0 DJ'W - 6.5, JGS - 3.0 GOS - 2.0, DJW - 24.0 JGS ° 6.0, DC - 14.0 RB - 5.0, DM - 3.0 22/2, C.O. No. 05 22/17, C.O. No. 05 DJW - 2.0, JG$ - 1.5 D)'W - 2.0, )'G$ - 1.5 23/16 25/19, 28/1. C.O. No. 06 27/7, 29/9, RFP No. 6(R.), 601) Rev., C.O. No. 06 28/12, 28/13, RFP No. 8. Future C.O. GGS - 2.0, DJ'W - 2.0 ,IGS- 1.5 DJW - 2.0, IG$- 1.5 DJW - 4.0, JGS - 2.0 DC - 2.0 C~S - 1.0, DJW - 3.0, JGS - 2.0 GGS - 1.0, RKL - 4.0 DJW - 9.5, JGS - 3.5 GGS - 1.0 DJW - 7.5, SGS - 4,0 CoGS - 1.o DJW - 7.5, JGS - 3.0 RKL - 3.0 28/17, RFP No. 8. Future C.O. ISSUE Finish Modifications (Paint, Wall Covering, etc) Annunciator Panel Radio Charger Counter Report Room Millwork Modification Storage Units In Sallyport Exterior Light Fixtures Sidewalk DOCUMENTATION ~# PSA MEMOILANDUM RFP - Request For Proposal ¢,0. - Chmge Order RFP No. B, 29/12 26/14, 29/1, C.O. No. 06 29/19 Furore C.O. 29/16 Future C.O. 29/18 Future C.O. 29/10 Futuro C.O. PSA/CCRD EFFORTS-TO-DATE & ANTICIPATED PUNCH lAST EFFORTS GGS - 1.0 DJW - 5.0, JGS - 3.5 DJW - 4.0 IGS- 2.0 GGS-I.0, DJW-6.0, RKL-5.0, JGS-2.5 DJW-4.0 JGS -2.5 DJW*4.0 JGS-2.5 D/W-4.0, DC-4.0 IGS.2.5 TQTAI~ GGS DJW /GS RKL DC DM 10.0 Firs x $95/Hr.'-- 121.0 Firs x S$0/Hr. = 55.0 ~ x $35/Hr. -- 12.0 Hfs x $45/Hr. ~- 27.0Hfs x$60/Hr.-- 3.0 Firs x S80/I-Ir, -- 5.0 I-Irs x $60/Hr. = Torsi $ 950.00 $9,6g0.00 $1,925.00 $ 540.00 $1,620.00 $ 240.00 $ 300,00 $15,255.00