Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />keeping Council informed as to the cumulative amount. The motion carried <br />unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />Pay Request #4 <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch explained Rochon Corporation had submitted their Pay Request #4 in the amount of <br />$195,892.45. The pay request covered the period ending December 30, 2000. Architectural <br />Alliance had visited the site and found the percentages for work completed were accurate. The <br />percentage of the contract amount applied for was 19.7% (minus a 5% retainage of $28,996.99). <br />Staff recommended approval ofthe payment of$195,892.45 to Rochon Corporation. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a <br />motion to approve Rochon Corporation's Payment Request #4 in the amount of <br />$195,892.45. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />3, Professional Design Services Fee, Architectural Alliance <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch explained Architectural Alliance was requesting additional fee for professional design <br />services. Architectural Alliance's basic service fee of $162,500.00 was established in 1998 at <br />8.6% of an estimated construction budget of$I,887,750.00. The City had decided to proceed <br />with a $2,942,000.00 construction project. Architectural Alliance was requesting an adjustment <br />of their fee in the amount of $22,280.00 based on the accepted construction budget less the cost <br />for the extension of the utilities and the $65,000.00 budget allocated for the basement. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst expressed concern this was not a sliding scale and the 8.6% was a fixed rate. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson expressed concern that this would keep occurring, and Architectural <br />Alliance should have known what their cost structure was prior to the development. <br />Councilmember Grant agreed. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated the City did change the scope of the project and believed this particular <br />charge was fair. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked why did they not draw the line at this time, instead of the next <br />time Architectural Alliance asked for a fee adjustment. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst responded they would be entitled to payment on number 1. Councilmember <br />Larson agreed, but expressed concern with paying them for number 2. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem requested a copy of the Contract that was signed by the City. <br />Councilmember Larson agreed. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst suggested deferring item number 3. <br />