ORI)f:R N0. 18814
AFPROVAh OF FAYING ARCHITECT/CONSiJLTANT TEAM (ACT)
Mi.CHAG:L N@~Af WAhF':RR., ARCHTTECT; MAXB:Y & ASSOCIATF,S
INC., JIIST7CF. RACILITY CONS(ILTANTS $4,500.00 ON
JULY 1S, 1989 AS FE,R AGREEMF,NT
On this the l.i~th <1ay of ~7u~Ly 1989, upon motion made by
commi.ssinner h'ay, seconded by Commiss:loner Baldwin, the Court
^nani.mous.y approved payment of $4,500.00 on July 15, 19fl9, ~
as per a,,Ireement, to Architect/Consultant Team (ACT) Michael
Neal Walker, Architect; Maxey & Assor,iates, Inc., Justice
Facility Consultants.
The County Treasurer and County Auditor are h~~rehy authorized
to draw a voucher, on .7uly 14, 1989, on Line Item No.
10-409-485, Frofassional Services, in Non-Departmental, for
$4,500,00 and reads payable to Michael Neal Walker & Maxey &
Associ.atc=s, Inc., (Commissioner Morgan was out. of the
~"ourtro<~m during ..he voLing• )
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN:
ARCHITECT/CONSULTANT TEAM - MICHAEL NEAL WALKER, ARCHITECT;
MAXEY & ASSOCIATES, INC., JUSTICE FACILITY CONSULTANTS
AND:
OWNER - COMMISSIONERS' COURT, KERR COUNTY, TEXAS
SCOPE OF PROJECTS
The Architect/Consultant Team (ACT) of Michael Neal Walker,
Architect, of Kerrville, Texas, and Maxey Associates, Inc.,
Justice Facility Consultants, of Austin, Texas, shall provide
professional services, including engineering services, for Kerr
County, Texas (County), for a PLANNING ANALYSIS of the County
physical resources and current and future needs through the year
2009 for:
1. Expansion of the existing maximum security jail capacity;
2. Creation of expandable misdemeanor facilities, including
work programs;
3. Feasibility of a replacement Juvenile Facility for pre- and
post-adjudication detainees with expansion capabilities;
4. Relocation of Sheriff's administrative offices out of the
Main Courthouse, combined into dispatch and other
operations;
5. Combined offices for for the Road & Bridge and Environmental
Health Departments;
6. Increased space for the Mechanical Repairs Shop;
7. Office space for various County departments, as prescribed
by the County;
8. Elevator for the Main Courthouse/Annex;
9. Expansion and upgrading of the Youth Exhibit Center to add
the possible function of a convention facility;
10. Other minor additions and revisions as may become apparent
in the above programming process.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
In performing the Planning Analysts, ACT shalt:
1. Assist the County's goals of determining the most beneficial
and cost effective methods to solve current overcrowding and
meet future needs;
2. Receive County's special instructions concerning inspection,
notification, and County staff interview procedures;
3. Receive and review legal descriptions, surveys, and other
site data from the County, including grades, pavements,
rights-of-way, restrictions, easements, locations of
existing structures, utility lines, and other properties
under consideration for lease or purchase by the County and
surveys/descriptions therefor (ACT shall not enter into an
active search for additional properties);
4. Review documents furnished by the County relating to
standards, legal requirements, building codes, requirements
of other governing agencies, energy management plans,
insurance criteria, maintenance reports, anticipated new
County programs, and growth projections;
5. Review data furnished by the County on approval procedures,
submittal deadlines, formatting, and time-critical criteria;
6. Review available record documents of existing County
facilities to determine the accuracy thereof, with a
preliminary report to the County as to the extent of
updating required, thereof;
7. Review the existing facilities' current conditions to the
extent necessary to estimate the construction methods
and costs relative to proposed additions/renovations (the
inspect[ons shall not be comprehensive, destructive, nor
exhaustive);
8. Coordinate through the County Judge's Office to mutually
determine the necessary County Departments from which to
gather essential data for the space needs analysis;
9. Conduct 2 to 3 Planning Sessions with Commissioners' Court
and affected staff, at which goals will be defined and
findings and recommendations will be thoroughly explored and
critiqued;
10. Perform thorough reviews of building, criminal justice, and
other codes, including new laws, to determine applicability
and ensure maximum practical conformance;
ACT/COUNTY ANALYSIS AGREEMENT
P9. 2
11. Condense requirements, research, reviews, and other cr[teria
into recommendations to the Court, as written statements,
Including alternatives, schematic diagram plans, attd
estimates of probable cost of construction for each
recommendation;
12. Assist the Court in determining the most advantageous means
of financing the recommended building programs and phasing
of Individual projects;
l3. Make recommendations to maximize operational efficiency,
improve existing security, and enhance cost effectiveness.
TIME
Based upon timely receipt of data and approvals from the
necessary County officials, this Planning Analysis shall be
complete within 7 weeks of the execution of this Agreement.
FEES
The County shall pay to ACT a Fee of 59,000 for the above
described services, payable 34,500 July 15, 1989, and 54,500
upon completion of the Analysis. The Analysis Fee shall be
applicable as a credit toward a future full fee for usual basic
services for forthcoming building programs on the following
bass: 50% credit on a building program of 5500,000 or more;
100% credit for program in excess of 51,000,000; provided that
Fee shall be applicable and proportioned 67% to correctional
facilities and 33% to other facilities. The Analysis Fee shall
be comprehensive with no anticipated reimbursable expenses for
communications, travel, or other expenses of the consultants in
the[r normal conduct of this Analysts. The Fee includes 20
copies of a finished report to be furnished to the County.
MISCELLANEOUS
1. Other ACT consultants are:
Carlos W. Coon, Jr., Consulting Engineer, Mechanical and
Electrical, San Antonio and Fredericksburg
Beicker Engineering, Inc., Structural, San Antonio
2. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not
less than seven C7) days written notice should the other
party fall to substantially perform In accordance with the
terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party
initiating the termination.
ACT/COUNTY ANALYSIS AGREEMENT
pg. 3
The Architect nor Consultants shall have any responsibility
for the discovery, presence, handling, removal, disposal, or
exposure of hazardous materials in any form at the existing
facilities, including but not llm[ted to asbestos, PCB, or
other toxic substances.
This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the
County and ACT and supersedes all prior negotiations,
representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This
Agreement may be amended only by written instrument, signed
by the same parties as represented below.
This Agreement entered into as of the day of June, 1989.
FOR THE CDUNTY:
8 GG.~~
ARCHITECT/CONSULTANT:
Michael Neal Walker, Architect #3491
1303 Vesper Lane, Kerrville, Texas 78028, C512) 895-ARCH
Maxey Associa ~ c., J tice Facility Consultants
1701 Director's Blvd., Austin, Texas 78744-1066, <512) 448-0148
ACT/COUNTY ANALYSIS AGREEMENT
pq. 4
ORDER NO. 7.8776
AUTHORI2.ATION FOR COt7NTY JUDGF. EDWARDS TO SIGN
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH
ARCHITECT/CONSULTANT TRAM (ACT) - MICHAEL NF.AL
WALKF..R, ARCHITECT; MAXF.Y & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Jt)STIC:E FACILITY CONSULTANTS
On this the ?2nd day of June 1.989, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Holekamp, w.;..th
Commi.ssi.oner's Ba'Ldwin and Holekaml~, and ~7udge Edwards voting
"AYE", and Commissioner Morgan "ABSTAINING", said motion to
authorize County Judge Edwarda to sign Agreement For
Professional Services with Archii..ect/Consultant. Team (ACT) -
Michael Neal. Walker, Arr;hitect; Maxey & Assor,iates, Inc.,
Justine E'acility Consultants, was approved by a majority
vote.
ORDER N0. 18776
AUTHORIZATION FOR COi3NTY JUDGE
EDUg1ItDS TD SIGN AGREII+IENNT FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH
ARGHITECP/CONSULTANT TEAM (ACT)
MICHAEL NEAT. ti~II1LI~t, ARCHITECT;
MAXEY & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
JUSTICE FACILITY CONSULTANTS
June 22, 1989
Vol. R, Pg. 405