Construction Agreement [Amendment No. 1] - Cerner Properties Inc. and J. E. Dunn Construction Co.
AMENDMENT NO. 1
to the
AGREEMENT
BETWEEN OWNER and CONTRACTOR
MODIFICATION and AMENDMENT
made as of the 24th day of October in the year Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-
Four.
Between the Owner: Cerner Properties, Inc.
2800 Rockcreek Parkway, Suite 601
Kansas City, Missouri 64117
and the Contractor: J. E. Dunn Construction Company
929 Holmes
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
The Project: Cerner Associate Center
2800 Rockcreek Parkway
Kansas City, Missouri 64117
The Architect: Hollis & Miller Group
309 SW Market Street
Lee's Summit, Missouri 64063-2315
The Owner and the Contractor agree as set forth below:
Whereas, the Owner and Contractor have previously agreed to amend their
Agreement to establish a scope, costs, schedule and Contract Documents, and
Whereas, the Owner and Contractor now wish to so amend their Agreement,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions
contained herein, the parties hereto agree to Amendment of their Contract
dated September 1, 1994, as set forth below:
1. This Amendment No. 1 is for the Early Bid Package.
2. In accordance with Paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2, the Date of Commencement
shall be the date of this Amendment and the substantial completion date
shall be pursuant to a mutually agreed upon Contractor's project
schedule.
3. In accordance with Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Agreement, the
Guaranteed Maximum Price for the Work of this Amendment shall be
established as: Three Million Three Hundred Thirty Two Thousand
One Hundred Thirty Nine Dollars ($3,332,139.00), which includes
deductive value engineering alternates 1 through 9 totaling
$224,600.00.
Pursuant to Paragraphs 5.1 and 5.3, the Contractor's Fee
applicable to the work of this amendment shall be established as:
Ninety Seven Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight Dollars ($97,158.00)
4. Pursuant to Paragraphs 16.13 through 16.17 of the Agreement, the
Contract Documents describing the Scope of Work of this Amendment and
upon which the G.M.P. stated in Item #3 above is based, are as follows:
Paragraph Description Title Date
--------- ----------- ------- ------
16.1.3 Supplementary & Cerner Associate August 22, 1994
Other Conditions Center - Early (Ref. Exhibit A)
Bid Package
Project Manual
16.1.4 Specifications Cerner Associate August 22, 1994
Center - Early (Ref. Exhibit A)
Bid Package
Project Manual
16.1.5 Drawings Cerner Associate August 22, 1994
Center - Early (Ref. Exhibit A)
Bid Package
16.1.6 Addenda No. 1 September 8, 1994
No. 2 September 15, 1994
16.1.7 Other Documents Proposal & October 25, 1994
Clarifications
(9 pages)
This Modification and Amendment entered into as of the day and year first
written above.
OWNER: CONTRACTOR:
CERNER PROPERTIES, INC. J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
BY:/s/Clifford W. Illig BY:/s/Barrett Brady
Barrett Brady
Executive Vice President
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT A
----------
1. Contract between Owner and Contractor dated September 1, 1994.
2. General Conditions, AIA Document A201, as supplemented and included
in the Project Manual.
3. Drawings dated August 22, 1994, listed as follows:
C1.1 through C5.2
S100 through S302
A0.0, A0.2, A1.1, A2.1 through A2.5, A6.1 through A6.5, A7.1
through A7.6, A8.1, A11.1, A11.3
M1.1 through M1.4
P1.1 through P1.4
ME1.1, E1.1 through E1.4
SP-1 through SP-5
4. Project Manual dated August 22, 1994 titled Cerner Associate Center-
Early Bid Package Project Manual.
5. Addenda
-------
No. 1 dated September 8, 1994
No. 2 dated September 15, 1994
<PAGE>
October 25, 1994
Mr. Steve Lee
Cerner Corporation
2800 Rock Creek Parkway
Kansas City, Missouri 64117
Re: Cerner Associates Center
J. E. Dunn Project No. 821
Dear Steve:
Enclosed for your review is a copy of our Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal
for the Early Bid Package on the above referenced project. With assistance
of the Hollis & Miller Group, we have provided recommended value
engineering alternates which bring the cost of the work within the + 5% of
the median range estimate figure.
We have also had the opportunity to look forward and project the Final Bid
Package costs. From our cost projections it is apparent that the project
has evolved to a level higher than our schematic range estimate assumptions.
This is an understandable progression that occurs as the design and
expectations are further refined and detailed.
We do believe if the budget is of major concern the cost can be reduced by
re-designing various elements prior to issuance of the Final Bid Package.
We look forward to receiving your direction in this matter.
Sincerely,
J.E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
/s/Mark M. Morton
Mark M. Morton
MMM/jr
Enclosure
cc: Charlie Williams, Cerner
Leon Roberts, Hollis & Miller
Doug Cook, Hollis & Miller
File (2)
<PAGE>
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF BUDGET ANALYSIS
2. BUDGET ANALYSIS SUMMARY
3. VALUE ENGINEERING ALTERNATES - RECOMMENDED
4. VALUE ENGINEERING ALTERNATES - PROPOSED
5. EARLY BID PACKAGE ESTIMATE
6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CLARIFICATION
<PAGE>
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of BUDGET ANALYSIS
------------------------------------
Original Range Estimate dated July 20, 1994 $7,949,026
Less Accepted Value Engineering Alternates 1,165,700 CR
Revised Range Estimate Dated July 27, 1994 $6,783,326
EARLY BID PACKAGE
------------------
Early Bid Package dated August 22, 1994 $3,556,739
Less Recommended Value Engineering Alternates 224,600 CR
Revised Early Bid Package Cost $3,332,139
Less Early Bid Package Median Budget $3,180,177 CR
Variance from Early Bid Package Median Budget + $ 151,962
(Note: The Early Bid Package costs are within the
+ 5% range of the July 27, 1994 revised budget.)
Cost variance in the Early Package are due to:
1. Site Utilities
2. Machine Excavation
3. Precast Concrete
Explanation of variance in the Early Package:
1. Site Utilities - Additional 8" water line and associated appurtenances
required by the City of North Kansas City, Missouri.
2. Machine Excavation - Unforeseen soil condition requiring extensive
undercut of foundation system and recompaction of soil.
3. Precast - Premium due to market conditions and schedule requirements
of the project have caused precast costs to overrun from budget.
FINAL BID PACKAGE
------------------
Potential cost overruns on the Final Bid Package:
1. Architectural $ 345,000
2. Mechanical $ 245,000
3. Electrical $ 180,000
-----------
Potential Total Overrun $ 770,000
Explanation of cost overruns in the Final Package:
1. Refinement of the final design has introduced many new items, increased
quantity of budgeted items and inclusion of previously deleted items.
Examples of these items include: access flooring, wood flooring,
lockers, folding partitions, mesh partitions, daycare exterior
storage rooms, drywall light coves, projection screens in gym, locker
units, acoustical wall and ceiling panels, special coatings,
millwork, folding partitions, wire mesh partitions etc...
2. Refinement and changes in the anticipated use of various scopes within
the building have impacted the budget. Examples of the changes are:
changing the lobby/corridor spaces to reception and prefunction
areas, changing the gymnasium to a multipurpose/auditorium area and
upgrading the meeting room finishes to boardroom-like finishes.
3. A general refinement of the mechanical and electrical systems have also
impacted the budget. Examples include premium rooftop units,
sophisticated temperature controls, premium light fixtures, dimming
system and programmable lighting system etc...
<PAGE>
VALUE ENGINEERING ALTERNATES - RECOMMENDED
October 21, 1994
1. Utilize a precast face mix which significantly reduces the unit cost
of same from the specified $248/CY mix to within range of $126/CY to
$160/CY and incorporate a sandblast/waterwash finishes.
Approximate Deduct: $94,200 - $134,000
2. Substitute limestone aggregate for granite at the interior exposed
walls. Also, a light sandblast would need to be substituted for the
water wash in order to not reveal the limestone. The mix would
contain the same dye as the specified mix and with the light
sandblast only be slightly lighter.
Deduct: $ 8,200
3. Eliminate the curved precast wall panels at the daycare perimeter and
provide segmented precast wall panels.
Deduct: $ 3,200
4. Modify the column and beam feature on the west side of the building to
12" diameter columns and 14" thick single piece beams. The beams will
have a hand-finish on the beam side which faces the structure. It may
also be possible to hand finish the top of the beam in lieu of the
inside face.
Deduct: $12,500
5. Eliminate the 9" thick panel sections and change to 8" thick throughout.
This simplifies the formwork requirements from that currently
required. In addition 1" depressions may be added to various
locations, upon engineering review, at no cost, and 10" precast panel
thicknesses are unaffected.
Deduct: $27,200
6. Delete the 24 each - 12" round bollards added by Addendum No. 2.
Deduct: $25,600
7. Delete bowstring joists at canopies and replace with a self supporting
roof system which will be defined further in the final package. Note
this is not a net deduct as the final design requires completion.
Deduct: $17,500
8. Substitute Vulcraft or Wheeling acoustical deck with NRC of .90 for
specified Epic ER2A with NRC of .95 in the gymnasium area.
Deduct: $30,900
9. Eliminate face block at pool equipment rooms, the receiving dock
perimeter (rooms A113, A114 & A112), the gym storage (room B111),
pool storage areas (room C122, C123, C124 &C118).
Deduct: $ 5,300
TOTAL ADDITIONAL VALUE ENGINEERING ALTERNATES: $224,600
<PAGE>
Project Description and Clarification
Early Bid Package
October 21, 1994
1. This Proposal is based on the drawings and specifications prepared by
The Hollis & Miller Group dated August 22, 1994, including Civil
Drawings, C1.1 through C5.2; Structural Drawings, S100 through
S302; Architectural Drawings, A0.0, A0.2, A1.1, A2.1 through A2.5,
A6.1 through A6.5, A7.1 through A7.6, A8.1, A11.1, A11.3;
Mechanical Drawings M1.1 through M1.4; Plumbing Drawings P1.1
through P1.4; Electrical Drawings ME1.1, E1.1 through E1.4; Pool
Drawings SP-1 through SP-5. The above referenced Contract Documents
have also been modified by Addendum No. 1 dated September 8, 1994 and
Addendum No. 2 dated September 15, 1994, which are also included in the
GMP proposal.
2. The GMP Proposal excludes the following items:
a. Design Fees
b. Financing Costs
c. Special Inspection Costs
d. Performance Bonds
e. Builder's Risk Insurance
f. Furniture and Artwork
g. Security System
h. Telephone System
i. Material Testing Costs (soil, asphalt, concrete, etc.)
j. Drawing Reproduction
k. Hazardous Material Abatement
l. Landscaping and Irrigation System
m. Utility Company Charges for Extension of Services
n. Development Fees or Special Assessments
3. As it relates to the critical delivery items (namely precast and
structural steel), we are requesting the Design Team review,
approve and return shop drawings with in a one week time period.
Because of the critical nature of these items and their fabrication
time it is imperative the shop drawing review be expedited in order for
the project to be completed in accordance with the schedule.
4. This proposal includes an eight foot plywood fence along Rockcreek
Parkway and the entrance to the Union Pacific Building with wire panel
fence encompassing the remainder of the site. Painting of the site
fence is excluded.
5. We have included asphalt patching required and specifically indicated
on drawing C5.1. However, we are excluding the patching of the re
maining asphalt because of the lack of information on the existing
asphalt section and can not accurately anticipate the extent to which
the asphalt may be damaged during construction. This work will be
reviewed and estimated after the scope of work has been accurately
determined.
6. We have included in this proposal five handicap sign bases (one for
each space), six light pole bases per the Architect's direction and
six steel bollards per Addendum No. 2. Each of these items will be
verified in the next bid package in location, number required or size
specification.
7. We are excluding from this proposal the precast concrete grass pavers,
since this type of work is typically provided by a landscaping
contractor.
8. We have not included in this proposal the colored concrete specified
but not yet defined on the drawings.
9. In this proposal we have included asphalt mixes APWA Type 1 base and
APWA Type 3 surface mixes in lieu of the BM-2b and BM2 indicated on
the plans. This substitution is supported by the specifications and
has been reviewed with the Architect as acceptable.
10. We have estimated the excess topsoil can be stockpiled on-site and
specifically exclude offsite haul-off. The topsoil will be wasted
behind Building No. 5 per the Owner and Architect's direction. Other
material (non-topsoil) will be utilized in eroded areas along the
ravine on the east property line.
11. Quinn Concrete is the apparent low bidder for the precast concrete
materials on the project. They are, however, not members of PCI, but
do provide their own in-house testing and quality control which is
periodically certified by an independent consulting engineer. In
addition, Quinn Concrete is also a Kansas City, Missouri approved
precast supplier.
12. We have included in this proposal 40 sf of glass block at the Daycare
Lobby, turret feature.
13. In our proposal we have included rails at the stair opening at the
gymnasium storage mezzanine. This rail was not detailed in the
drawings, therefore we are providing a 1.5" square tube code
compliant rail. We also have provided the rail at the mezzanine in
the lobby area with a top tube rail and two channel intermediate
rails.
14. We have included in our proposal angle framing at the roof top units
with two framed openings per RTU per details 3/S102 and 4/S102.