THE company which designed Colchester’s multimillion-pound art gallery will be paid £375,000 extra – because the project has overrun and cost more than expected.

Town MP Bob Russell last night said taxpayers would see the payment to Firstsite designer Rafael Vinoly Architects, as a reward for failure.

Mr Russell said: “With the borough council facing huge spending cuts, it is an outrage the public purse is having to give the architect what could be viewed as a bonus, simply because the cost has soared.”

But Colchester councillor Paul Smith said it was inevitable the company had received more money, as its staff were regularly needed at the site and building work had overrun by three years.

Mr Smith, who has responsibility for the gallery, said: “It is wrong to describe it as a bonus, because they are just being paid to do extra work.

“We wouldn’t say the security guard at the site had got a bonus because he has been working there for longer than expected. It is the same situation with the architects.”

Rafael Vinoly Architects was supposed to get 7.2 per cent of the original £16.5million budget for Firstsite, working out at £1,191,149.

The company struck a compromise deal with the council following the unexpected delays and will end up with £1,566,468, 6.26 per cent of the final £25million budget.

Mr Russell added: “It is a smaller percentage, but in cash terms a considerable additional sum.”

The MP called on Mr Vinoly to donate the £375,000 to the campaign to buy the old sergeants’ mess building, in Le Cateau Road, as a visitor centre for the town’s Roman chariot-racing circus.

He said: “I am led to believe Mr Vinoly has not been to Colchester for at least two years to see how his masterpiece is progressing, which I find astonishing.

“It would be a goodwill gesture on his part if he stuck to his original fee, and handed back the extra £375,000 which could, as I suggest, be used to acquire the sergeants’ mess for the benefit of the town.”

A Rafael Vinoly Architects spokesman said: “RVA defers to the Colchester Council in regard to this matter. We have no additional comment.”