My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Interim Architect Agreement/Contract
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Interim Architect Agreement/Contract
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 11:47:23 AM
Creation date
8/2/2011 11:15:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10061
Title
Interim Architect Agreement/Contract
Company
Arbuckle/Costic
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Contracts - Agreements
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
346
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
~ <br />Marion County <br />OREGON <br />GENERAL SERVICES <br />ADMINISTRATION <br />(503) 588-5455 <br />FAX(503-588-5495) <br />FACILITIES <br />MANAGEMENT <br />(503) 588-5154 <br />FAX(503-373-4430) <br />HUMAN RESOURCES <br />(503) 588-5165 <br />FAX(503-588-5495) <br />PURCHASING & <br />SERVICES <br />(503) 588-5295 <br />FAX(503-373-4379) <br />PROPERTY MANAGEMENT <br />(503) 588-5047 <br />FAX (503-588-5495) <br />MEMORANDUM <br />T~: E~111 COSt1C <br />Arbuckle Costic Architects <br />FROM: Randy Curtis, Director ~C~i <br />SUBJECT: Invoice nos. 95352 & 95353 <br />DATE: October 10, 1997 <br />R.G. discussed your most recent invoices with me yesterday. We are both <br />concemed with the amount of time spent on the project in August and September. <br />BOARD OF On August 6, 1997, I sent a letter to the Development Team members indicating <br />COMMISSIONERS that "we cannot afford to spend time and money on options that are not within the <br />Randall Franke <br />Gary Heer county's budget." Similar discussions took place at out weekly meetings on 7uly <br />Mary B. Pearmine 31a` and August 28`~. From the invoice, it is not clear how much time is being <br />ADMINISTRATIVE spent on redesign vs analysis of design options. However, based on the invoices, <br />OFFICER <br />Ken Roudybush I am concemed that over $60,000 was spent at a time when it was clear that a <br />fmal design has not been approved by the clients. <br />The work yow staff did in early August on redesign options has been appreciated <br />and we are a11 excited with the new possibilities. However, I a.m concerned that <br />work has proceeded beyond that which was authorized or anticipated by the <br />clients. <br />We need an explanation of August/September invoices and perhaps a more clear <br />understanding of work being performed dwing this budget analysis phase. To <br />this end, let me reiterate, that billable hours must be kept to a minimum until all <br />pa.rties agree that we are on budget and/or have authorized the continuation of <br />design development drawings. <br />If you have questions regazding these issues, please do not hesitate to contact <br />either myself or RG. <br />C: R.G. Andersen-Wyckoff <br />Dan Petrisich <br />100 High Street NE, Room 5321 • Salem, Oregon 97301-3665 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.