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
emo <br />To: File <br />' From: R. G. Andersen-Wyckoff, General Manager <br />Cc: Randy Curtis, Dan Petrusich <br />Date: July 1, 1997 <br />Re: Phone Conversation <br />Received a telephone conference call from Dan Petrusich and Craig Lewis regarding the Arbuckle <br />Costic invoices I had faxed to them for the months of May and June for services provided to <br />Courthouse Square. Dan indicated they were having difficulty reconciling the invoices for several <br />reasons: <br />1. They have no record of previous payments. <br />2. There is no supporting data for the hours claimed. <br />3. They have no copies of subcontracts issued by Arbuckle Costic. <br />Dan asked if they have the authority to contact Arbuckle Costic to request the necessary <br />documentation? I told Dan that as our agents, with responsibility for authorizing payments on <br />the project, they have full authority to request, or demand, any substantiating data required. <br />Dan said they would have people in Salem on Wednesday on another project related issue and would <br />go to Arbuckle Costic to request the information. I suggested that if they requested to see the <br />subcontracts and they could not be provided, that in itself is an answer: they don't have any. <br />Dan and Craig expressed concem that the plans they have received from Arbuckle Costic do not <br />constitute 67% completion of Design and Development, as indicated on the invoice, nor can they <br />understand how Arbuckle Costic could spend $100,000 on the project in less than one month. I told <br />them thaYs why we sent the invoices to them: we also had concems over the lack of documentation <br />and therefore the reliability of percentages of completion of the drawings. <br />I briefed Dan and Craig on the meeting Randy and I had with Alan Costic in that we had requested that <br />Alan provide us with a time and materials estimate for their architectural work on the p~oject as well as <br />copies of subcontracts. Further that we wanted the time and materials estimate broken down rather <br />than backed into as an extension of a presumed percentage of hard costs. There was comment, as . <br />well as inference, that we wanted justification for their compensation fee knowing that the costs would <br />be audited by FTA. Alan informed us that complexities of the project also affect the fee so that you can't <br />just compare projects on the basis of their budgets. We indicated we wanted that accounted for in the <br />time and materials estimate. <br />• Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.