Arbuckle Miscellaneous - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. ,~ . ` . ~~ . ~ U.S. Department REGION X 915 Second Ave~ue of Transportation a~s~, iaano, ore9on, Federai auitdin9, Suite 3142 Washington Seattle, WA 981741002 Federal Transit 2os-22a7ss4 Administration ~-,1~~~(~ r, ~ .U ~ • U ~v l~ ~~~ ..~ ~~ Mr. RG. Andersen-Wyckoff F~~ ~ ~ 19~a ' General Manager FEg ~ ~ ~gog SALEM AREA TR~N~IT Salem Area Mass Transportation District GENEFiAL MANAG~R 3140 Del Webb Avenue N.E. ~ Salem, Oregon 97303-4165 Re: Courthouse Square Procurei:~ent Issues So!e Source Justification Dear Mr. Andersen-Wyckoff: We have reviewed Mr. Fetherston's letter of January 27, 1998 regarding the sole source contracts between Salem Area Transit District and Marion County (hereafter referred to as SAMC) with PencelKelly and Arbuckle Costic Architects, Inc. Following is our understanding of the sole source actions and required clauses and our deternunation relating to each action: 1. Architectural and Eri '~g neerin~ Services. N1r. Dan Berrey was retained by a Letter of Agreement (LOA) signed by Marion County on July 31, 1996. We understand that Arbuckle Costic Architects, Inc., (Arbuckle) was a subcontractor to Betrey. We further understand the contract with Berrey has been ternunated. Berrey had not entered into a written agreement with Arbuckle. However, Arbuckle prepared designs for the project. ' At the time of Mr. Berrey's termination, it was estimated that the schematic drawings were - 100% completed and the design development drawings were 67% completed_ At the time of the termination of the LOA with Dan Berrey, SAMC entered into a sole source Interim Agreement (IA) for architectural consultation services with Arbuckle. SAIvYC determined this action was necessary to promptiy obtain control of the architectural work product in order to continue the project. The project schedule was established to start construction in September, in order to .' complete the concrete work before the onset of winter weather. The project time frame for architectural services was May to August, in order to start constn.iction no later than September 1. SAMC decided that starting a new procurement action to obtain an architect would be too time consuming in order to meet the construction schedule. Arbuckle controlled the drawings and other architectural work products for the project. Although general architectural services are available from several sources, the specific item that the District needed to procure was the existing work product, not general architectural services. Because Berrey had no written agreement with Arbuckle, the architects held all copyright interest to the work products. Although the District has the righ: to compel the architect to license the work product to• SAMC, this would have resulted in lirigation and Page 1 of 3