My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOC Files (Folders 1-3)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
BOC Files (Folders 1-3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 4:07:50 PM
Creation date
8/2/2011 3:23:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10068
Title
BOC Files (Folders 1-3)
Company
Marion County
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Project Coordination
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.
/
608
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 />~ ~ Salem Area Mass ~'ransit District <br />~ Courthouse Square <br />~ COST ALLOCATION <br />~ <br />r~ Purpose: The purpose of the cost allocation analysis is to establish <br />i~ the reasonable basis for the payment of shared costs. in the <br />Courthouse Squaze development and prorata payment of <br />( `~ constrtxction related progress payments. <br />; Principles: The partnership between Marion County and the Salem <br />~~ Area Mass Transit District for Courthouse Square, as <br /> memorialized hy the Intergover.~nmental Agreement, enables <br /> the two public agencies to realize . savings through the <br />~ sharing of costs which otherwise would have accrued to an <br />~ individual agency. This cost allocation model will establish <br /> the basis on which those costs will be reasonably shared <br />~ and, when completed, will determine each pazty's prorata <br /> share of the entire development project In that manner, <br /> all invoices for services to the project can be paid by the <br />~ paying agent upon receipt of each party's prorata share of <br />. <br />~ the invoice, rather than the untimely and costly necessity <br />. of trying to detemnine the actual share of each invoice. <br /> Given the condomuuum nature of the development and the <br /> <br />~ ~ inter-mixed elements of the project, the latter method of <br />determining costs would be almost impossible, whereas, <br /> the former proposed method, established by independent <br />~ cost-estirnators and reaffumed from the bids, provides a <br />~; simple, accurate, and cost-effective method of payment and <br /> fiscal control. <br />~ <br />' <br />' ~ _ <br />~ <br />. <br />j ,Analysis: For purposes of this analysis, cost sharing has been <br />~_: divided into four categories: <br />~ <br /> 1. Land Related Costs <br /> 2. Special Considerations <br />~ ~ 3. Constrnction Related Costs <br /> <br />J . 4. Change Orders <br />~ <br />~ . Land Relatea Costs: The property acquisition model, <br />,. previously approved by FTA and recently updated in <br />~~ accordance with the final design development plans, <br />., established that Transit has acquired a 31.29% undivided <br />(; interest in the downtown block now known as Courthouse <br />~ . <br />E Square and upon which the project will be developed. Cost <br />~ Ch2 Cost Allocation <br /> 09/29/98 <br />~ <br />~ <br />, ,: 75 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.