My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:47:33 AM
Creation date
9/6/2011 10:03:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10302
Title
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
BLDG Date
8/19/1997
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9601 Courthouse Square Research
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.
/
430
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
Ra.ndy said they have allocated $2 million and so far we have identified $1.4 million. There is no <br />reason not to go after more. The city does have a lot of urban renewal dollazs available. <br />~ The iss <br />ue of shonng was discussed. If you are just going to 12 feet, you won't need to shore. <br />With either of the two new options, shoring will need to be done and there are additional costs <br />involved. Pence/Kelly will get some numbers after receiving engineering information. They have <br />the option of using kickers or tie backs to shore and will use tie backs with screws into the street. <br />There is the possibility of problems with utilities in the street with either option. <br />How many Pl opNons are we evaluating? We are looking at the two new ones, and especially <br />if Option 2 is viable. We should have enough data on the 278 option to compare the three. <br />Leonard will revisit to see if accurate. Dan P suggested we work hard on these options. If <br />Option 1 can work, then we need to pursue discussions with the city as soon as possible on <br />revocable permits. MNIDC will take drawings back to Rick today and they will have Walker also <br />review for additional input. <br />De-watering Work <br />Phase 1 and Phase 2 have been completed. We have raw data available and Mike is saying we <br />don't need it if we are doing Pl. The analysis write up will be $6,000 and there is no reason now <br />to expend these dollars. DEQ's request re: sewer contaminates has been taken care of with a <br />sample being sent out for analysis. <br />Discussions retumed to environmental issues and forcing the issue with Sta.tesma.n Joumal. The <br />~; attomey was not available due to recent medical situation. 7erry Hodson is saying they have <br />closed the discussions and they don't want an agreement. Commissioner Franke, chair of County <br />Board of Commissioners, doesn't want to force the issue and pursue other alternatives. The <br />question was why should we dig 25 feet when the Statesman is only going to 13 feet. <br />Dan P. was not convinced, even without the environmental issue, that P2 made sense. If this <br />works, we are ahead dolla.r wise. Dan B. asked if there would be risk to county for <br />efficiency. Randy responded that the risk now is it appropriate to do this. If parking county goes <br />down, then we will go there. We have backdoor options that can get our count up to 400-425. <br />We are comfortable with the parking ratio. If the count is up to at least 350 then it is a go and we <br />have flexibility across the street. We are still at a 3/1 ratio. If the ratio of standards/compacts <br />goes down, then we can talk. <br />Leonard added that Salem requires 19 feet length for standard. Right now the two rows in the <br />center of Option 1 are compacts. The larger vehicles being parked in the service area on the first <br />floor is under review. <br />Bill asked what do we do with GRI, shut it down? We have raw data, and according to Stan it <br />looks similar to what he saw. Centurywest has expended $17,000 towards this effort to date. <br />The $17,000 is what? There was a correction to the amount by Centurywest. There is a <br />$30,600 bill for county: GRI $17,100 and Centurywest $13,500. Centurywest is to rewrite work <br />order #24 to cover those costs and GRI expenses are against their contract, and they will supply <br />~ an invoice on that portion. Do you want to spend the $6,000 for the plan? Mike Ha ford <br />Y <br />says it is of no value to hun. We don't want to throw it way. We will keep and analyze it if and <br />Page 3 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.