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
~ <br /> <br />design that we are all comfortable with it. Additional discussions followed regarding the retail issue <br />of the ground floor space. Dave also addressed the situation of a separate contractor building the <br />retail tower and how to coordinate two different contractors on site and who maintains control. <br />These azeas will be worked out in the RFP. <br />The timing on the RFP will be one month to put together and then out for bid for one month; so it <br />will be at least two months before responses come back in. We want to get a maximum response <br />and ~plore as many options as we can. NIlVIDC is working on putting together a list of individuals <br />to contact and would appreciate any na.mes you would like to provide. <br />Would there be any probtem with Pence/Kelly proposing with a partner? No, however, <br />MNIDC would be the only party of the group that should not propose. <br />Budgets <br />Pence/Kelly prepared cost comparisons on the four design options from last week. The 4& 5 story <br />came out almost identical. The last strcetscape budget was $1.6 million with the original old design <br />and the costs should not change too much. The square footage is about the same in the two small <br />plazas as the originallarger one. Streetscape needs have not been reduced in the new design, but <br />dollars will stay. The city cunently has $1.3 to $1.4 million in their budget, but we will ask for <br />more on a line-item basis. There are no guarantees, but we can ask. <br />Comparisons were made on the cost per square foot from the June estimate vs. today's numbers. <br />Efficiencies have reduced costs by $14/s£ We are headed in the right direction by reducing <br />overbuild and gaining efficiencies in the design have helped get a better quality building at lower <br />costs. <br />Dave went over the numbers and differences in the 4 and 5 story versions and gave additional <br />clarifications. The cores are exactly the same, size-wise and elevator-wise. The treatment of the <br />the north side bus mall wall was also discussed. Transit will have control over this wa11. It is not <br />in the shell costs, but will be figured in the bus mall costs. Other issues to explore will be <br />separation of ownership and fire marshall issues when looking at the treatment of this wall. An 8" <br />wall has been added into transit's budget. It will need to be fine tuned. <br />The arcade is covered in the budget for the south tower building, but not included in the private <br />development side. This item will need to be refined as well to keep it separate and clean. Dave will <br />work with Byron and Interface to work out a cost break down for mechanicaUplumbing, etc. to <br />establish a fairly simple program and then use add-altemates to it. <br />No restrooms are shown on the ground floor and restrooms are not included in these costs. Leonard <br />will put them in. Discussions ensued about the restrooms being separate from the TPs and in the <br />common space allocations for the ground floor. Restrooms on the 2nd-Sth floors meet and exceed <br />code requirements for restrooms, but are not adequate for tenants. <br />Page 2 of 4 ~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.