Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

~ they heard what they wanted to hear: the ability to get phase permitting of proje¢t. There was a good representation from the City as well. The city planning department asked good questions and it appea.rs the project is headed in right direction. Dan raised the issue of getting promises from the city and then not having them deliver. We have been in control up until now and we need to rely on the city to come through with our deadlines. Discussions were held on how to approach keeping the city on target with our project schedule deadlines. Options include having an upfront candid discussion with the city, request an outside company to handle the permits and request that the city review and approve. Another option would be to put in writing our requests and timeframes as to whiat we want and need; then get a response in writing from the city to have something to go back to when deadlines are not being met. Public works and electrical issues could be the hang''up. Right now the city has no major projects for the ne~rt 6-8 weeks, but there aze some out thei±e that could hit the city about the same time as ours. It was recommended by RG to be careful in the approach to the city and work both sides, possibly another visit with Don and Dick to see how they react. We should revisit this issue a little later in the project and discuss once again. An urban renewal update will also need to be completed soon. County just went through situation where an unknown systems development charge of $46,000 appeared and was negotiated down to $5,000. Have we prepazed our budget to deal with permit fees of this type? Dan responded that it is built in to most of the estimates. RG explained the process the city uses in assessing fees of this type and also issuing, credit towards those fees to reduce the final assessment. It is likely the county was not given ant~ credits on the original assessment and once those were discovered, it reduced the final assessm~nt. We need to stay on top of situations like this to ensure we don't get caught in a similar situ~.tion. Parking Issues The current plan leaves no parking space on High and Church Streets. Was that in the plan in November? High Street never did have parking on it. We lost a few spaces on Church Street. How will the private retail office be affected by fees assessed from the patking district? Each private business coming into the project will be assessed directly from the city. It will not be a fee the owner of the building will need to worry about. Status Reports Alan reported that they are working towards identifying blocks of space for the aarious entities for County and Transit to occupy in the building. They are moving along. They need to have the rationales where transit and the board of commissioners want to be located. County has fle~bility at this time with the board, and these issues will be worked on in the n~~rt week or so. We have an interior architect on a consulting basis coming on board on Tuesday. Our desire is to get GMP package information to Curt that will have as much detailed informat~on on space as possible. County has provided Lisa with some new square footage numbers anC~ we now have all drawings for existing county and annex offices showing how we are currentlq using space. Board of Commissioners will need access to elevator and/or stairs to be close to hearing room, County maikoom will be located on northeast corner of building. County is lodking at 50,000 Page 3 of 6