Laserfiche WebLink
4.2.e Courthouse Square - Streetscape Project Urban Renewal Funding (CD) <br />Scott Move the staff recommendation with the followin~ modifications: And, first of all, <br />to delete the amounts for canopies, bridges and arcades/pavilion/clock tower, all as <br />found on Attachment A which is, would be the 6th pa~e of the staff report if the~ <br />were numbered. And to also remove the item down at the bottom of that for tree <br />removal in the amount of $3700 and for consultant fees in the amount of $101 469 <br />and to replace that, the ca.nopies, bridges and arcade/pavilion/clock tower with an <br />allowance of up to the cit~policv amount of $160 per lineal foot, which appears to <br />be somethin~ in the neighborhood of $150,000 (that's strictlv parenthetical); and <br />that the expenditure be subject to desi r~i approval bv the Citv for the street <br />awnings and streetscape amount; and that $160 is for the awnin~s, of course, and <br />also to delete the provision for perpetual maintenance. <br />Wheeler Seconded. <br />General discussion. <br />Wulf Well, I, maybe it's a friendly amendment of sorts that I would assume that we, if <br />the maker of the motion is reducing the canopies, bridges, arcades/pavilion/clock <br />tower, that the corresponding general conditions, contractor fee, contingency and <br />index to construction start, also ... <br />Scott Excuse me, those were all to be percentaged so they would a11 be reduced <br />accordingly. <br />Wulf Okay. And then, this is more of a clarification. Are you asking, the way your <br />motion is, is that 100% of the consultant fees be deleted or just the proportionate <br />share of the consultant fees? <br />Scott The part I was making reference to is under Reimbursement for completed work. <br />Maybe I need clarification from staff, but I thought there was general agreement <br />that we were not going to pay for the work they've already done. <br />