My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:37:49 AM
Creation date
8/5/2011 3:34:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10093
Title
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
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.
/
615
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
phase 2 of that plan. With plan 4b this would allow <br />the Courts to go ahead with their expansion. <br />The only value with a phased public service building is <br />that we are assuming that government will continue to <br />grow in some proportion with the population and the <br />economy. If there is a much higher restriction on <br />government growth in the next 10 - 15 years then we may <br />never get to phase 2, we could be down sizing, although <br />the projections don't say this. There is the possibil- <br />ity of the federal government downsizing to the state <br />and local governments, because people want to deal with <br />it at the local level. If this is the case what is <br />projected for 2013 may now be expected in 2005. <br />Dale Penn recommended Downtown be an "A" category. We <br />want to consolidate the county departments into one <br />location and minimize county owned buildings in the <br />downtown area. There is still a transit issue that is <br />a City/County livability issue. This option would at <br />least provide some flexibility to a potential solution. <br />Randy Curtis has been meeting periodically with Greg <br />Cook of the Transit district. Since the transit and <br />county separated from the project, there has been <br />continued communication although he has not discussed <br />the possibility of the Senator Block with Greg. <br />Dale asked if we would meet the voters approval to <br />purchase the Equitable Building and can't we purchase <br />it through C.O.P's. Randy said if we phase it in over <br />several years the Equitable building with its' revenues <br />may be adequate, plus our own revenues to cover operat- <br />ing cost and debt service. If this were feasible it <br />would change the whole planning. <br />It was moved and seconded that Downtown is a"B" cate- <br />gory. Downtown should research the feasibility of <br />acquiring the Equitable Building. If reports are <br />favorable, move forward with the purchase of that <br />building (option 3). If reports are not favorable then <br />move toward option 2: Construct new building with park- <br />ing on Senator block. <br />TRI-AGENCY: <br />Mark Caillier stated that last week we had a concern of <br />having to many "A" categories and yet we continue to <br />make things an "A" category that are dependent upon a <br />Facility that is a"B" category. There is still no <br />place to put the Sheriff's department. Corrections is <br />an "A" but $2 -$2 1/2 million in site construction <br />costs were not included in the corrections program. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.