My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Note Book: Miscellaneous
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Note Book: Miscellaneous
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:39:42 AM
Creation date
8/8/2011 9:50:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10404
Title
Note Book: Miscellaneous
BLDG Date
1/1/1998
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
136
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
3. Consolidation makes the Boazd and administration more accessible to our <br />constituents; and, ' <br />4. The leaseable expansion space that FTA will finance in the consolidated <br />project provides cash-flow which covers the increased costs of a new facility. <br />Without the consolidation that opportunity dces not exist and the increased <br />costs of both facilities would fall on the taxpayer. <br />Consolidation of administrative staff with the downtown transit center is not as <br />critical a need as the relocation of buses to a downtown off-street facility. The move <br />to consolidate dces represent a positive response to the issues noted above, however, <br />and it has been the Board's position that the consolidated transit facility continues to <br />be the best option, as it was when the Board addressed this issue in 1985, 1994, and <br />i ~95. <br />• Should these facilities be constructed on the Senator Block site? <br />Of all the issues that have been raised surrounding the Courthouse Square project, <br />there are none that have been as thoroughly studied, or as uniformly and <br />consistently concluded, as the issue of the Senator block location for a transit <br />facility. To state the findings succinctly: there are very few downtown sites which <br />meet the essential criteria for siting a transit center; of the few that do, one site is <br />in public ownership; one site is cleared, environmentally remediated, and would <br />not require further demolition of existing businesses or development; one site has <br />the approval of the City traffic division, the Ciry Council, the County, the <br />downtown association, the Chamber of Commerce, and other key participants. <br />In consideration of the resources that have been applied to studying the question <br />of location, and the consistent results of those studies....knowing firsthand the <br />disruption that ongoing site studies have on businesses that are in potential study <br />areas....knowing the difficulty that pertains to gaining the degree of consensus on <br />a location that currently exists for the Senator block....knowing that the block is <br />currently in District ownership and can easily and successfully accommodate a <br />transit center (with or without Courthouse Square)....with the knowledge of these <br />facts, the District is firm in its resolve to continue the examination of transit <br />development options at the Senator block site. Should it prove unfeasible to <br />develop Courthouse Square or any other transit center on the Senator block, then <br />we will not proceed at that location. But until there is compelling reason to <br />discontinue development options at the block which meets so many essential <br />criteria, the District Board has directed staff to focus its effort, for the Courthouse <br />Square project and any other transit center development, at the Senator block site. <br />• Should the District construct its facilities in partnership with Marion County as <br />now proposed as Courthouse Square? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.