Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

~ not in the bid have been moved over to streetscape. These were developed with ci y staff and are within their current contracts. It was suggested that the plan include four (4) plant rs and two (2) trash receptacles along each face of the building. This would still bring the cost ir~ under 1.Smil. Legal fees and soft costs were discussed. I ~ ACTION: Curt will adjust his proposal with these line items. The revised she~t will be ready for Monday's meeting. I ITEM 2: Atrium Design ~'i Dan asked for discussion around his concerns with the atrium. Among his conce s are: air and sound quality, fire proofing, cost and obstruction of views. Dan had asked for an alt rnative design for the atrium to be developed. The new design provides a covered pedestrian area which extends over the doors of the busses. From the model, it was unclear how far out the cove extends. RG said that he will need some alternate views to submit to his management staf£ The $nodel is not at the correct scale. I ACTION: Leonard will have new drawings for RG by Tuesday morning. Weight bearing, waterproofing and cost saving issues were discussed, along wit other design elements. The cost of framing and electrical is reduced in this design. There is also savings in the reduced columns which increases the parking space and this reduces the cost per st 11 by $500.00. It was pointed out that the mechanical engineer was concerned with the original d sign from the beginning. The cost of e~chaust/power ventilation was never determined for the origin 1 design. Curt pointed out that it is necessary to fireproof the covered pedestrian walkways with sp ' ers, but not the open areas. The improved view from the office space was noted. The metal roof system far the riginal design did not give the impact of a light, spacious area. The potential noise impact between e two designs was also discussed. With the new design, there is more flexibility in the cost of th materials and using glass becomes an option again. Leonard introduced some sample materials. i Dan pointed out that the atrium is just a component of the project. Any changes to t] will not hold up the project at this point. The new design has no impact on the shell the support features in the garage. There is an impact on the parking structure and county's cost. No decision needs to be made today on the atrium, but with the exi; are looking at HVAC at $120k and fireproofing at $135k. The cost of the s~ unknown. No decision at this time. Randy asked that the minutes reflect that Camelot is gone unless Alan comes concept to Randy and RG. atrium design -sts, including ~s impacts the 1g design, we nklers is still and sells this Dan reported that the preliminary soil analysis has come back under five parts per mil. He still needs ~, to see the report, which he will have on February 21, and the analysis of the two ot er test holes.