Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

his view of this is that when we go out to bid, we'll see different numbers. We !have to assume the worst case. RG stated that it still seems like a huge difference. ', Dan asked for cost saving discussion. He asked if we had a firm count on th parking stalls. 335 was verified. Dan said that this has an impact on the cost. Parking remo es some of the otherwise usable space and increases the cost. Randy asked if we were to remove e atrium, will that give us more parking spaces. The response was that it is only 3-4 spaces. Right now the height of the parking structure is 14 feet. C~ut said that the design is similar to tt~e design of the Revenue Building. The height in that structure is 9.6. There was discussion aro d the engmeers recommendation of 30' column spans. RG ~plained the results of the test his d ver's ran using the amount of space allowed in the current design. There was discussion around e width of the pass-throughs and around dropping the height of the structure. It was suggested at moving the walls out would allow for more space in the pass through, without reducing the ount of usable space. Having two levels of parking under the south side of the structure and m~ving up 8" per floor (dropping to the height to 13' 4") was suggested. Curt asked if the height ~f the first floor could be reduced to 17'. RG stated that the new CNG buses aze 13'4". He's~een told that as long as there is 10" of clearance, the buses can be serviced in the two pass oughs. Randy suggested putting a higher cleazance on the east side of the building, if we need ~nore clearance. Dan asked clearance is needed for a semi truck. The response was 14' 8' . an said that the point is that there is savings on each floor. There was discussion around snow removal. Both RG and Randy said that snow removal would be a priority, as it is too much o a liability. ~,, Curt said he is still reviewing the possibility of doing the building out of con' rete, instead of steel, which is predicated on the other discussion of the columns. RG stated at he had heard of using 40' foot span between columns. There was discussion around having t go deeper and the increase in the number of parking spaces if this were done. I ACTION: RG will have his drivers run the test again and come back with th~ results, before changes to the design are made. I Dan cautioned that we were going to lose the 40' that was over built into th~ design. With transit coming in at $SOsf on the covered roof, Dan asked for discussion on the trium. He said that there are questions around the day care. He said that in doing away with th day care, there isn't a lot of savings. It isn't costing that much. The hard cost of the day care is $300,000, with ti's at $200,000. Other ti's coming in at $30sf, instead of $SOsf. There was di cussion azound the roof design. ~, Dan said that he wants a decision by next week as to how seriously the day car is in jeopardy. RG said that if the Y is going to expand their own day caze, it would be to th ir advantage to use their own space, because of the close proximity. The FTA has said that e day care does not have to be a non-profit. Dan said that he does not have 2mil to build the ay care. Based on what COG is giving us, it may be necessary to omit the day care from the de ign. The value is in pre-leasing the space. Dan said he' 11 be talking to John McGrath about le ing space. RG suggested e~ending the retail on the north side, with the service entrance on tl~e southeast side ~,, of the building. Randy said he would not choose county space based on locatio~. Dan needs to