My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:47:33 AM
Creation date
9/6/2011 10:03:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10302
Title
Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)
BLDG Date
8/19/1997
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9601 Courthouse Square Research
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.
/
430
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
Randy addressed the following issue for Dan and Craig's benefit. Doors have been opened for us in <br />looking to the city as a partner in building more pazking downtown. At Monday's city council meeting, <br />Tim Grimes brought up the same fact suggesting joint partnership. The number of spaces we looked at <br />earlier is not adequate. The door is open. Additional discussion on ways to design and add pazking <br />to the retail project later were discussed. It would be more e~ensive, but the options aze available. <br />Ralph asked about eazlier thoughts of expansion on the existing courthouse pazking structure, was it too <br />e~ensive? Melvin Mark stopped process eazly on with the biggest reason being the structure was one <br />of the most inefficient structures their e~ert has seen. Cost would be prohibitive for what you could <br />add. <br />Alan added that in recent discussions with Gloria Jackson, Chamber President, concerning the <br />chamber's parking issue, that if the project gave up their waiver, and paid downtown parking fees, it is <br />not an issue anymore. It is worth exploring operational costs to see if this can be handled. Then the <br />project wouldn't be treated any differently than any other downtown business. Another option that <br />might arise is if the city looks at an eastside municipal pazking structure and the county participate in this <br />project then they could accept their waiver again. Something like this in place may have more value. <br />In reviewing the agenda items, the first item was to get Billy up to speed. The standazd meeting times <br />have been Thursday afternoons at 1:30 p.m. There is no reason to interrupt that schedule, but there may <br />be some gaps while intemal issues are resolved. <br />Alan asked about the structure of the public heazing scheduled for this evening and if things had <br />changed. Commissioner Franke would like the architect to be present and work through the design. <br />Billy will be introduced and sell others on who he is, his experience and his personal objectives in <br />approaching this project. Randy and RG aze the winning runs on the diamond and 7ohn and I have <br />been called to hit them in. Once we get the financing and parking issues resolved, then we should not <br />have a problem to get the proj ect off the ground. <br />Dan asked how they should deal with the press if they get ca11s. They are to be refened to Billy if <br />county related or to John if a transit issue. You may speak to who your company is if asked, but refer all <br />other questions to the owner. RG added that Dan is speaking to issues on how they prepazed proforma. <br />The Oregonian is looking for information. The process would be for Melvin Mark to provide answers <br />to county and then can be called into conversation if needed for additional clarification. Sheryl Martinez <br />from the Oregonian is interested in getting answers on proforma and is armed with misinformation from <br />Dave Glennie's email. Dan had no knowledge of that particulaz email. Ken responded we need to <br />micro-manage Glennie's information. Randy provided information that Glennie emailed council <br />members and provided the press with a copy of that email, but county and transit did not receive it. <br />Reference was made that county and transit costs were in the $8 million range. The Statesman published <br />the information as fact then came back to us to refute. Randy added that his staff is working on pulling <br />this informarion together. A rough estimate today would be jointly about $5 million with another <br />$500,000 in outstanding bills. Dan added that the proforma contains about the same information and <br />this information came directly from Randy's staff. We need to make sure our intemal analysis is the <br />same as the proforma. Ralph had not received a copy of the latest proforma package that went to the <br />city council on Monday. Randy will provide a copy for him. <br />~ Curt asked about the action plan on the time schedule and completing it both ways. Are we to work on <br />that? There is only one set run. Billy asked for an update and when it would be avail-able. RG raised a <br />point of order. We just asked them to go to work for us, but Melvin Mazk doesn't have a signed contract. <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.