Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

RG added that within the Environmental Assess, the engineers had established a footprint of the lanes of bus traffic entering from the street. When mapping it out, RG found they had overstated and it has been sent back. We can save 20 feet across the block, which opens a greater footprint to the County and commercial ~ use. Bob asked if someone is addressing issue of cost of the project. He pointed out the difference of 10 million in the two proposals. RG responded that he and Randy had discussed this. In comparison, SABA included no demolition costs. Prudential did. Neither had a childcare facility included. Parking spaces were also taken into consideration. In comparison, they are pretty close. Prudential's proposal still comes out at a lower cost to the County and to Transit. SABA has an expensive roofing system. RG stated he is not satisfied with either design. Randy added that Prudential gave additional cost reductions. Prudential is asking if we would consider COP's. RG added that he is also getting these calls. David Glennie expressed concern as to why they need to pay someone for market rate financing. Randy stated that there is no way to go back to the public to get money. David stated that he questions the County's position on going out and signing long term leases. There was general discussion around long term leasing capabilities of the County and the facility process. ~ David stated that it is issues like this that are the reason we cannot pass bond measures: building and shuffling money that comes from the taxpayers. Randy responded that he is not sure we are precluded from doing that. RG stated that this is something we should be asking the developers. His board does not feel in any way that they are signing on the line. If it does not pan out, they will pull out. David responded that with 7 million, Transit is covered. RG responded may not be the case. The County has 5 million in property. Transit is going to buy part of the property to help bring down the cost. David stated that we are essentially handing someone a franchise and paying them for it. Bob questioned if David was concerned because this is omitted from the proposals. David stated that his primary eoncern is that we are paying a load. RG stated that this discussion should take place after the interviews. Both parties are going way beyond their proposals. ~; Randy responded that the perspective David is giving him is essentially what options does the County and Transit really have. There are still opportunities to fashion some agreements and there is the need for some expertise in formulating these agreements.