Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

have been told to not reduce size of the building. Do we put our efforts into looking at getting ~ public agencies into the building and working on leases that could terminate in 10 years to get back county expansion space? Where do we look? We can't delay the decision too long as we need to continue to work on the design and not leave the project behind schedule. Dan said that a source of revenue is also space. Getting the price per square foot of office space down will impact the overall rental numbers. By taking off one floor from the design, you may fmd price per square foot going up. Core costs will be the same and using the same land area spreading over fewer square feet, it may go the wrong direction. Randy felt this needed to be on the table and have value put to it before we determine if it is right or wrong. Occupancy will play a role in the equation. Additional discussion followed about an above ground parking structure and building on the north side. It could go up and over transit bus mall a little bit. It is the most cost effective and would allow retail on the ground level. Layout of the bus mall was discussed. It is committed by flow routes and after several tests and trials, the lanes are as small as they can be at 15 feet. Current set up on Court Street is operated by different rules. Other safety aspects enter into the picture in the bus mall design as well as the city has dictated the ingress and egress for the buses. They looked at the possibility of shrinking the bus mall to enlarge the retail pad area larger than 50 feet to make a more attractive parcel to sell. RG stated that if the land was sold, based on contract entered into with the county, money generated would go back to FTA and could not be channeled into the project. ~,;r Other concerns with an above ground parking is the size of the area. You would need about 124 feet to go all the way around. We could run into some of the same problems from our original design with columns, cantilevering, and another 80 foot span. We also visited this area back in July when John voiced concerns over the transit mall located between two towers on the north and south. A 60 foot footprint is good for office, but won't work for parking. A logical segment for cutting back the parking structure would be by 66 stalls per bay and still stay relatively efficient. There are many concerns with an alternative upper deck on the bus mall: ramps would be too steep, bus weight of 36,000 pounds, not to mention the engineering changes. It is far too expensive to consider. We need confirmation of models and the process and steps taken to get where we need to go. There are two things to work on. Pull the garage back on the north retail side of the site. Have Dave price that design to find actual savings. We could end up with the same amount of parking initially with surface parking. We need to get additional input from Mark and find out what we can afford. We need to establish a true cost of the transit mall and then deal with it. It should be treated like streetscape as a wash in the performa. In order to do this, transit needs to come in under budget. Transit can't go above its budget. NIlVIDC will give direction to Dave as to what judgment calls to make in splitting the costs of the building. ~ Page 4 of 7