Development Team Meeting Notes (96-99)

Home Browse Search

Leonazd to refine shell, decide various issues to attribute to parking and get assumptions written down. If ~ costs can be loaded into the building reasonably, let's do this. How technical do you want to get? Some examples were given regarding allocaring costs of elevator to parking. It will be done in an effort to not create volumes, but in a reasonable, simple way. Dan Berrey asked why are you loading the building vs. parking structure? This was the direction given from the financing company. Dan B. recalled eazlier meetings with financing group on loading the parking structure with costs vs. loading building with costs and thought they bought into this approach. Randy reminded Scott of this conversation, but he had no comment. Dan B. was concerned with the issue of financing parking on COP's if money came from transit, and that MMDC may be going on information that may not be complete. Right now the parking structure is not paying for itself. We will bring this issue up again with Mazk and Scott to remind them of earlier conversation, If it has been overlooked by financing, and we get financial advisors agreement, then we can sit down and reload the numbers back in. Since we aze working with a condominium agreement and will allocate costs among various condominium owners, that is another reason to pull costs out of parking. The building won't be broken down by nuts and bolts. MMDC will provide a current copy of the Building Owners Managers Association measurements for whole buildings. Leonard has been working from an older copy and we will get a better idea now and can fine tune it. Budget Dave is working on the ne~ generation of numbers and will have it together by ne~rt Thursday, the 315` ~ The GMP is due on September 15~'. Dan B. would like to be involved in discussions on allocations in the building. Some meetings have already taken place and they will circulate a draft for Dan to review what's been done to date. Dave on budgeting for ne~rt Thursday will be working on TI and shell breakout and parking garage. He had a question on corridors going into shell pricing. There is need to provide egress corridors especially on tenant leased offices. He needs to include individual tenancy egress comdor system for permitting requirements. Environmental Tom handed out a Pre-construction Remedial Activities Table for the project. This table does not include the Chevron site. It has been pulled out and will be handled separately. Tomonow a meeting is scheduled with the county to iron out assumptions and position to take on Chevron negotiations. There are a lot of question marks. We needed to make assumptions based on information known regarding number and loca#ions of tanks. The soil contamination is based on subsurface investigations made months ago. There aa~e a few spots with petroleum contamination and two potential sumps suspected, but no known infortnation. On columns Depth and Volume the question marks are unknowns. Regarding the questions about how deep are we digging? These will be refined as we make policy decision with county. The objective to protect workers will be kept in mind. How far below 12 feet we go will be decided in near future. Is this a policy or regulatory decision? Could be both. This should ~ be addressed tomorrow. We may not be required to remove soil. It depends on how we want to approach negotiations with the DEQ. There could be possibilities to leave in place. We may spend less Page 3 of 8