Laserfiche WebLink
at scope of work and not making a good comparison with original contra~ct. Pence/Kelly will review <br />rates and get back to Kathleen. Dan B. will review notes on shoring and basements as well. <br />It was noted that the ne~ phase will not be a fixed price, but time and materials, and someone will need <br />to review receipts to prevent duplication. Staton has done a great job and has a good relationship with <br />the neighboring businesses. Their only wealrness is paperwork and supplying document costs and <br />schedules that aze timely. We need to report back sooner than ne~rt Thursday. <br />Discussion went back to dealing with the Chevron site. The remediation phase is not a pazt of 1~~~IDC's <br />scope. From a private developer standpoint, it may be difficult to sell a building that has contingent <br />liabilities. Concerns were raised about the possibility of spending the extra dollars to have a clean site. <br />A meeting between financing company and Centurywest may be required to discuss how much impact <br />leaving contaminated soils would have on project. Kathleen requested that any further discussion on this <br />matter be tabled for today, and let Ceniurywest meet with county to plan strategy for Chevron <br />negotiations. <br />What about the other hot spots and chasing? It is a similar source of issues. You could spend less <br />on action and more on negotiation with DEQ. There may be concerns for Dan B. as private developer in <br />obtaining financing on project with impacted soils. If there is negaxive impact on Dan's portion, and he <br />is unable to secure financing, then the County could inherit Dan's problem. That is a risk to county. <br />Potentially at some point it will clean itself up, but county should be aware of this potential issue on <br />horizon going into meeting tomonow. The ability of county signing an indemnity may be enough to <br />cover this in a secondary market. We aze looking at two sepa.rate issues: discussions on how we deal <br />with Chevron and if what Chevron does is limited, county can make decision later on how faz it wants to <br />go in remediation. We need to confirm this information with the underwriter for the COPs. Because of <br />the condominium agreement, it may be better for private leasing. If we have an issue with financing, <br />discussions need to happen now on what assurances the county needs or if county would give one that <br />could help get private financing. <br />Environmental <br />Done. <br />Budget <br />Overall budget is being worked on. Dave had question as to which P 1 design he should be working on. <br />This item will be kept open a little longer. County needs more information from Rick regarding options <br />on e~sting parking structure in Courthouse. Additional discussion was held on costs per stall and <br />marginal costs, but without additional information from MMDC, county cannot make accurate <br />assessment of pazking situation. Efficiency on the 324 is a lot better. Dan P. would like to meet with <br />Leonazd and Mike to discuss option of moving sheer walls and be able to reach same conclusion that this <br />option is not viable. MMDC will then get all information to Randy for him to make decision on what <br />parking options will satisfy needs of project. This item will be added to Tuesday's agenda and MMDC <br />will provide information to Randy then. <br />Who's deciding if we put waterproofing under slab? It was decided not to do this. Grading it and <br />putting sumps in is the cheapest option. Craig will check with Geotech for additional information on <br />watertable. <br />Acoustical/Vibration <br />~ Leonard checking with another firm that has done a lot of business with Tri-met in Portland for a second <br />bid on acoustical/vibration to compare with Altermatt & Associates. <br />Page 7 of 8 <br />