My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:48:22 AM
Creation date
9/6/2011 10:10:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10326
Title
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
Company
Transit Board
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9601 Courthouse Square Research
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
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
;~ 4~ l r~~~ L1 ; UL Q•~us 5na a4yJ IlUA1N1V K~JUUKI:~J ~ 002 <br />' ' . , <br />~ EXHIBIT 3 <br />' Courthouse Square Project <br />Interview Panel Planning Session <br />- - - ~ May 29,1996 <br />' ~ <br />PRESENT: RG Andersen Wyckoff, Transit District; Luis Caraballo, Transit District; Randy Franke, <br />' Marion County; Randy C~artis, Marion County; David Glennie, YMCA; Ann Gavin <br />Sample, City of Salem; Gary Denn.ison, Chamber of Commerce; Dick Ha.yden, City of <br />' Salem; Bob Speclanan, Salem Downtown Association; Ed Martin, Commercial Bank <br />' Randy opened the meeting by explaining that it was important for everyone to meet and determine objectives <br />prior to interviewing the developers. Introductions were made. <br />' Randy stated that, by way of introduction, ceatain inforniational issues relating to t~e cost and budget needed <br />to be relayed to the panel. This is information that only staff has had. It was purposely withheld from the <br />developers because it is constantly changing and they did not want to confuse the developers by having them <br />' try to deal with those changes. <br />The selection criteria is outlined in the RFP that was sent out, on pages 8& 9. This infoanation will be the <br />' primary criteria for selection of the developer in next week's interviews. The other thing that has been <br />determined is that some of the members have a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest Ran.dy <br />stated that he and RG are comfortable with everyone on the panel. Any relationships should be brought to <br />, their attention before the interviews next week. , ~ <br />`~ Randy asked Randy Franke to set the stage from the County's point of view, aad define the importance of <br />' the project. . <br />Randy Franke explained that the original decision that allows the County to be in the position to discuss this <br />' kind of project was made when the couaty acquired the property on the block. The intent was for future <br />development by the County. A similar proposal was discussed in the mid~ighties. Unfortunately, because <br />of a host of reasons, the concept did not pencil ouk He related that a good e~campie of par4oershipping is <br />, the relationship that the County used for the recovery facility in Brooks. Two issues are still there, bottom <br />line cost and the cost to the rate payers. The County wants a project that will meet the needs of the County, <br />, will look good, will not be an embarrassment, and the keep the cost of services down. In terms of services, <br />the Courthouse security is a good example. The Courthouse has ceased to be an easily accessible and an <br />open and friendly place for people to come and do business. The Board of Co m~Q~oners are extremely <br />' fivstrated by that They want a rea.sonably accessible, open friendly environment for citizens to come do <br />their business. There is also the need to consolidate services to one location for the public. 'fhe Board <br />believes this project is exciting and will meet more than just the County's interests. It will-meet TransiYs <br />' interests and provide positive benefits to the downtown area. It may be a tall order. The panel should not <br />a~ecessarily be looking at the low bidder - Thev should be ]ooldng at the back~muad and qualific,ations of <br />the developer, does that team have a vision, does thaf team have the experience and flexibilit~r to come up <br />' with innovative ideas. Randy stated he wished he could be part of that selection process. <br />Ann asked Randy Franke if there doesn't need to be some strategy to mazket a new office building and if <br />~ in the fact public perception needs to be addressed. <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.