My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Analysis and Feasibility Report (2)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Project Analysis and Feasibility Report (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 4:44:22 PM
Creation date
9/6/2011 10:43:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10308
Title
Project Analysis and Feasibility Report
Company
Gardiner & Glancy LLC
BLDG Date
7/1/1996
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Project Coordination
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.
/
106
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
In the early stages of this project it was assumed that the inclusion of a private <br />developer would be an added resource to the project. We envision private retail on the <br />ground floor and private office space being leased on the upper floors. The leased <br />office space will allow the county to acquire additional space over the next 10-15 years. <br />With this background the county desires to achieve the following objectives. <br />• Construct 100,000+ gsf of new office space <br />t Acquire ownership of our portion of the complex in 20-30 years <br />• Build and own a 350+ parking structure as part of the project <br />• Leverage the value of our property together with federal funds and the resources of <br />a private developer to minimize the cost of this project. <br />• Pay full service rents (O&M and debt service included) for county office space in <br />1999 in the $1.20-1.40 /sq ft/ month range. <br />In order to achieve the objectives noted above, the county must first determined that it <br />is financially feasible to participate in this project. While we must find replacement <br />office space for some of our departments and provide for future growth, the lack of new <br />bonding authority and potential property tax limitations make this type of venture very <br />risky. The county's general fund as well as other funds may have great difficul#y <br />absorbing the additional cost of this new office space The county cuRently pays <br />$.82-1.15 / sq ft/ mo. for existing office space. <br />Therefore, we are seeking the assistance of outside f nanc~al advisors to analyzed <br />financing options as well as review the proposals submitted by Mr Berrey. The Board <br />of Commissioners will not enter into a final contact until they can be assured that the <br />counry has a sound financial strategy for building and occupying this facility. <br />Time Frames; <br />The developer is currently out of town and will not be submitting new proposals until <br />July 26th. However, the transit district must proceed with preliminary architectural and <br />fundi~g plans in order to obtain final approval of the FTA funds. Their submission <br />deadline is August 30th. Unfortunately, if the county backs out of the project, the site <br />and design would both change. My goal is to complete the review of the developers <br />proposals and develop a clear financial strategy by August 9, 1996 so that transit's <br />project and funding are not jeopardized. <br />Options: <br />There appears to be at least three basic options for the county to consider. However, <br />all three are highly dependent on finances. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.