Laserfiche WebLink
43 <br /> <br /> Mr. Letteri said that he feels that the prel~ary design and design development <br />have been done and that we are on the fringe of going into development of construction <br />documents. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he feels that we are far bom that. Mr. Cox said the architects have <br />not designed a building, they- have identified a set of parameters by which a building can <br />be designed to meet that criteria. Mr. Cox said he feels an RFP can be written in a week, <br />and advertised for three weeks to get a broader cross section of architects. Mr. Cox said <br />he feels this is being misconstrued as a delay, but it is only a one or two month delay in <br />the life of a building that will stand 100 years. Mr. Cox said this process will also set the <br />tone for phase 2 of court improvements. He said the jail house square is being <br />jeopardized by this plan, and he feels the potential is there for that to be an important <br />public space. Mr. Cox said he feels it is important to have a long view of this, and to rush <br />the process is a mistake. Mr. Cox said it would only take six weeks to get an RFP out to <br />establish what it ultimately looks like. <br /> <br />Mr. Toscano asked how that is not an argument for redesign. <br /> <br />Mr. Cox said that the program has just been defined. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said he assumes that the RFP would include the proposed footprint of <br />the building, space and parking deck, and Mr. Cox said that in essence the site has been <br />defined. Mr. Cox said that the proposal has the building lopsided on one side and if a <br />new architect can do SOmething different then so be it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if the contract with the existing architect can be stopped at this <br />point, and Mr. Toscano said that it can. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said that any new architect would need to follow the parameters of the <br />existing proposal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said the space planning exercise has been done, but not the making of the <br />building. Mr. Cox said he would like to see if the proposed east and west design of the <br />building is the best possible, and said this work can be used as a foundation to build a <br />building. <br /> <br /> Mr. O'Connell said the fundamental question is does the Council approve moving <br />forward with the concept. He said that if Council wants to reffdnk the proposal, it will <br />take time and likely more money. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he raised concerns about this proposal months ago, and he did not <br />understand that the firm that has assisted up to this point would be used for design. Mr. <br />Cox said he has spoken with a member of the Board of Supervisors about the RFP and <br />they said they are okay with the idea~ <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said he spoke with the same Board member, and they said okay as <br />long as there is no redesign, no more time, and no more money. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he feels the issue should be brought before the public before <br />deciding on the arch~rtect issue. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards asked if the public hearing would be on the concept, and Mr. Caravati <br />said yes. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said that that the parking arrangement for the Court Square project <br />was worked out in conjunction with this proposal, and said there is a vital need to retain <br />the same number of parking spaces. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if there is consensus on the basic design and with having a <br />public hearing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano questioned what will be accomplished with a public hearing, and <br />asked if Council is really going to turn down the concept. <br /> <br /> <br />