We are showing our ignorance of the process...

This is part of the back-up for the discussion item on the City Commission's work session agenda for March 9.  I took the liberty to highlight in yellow the questions that are worthy of asking an architectural firm at this stage in the process - or ever, for that matter.  It might be even a little bit of a reach to ask about the applicability of their design to various grant programs, but it does signal that money is an issue in this project.

The other questions prove that the City does not know what they are doing - which is a scary harbinger for the project in general.  The city should be in the position to tell the six firms what they want on the second floor.  In many ways, this was the city's responsibility to do its homework with the public and with their financial pro-formas BEFORE the RFQ process.  And what does the city want to do with the space - have a ballroom, or something else?  Are we that afraid to be held to our decisions that we are letting architectural firms that are hungry for work tell us what WE want to do with our building?  I thought one of the "givens" of the project was that the tenants will stay in the building (a major complicating and potentially expensive factor) -are we now saying this is "optional.?"  In addition to being expanded or reconfigured, we should be asking if the first floor retail space will be reduced due to the requirement to meet ADA requirements.  And do WE want to keep the porch or breezeway?  The city is in the position of being developer for this project and apparently is not suited to the role.

Regarding "green" elements of the project, it should be a threshold requirement - the degree is the question.  We should be able to state affirmatively that WE want the building to generate its own electricity - if they can't design a building in this manner, then they don't get the job.  How about that?  And to ask how your green features will be able to survive the public participation/charrette process is asking them to gaze in a crystal ball that is hazy at best.  How are they to predict what changes will be accommodated?  And couldn't this have been done before through a series of community workshops before the RFQ process?

Just my two cents.  It is a good thing that we have Vice Mayor Golden, a self-admitted "developer" to help lead us through the process.