Above is the bid tabulation from four (4) bidders on the shoring project - once mandated by the city's FORMER chief building official. The low bid exceeded the estimated cost of the work by more than double. These have been discarded and the city will not be issuing a contract related to the shoring of the building. Also note the two (2) year work period.
I have a copy of the actual shoring plans in .pdf. If you are interested, please e-mail me.
Above is the cover to the 134 page addendum to the bid solicitation issued by the City. Apparently there were many unanswered questions after the mandatory "Pre-Bid" meeting that happened on May 28, 2009. Included with this addendum are all of the seven (7) structural reports on the building since 1995. I can forward a copy to you if you are interested, as well.
This is perhaps the most telling item of the 134 pages: A two page report introduced as "Revised Site Report." Click on image for greater detail - these two pages speak for themselves. Notice the use of BOLD type and the use of the words "compromised," "jeopardized" and "immediate."
This gives you a clue what would happen when a contractor attempts to rehabilitate the building. What it comes down to is what will we have when we're finished renovating this building at a much greater cost, due to the greater amount of unknowns, than we would have for spending less money building a new building that met all the current construction standards and would be more aesthetically appealing? If money were no object, which it most definitely is, I would say renovate - and probably in the same design that is there now. I just don't think that is a realistic option - especially in the eye of the public looking down at a ballot request for a General Obligation bond to fund the improvements.