Capital Reviews per Reviewer – Admin
By Reviewer Destiny Richardson on January 31, 2020 at 9:16 AM
(Only one Project Type should have scores.)
|Impact||Priorities||Existing System||Economic Development||Collaboration|
|2: Needs Improvement||3: Adequate, with room for improvement||3: Adequate, with room for improvement||3: Adequate, with room for improvement||2: Needs Improvement|
CIP Committee Feedback:
They should also try to leverage external funds. During the public art strategic planning process we heard many requests for skatable sculpture and a new skate park. We may consider next phase of Art in Capital. The design phase already has public art dollars allocated. Impact is to a specific group, may not address a priority need, minimally addresses existing need, may promote some economic development or leverage other funds | What are the actual numbers of users of the current facility and estimate of potential increase through competitions, etc.?
“- Will this be ready for construction in FY21? Feasible this year?
– Provide the feasibility study to address the amt of users in the next phase.
– Does cost estimate include property acquisition?
– Property acquisition needed
– Provide # of yearly users, historically vs. percentage of population
– Concerns have been expressed that this project would only serve a small number of people”