Laserfiche WebLink
building nearby or across the street. Another scenario was for new construction. The third scenario was <br />more complicated and was premised on retaining as much as possible of the existing building structure but <br />proposed to fit the entire organization in a remodeled facility. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if it was easier or more cost-effective to build new or to try to retrofit the existing building. <br />Mr. Cohen said the experience of other municipalities indicated it was probably more expensive to retain the <br />existing structure than build new. There were several factors to consider. He said that independent cost <br />estimators concurred with those conclusions. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if the Council Chamber or a similar gathering space could be duplicated in a new facility. <br />Mr. Cohen said that in terms of the dignity of a public gathering space that was appropriate for a govern- <br />ment body to come together with the community, the answer was yes. He envisioned that such a facility <br />would be state-of-the-art in terms of systems and technology. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked for more detail on the Police Services Delivery Study. Mr. Cohen said his firm had a <br />consultant on the project team with considerable experience in working with municipal police departments. <br />He proposed to work with the City to facilitate a decision about the appropriate police services delivery <br />model, examining both the experience of other communities and the internal operations of the department. <br />There were also implications related to land; he pointed out that the operations side of police services must <br />be housed in an essential services structure and designed to a higher seismic standard, which had cost <br />implications as well. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé believed the analysis of police services delivery being proposed was needed, particularly given the <br />need for parking for police vehicles. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor suggested that police vehicles could be scattered across the city for traffic calming purposes. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor hoped the consultant would consider the relative importance of co-location of the departments <br />and consider what needed to be together for the convenience of the public. She emphasized the importance <br />of citizen involvement in the process so that the voting public felt that the decision was theirs. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked how much more expensive on average it was to renovate a structure rather than replace it. <br />Mr. Cohen said that information was difficult to pin down until one went through the detailed seismic <br />upgrading plans and their relationship to the programming in the structure. In this case, the City knew the <br />City Hall structure needed to be upgraded, so at minimum the “bones of the building” would be saved and <br />augmented. He noted that some general contractors were contacted as part of the study to get their sense of <br />the issue, and they agreed with the conclusions in the study. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that people said it was cheaper to rebuild and then the price of rebuilding continued to go <br />up. She said a new building was not necessarily better; for example, the sound system in the Bascom- <br />Tykeson Room at the library was not as good as the sound system in the McNutt Room. Mr. Cohen said <br />that his firm would take in to account everything from acoustics to mechanical space so the council could <br />really understand every aspect of the decision before it was made. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked who would be involved in the citizen interviews. K.C. Cooper of the J.D. White Company <br />responded, saying that between 50 and 60 people would be interviewed and would be selected by the <br />council, staff, and the project team. The project team was seeking diverse input. Many interviews would be <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 14, 2005 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />