HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: City Council Goal - City Hall ComplexECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Work Session: City Council Priority Issue – City Hall Complex
Meeting Date: July 11, 2007 Agenda Item Number: B
Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Mike Penwell
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5547
ISSUE STATEMENT
The purpose of this work session is to verify site selection for City Hall, narrow the
consolidation options, and request council direction to complete the remaining work for the
Implementation Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan.
BACKGROUND
At the June 20, 2007, workshop, the project team introduced public opinion research,
consolidation options, and a conceptual scope of work for the remainder of the Implementation
Plan Phase. At that time, the council requested additional information on the costs of the police
patrol facility, escalated relocation and leasing costs, comparison costs for leasing and
purchasing space in the Federal Building, potential City Hall sites other than the existing City
Hall and the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly sites, deed restrictions related to the Butterfly Lot site, and
costs for the remaining Implementation Plan Phase scope of work.
Current cost models are based primarily on square footages and a few base assumptions to
address the known factors of essential services, underground parking, and where appropriate,
high-rise construction. A more detailed exploration of the cost issues related to the City Hall
Complex and police patrol facility is proposed as part of the remaining scope of work when a
more developed design can inform more developed costs. However, to further the council’s
decision-making process so that clear direction can be given at this work session, additional
information is provided here and in the attachments. See Attachment A for cost factors of the
new City Hall and police patrol facility, updated costs for relocating and leasing space to
accommodate construction, and occupancy costs for leased and owned properties.
Site Selection
At the July 11, 2007, work session, the council is asked to confirm a site for future use in the
City Hall Complex master planning studies. Since the commencement of the Implementation
Plan Phase, new considerations have surfaced regarding the benefits of using the existing City
Hall site and the complications of using the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly lot site. See Attachment B
for additional information on these considerations and a summary of previous research
performed on potential City Hall sites.
Consolidation Options
At the July 11, 2007, work session, the council is asked to narrow the consolidation options for
future use in the City Hall Complex master planning studies. The council may choose to select
one of the previously presented options or an alternate approach that could span a range of
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070711\S070711B.doc
consolidation options. At the June 20 council workshop, several councilors indicated that it was
important to go forward with a project that would allow for full consolidation of City staff and
functions. As a result, the project team proposes to master plan a fully-consolidated City Hall on
a selected site, including a scenario that allows incremental building (e.g. building wings).
While a ¾ block site can accommodate the needs of a fully consolidated City Hall with
significant underground parking and open space, accommodating these needs incrementally
would require a full-block site. This would allow a project that plans for the future, addresses
the possibility of a reduced project budget, and provides multiple consolidation solutions for a
single concept design fee. See Attachment C for the previously presented consolidation options.
Proposed Scope of Work for Completing the Implementation Plan Phase
At the July 11, 2007, work session, the council is asked to approve a scope of work to complete
the Implementation Plan Phase. The complete scope of work identified in the City Hall Complex
Action Plan is: “To identify the specific steps required to implement the Development Plan. This
will entail refinement of the conceptual design from the Development Plan into design options
with enough detail for the consultant team to generate accurate project cost estimates. The
design options will then go through another round of review and comment by council, then
community, and City staff. This phase will conclude with council adoption of an
Implementation Plan that includes specific information about timing, phasing, financing,
property acquisition, and project delivery methods.” See Attachment F for the City Hall Com-
plex Action Plan.
At the February 14, 2007, work session, the council authorized the project team to complete a
portion of the Implementation Plan Phase work (called “Phase 3A”) that addressed financing and
phasing methods, public involvement activities, and public opinion research. The remaining
Implementation Plan Phase activities (called “Phase 3B”) were postponed so they could be
informed by the initial work.
The proposed approach to complete the Implementation Plan Phase integrates design work,
public opinion research, public involvement activities, and council decision-making. It is
recommended that all scope items be performed as parallel efforts to comprehensively inform the
council prior to decisions related to a bond, and to understand and incorporate community
priorities relative to a new City Hall and Police Patrol facility.
The Phase 3B work will be performed from approximately August 1, 2007, to June 1, 2008, in
preparation for a potential bond measure in November 2008. Major work products of this phase
include:
?A site-specific concept design that allows for full consolidation (through one construction
project or multiple projects that incrementally realize full consolidation);
?A City Hall Complex project budget in preparation for schematic design;
?Site selection, concept layouts, and cost modeling for a Police Patrol facility;
?A comprehensive public involvement process; and
?Public opinion research regarding the project and support for a potential bond measure.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070711\S070711B.doc
A summary of the scope of services and costs for Phase 3B are noted below. See Attachment D,
Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope, for a detailed description of the scope efforts and
Attachment E, Implementation Plan Phase 3B Schedule.
Phase 3B Costs
Technical Tasks
Federal Building Analysis $ 49,000
Police Patrol Facility Planning $ 126,000
Expanded Concept Design $ 189,000
Eco-Charrette $ 38,000
Public Involvement Tasks $ 305,000
Community Forum (1)
Community Outreach Meetings (5)
Specialized Input Group meetings (3)
Website updates and surveys
Neighborhood Association outreach
Speakers Bureau and Event presentations
Media communications plan, coordination, and local media appearances
Public Opinion Research Tasks $ 215,000
Tracking Poll (Fall ‘07)
Focus Groups and Telephone Poll (Spring ’08)
Meetings
Council and Staff meetings $ 135,000
Council Workshops (4)
Council Work Sessions (3)
Project Team meetings with City (40)
Subtotal of Proposed Phase 3B Services $1,057,000
Reimbursable Expenses $ 50,000
Project Management (City) $ 80,000
Miscellaneous City Expenses $ 20,000
Sub-Total Phase 3B Costs $1,207,000
Contingency (3.5%) $ 42,000
Total Phase 3B Costs $1,249,000
At the conclusion of the Phase 3A contract, there will be approximately $460,000 in project
funds remaining from the $1,000,000 appropriation included in Supplemental Budget 1 during
FY07. Subtracting this amount from the $1,249,000 in Phase 3B costs leaves $789,000 to be
requested in SB1 for FY08.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070711\S070711B.doc
RELATED CITY POLICIES
The City Hall Complex master planning and public participation process relates to the council
goals of an effective, accountable municipal government, a safe community, and sustainable
community growth and change.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
A.For confirming a site for the City Hall Complex, the council has three options:
1.Direct the City Manager to proceed with planning efforts using the Existing City Hall
site.
2.Direct the City Manager to proceed with planning efforts using the Rock N’
Rodeo/Butterfly Lot site.
3.Direct the City Manager to authorize further site selection studies and associated fees for
a City Hall Complex in the Phase 3B scope of work.
B.For narrowing the consolidation options for a new City Hall Complex, the council has three
options:
1.Approve a master planning approach on a full-block site to accommodate full
consolidation wholly or incrementally.
2.Choose one of the previously presented consolidation models for use in future planning
studies.
3.Choose multiple consolidation models for use in future planning studies and direct the
City Manager to authorize additional concept exploration studies and associated fees in
the Phase 3B scope of work.
C.For completing the Implementation Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan, the
council has two options:
1.Direct the City Manager to proceed with the Phase 3B scope of work as described in
Attachment D and request on a Supplemental Budget an appropriation of $789,000 from
the Facility Reserve.
2.Direct the City Manager to return with additional scope and fee information related to the
Implementation Plan Phase for consideration by the council at a future work session.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
A.Given the advantages of the Existing City Hall site over the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot
site, the City Manager recommends Option A1 to use the Existing City Hall site for future
planning and design efforts.
B.For narrowing the consolidation options for a new City Hall Complex, the City Manager
recommends Option B1 to master plan a concept that can achieve full consolidation wholly
or incrementally on one site.
C.For completing the Implementation Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan, the
City Manager recommends Option C1 for a total of $1,249,000.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070711\S070711B.doc
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
A.Move to direct the City Manager to use the existing City Hall site for the planning and design
of City Hall.
B.Move to direct the City Manager to approve the development of a master plan for a wholly or
incrementally consolidated concept on one site.
C.Move to direct the City Manager to proceed with Phase 3B of the Implementation Plan Phase
of the City Hall Complex Action Plan and request on a Supplemental Budget an
appropriation of $789,000 from the Facility Reserve.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Cost Analysis for City Hall, Police Patrol, Moving and Leasing, and Occupancy
B.City Hall Site Considerations
C.Consolidation Options
D.Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope
E.Phase 3B Schedule
F.City Hall Complex Action Plan
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Mike Penwell
Telephone: 682-5547
Staff E-Mail: michael.j.penwell@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070711\S070711B.doc
ATTACHMENT A
Cost Factors for City Hall, Police Patrol,
Moving and Leasing and Occupancy
The Cost of Construction
There are many factors that contribute to the total cost of a typical construction project. While some may
be adjusted to reflect specific project goals and priorities, many costs are fixed. The three primary cost
drivers on any project are:
Construction Costs
, which are building materials, equipment, and labor directly related to the
construction;
Soft Costs
, which are project costs indirectly related to construction costs such as property acqui-
sition, permits, furnishings, design fees, design and construction contingencies, project manage-
ment, and moving costs; and
Escalation
, which anticipates the effect of inflation on all project costs when construction is to
commence at a future date.
The best way to predict the likely cost of a project before it is designed is to create a cost model. This is
done by establishing a baseline construction cost estimate which by necessity is based on many assump-
tions about the expected size, performance and quality of the finished project. It is also based on com-
parative empirical data from other similar projects. The Construction Cost is then magnified by a soft
cost multiplier which, for a project such as the Eugene City Hall Complex, can be as high as 1.4. Finally
this adjusted cost is increased again by an escalation factor which is currently predicted to add an addi-
tional 8% per year to the total project costs.
In trying to reduce the overall cost of a project, all three of the above components must be examined; but
generally the greatest impact comes from construction cost reductions, which in turn reduce the other
multipliers. The three ways to reduce construction costs are to reduce the size of the project, reduce the
quality of the building materials and systems, and/or commence construction sooner to reduce escalation.
Reducing the size of a project can have a negative effect on its overall success if it compromises basic
functionality and program goals. For the Eugene City Hall Complex, the proposed building size is the
result of a carefully considered and extensive programming effort which identified space needs for both
current needs and projected growth (for 25 years).
Reducing the quality of building finish materials and systems will usually have an impact on perform-
ance, life cycle costs, and/or the building’s expected useful life. Because the Eugene City Hall Complex
should be designed with a useful life of at least 75-100 years, the choice of building materials and systems
needs to be carefully considered in the context of the project values, functional needs, and the long term
impacts on performance, durability, and life cycle costs.
The effect of escalation on construction costs is a factor that can be mitigated but not controlled. Because
the last 4 years have produced unprecedented and sustained construction inflation, the cost models for the
Eugene City Hall Complex use a conservative escalation factor of 8% per year.
In attempting to reduce construction costs, the majority of costs associated with a building are for basic
structural, mechanical, electrical, code and life safety requirements totaling as much as 65-70%. The
remaining building components may be reduced in quantity and/or quality, but life cycle and performance
issues must be considered carefully. Achieving a 5% reduction in overall project costs could likely be
achieved while still satisfying project values such as sustainability, efficiency, and a long useful life that
plans for the future. A 10% reduction in overall project costs could be achieved but would likely raise
significant life cycle and performance issues.
It is important to note that the Eugene City Hall Complex and Police Patrol facility are not yet designed.
As they develop, assumptions reflected in the current cost models will be tested and updated to make sure
they are consistent with the City’s project values and goals.
Moving and Leasing Costs
Moving and temporary leasing costs were included in the most recent cost models. Moving costs are
based on $2.50/square foot and lease costs are based on $2/square foot/month. Escalation for these costs
in Eugene is slower than escalation for building materials and labor, and is assumed to align with standard
inflation at around 3% per year.
Many factors influence moving and leasing costs including site, the construction schedule of a new City
Hall, the construction schedule of a new patrol facility, the level of consolidation, and which functions are
identified to be moved into a new City Hall. The following examples show two scenarios:
Option A: a new City Hall is built on the existing City Hall site to accommodate all functions
except patrol. The patrol facility is built first and occupied prior to the move, eliminating tempo-
rary leasing space for patrol-related functions. The remaining City departments move to
temporary leased space and then move into the new City Hall upon completion. The escalated
cost for this option to 2010 is approximately $2,170,000 which is the sum of $190,000 in initial
moving costs, $600,000 for secondary moving costs, and $1,380,000 for temporary leasing costs.
Option B: a new City Hall is built on another site. No temporary space or intermediate moves are
required and all functions to be housed at a new City Hall and a patrol facility are moved once.
The escalated cost for this option to 2010 is approximately $570,000.
Occupancy Costs
Some of the previously presented consolidation options included leasing space in the Federal Building.
Costs for leasing were excluded in these options. Costs for occupying City-owned space (including
operations, maintenance, ongoing contributions to the Facility Reserve Fund, etc.) were also excluded
from the project cost models. The Project Team, in collaboration with city staff, will address the cost of
occupancy through the course of the remaining scope of work as decisions allow more site-specific and
design-specific information on which to base these costs.
ATTACHMENT B
City Hall Site Considerations
New Considerations on City Hall Sites
Several new considerations relative to site selection for a new City Hall have surfaced since the
commencement of the Implementation Plan Phase. Given the following considerations, using the existing
City Hall site in future planning efforts may enhance public support, lower costs, and accommodate full
consolidation of city functions wholly or incrementally over time.
New benefits for using the existing City Hall site include:
Public preference. Public Opinion Research performed in the spring showed a strong preference for
?
using city-owned property.
Available adjacent lease space. The General Services Administration has indicated a strong desire
?
for the City to lease space in the Federal Building, creating the possibility of a favorable lease
opportunity for temporary or long-term occupancy.
Available adjacent open space. All or part of the full half-block south of the existing City Hall
?
could be used for future City Hall growth or even a new Police Patrol facility.
Flexibility for design and planning. Ability to master plan full consolidation on one site through
?
incremental building.
New complications for using the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot site include:
Property owner interest. During the site selection effort of the Development Plan Phase, public and
?
private property owners of the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot site were contacted and none indicated
an unwillingness to discuss selling their properties. Since that time the Rock N’ Rodeo owner has
indicated strong opposition to selling her property.
Cost of private properties. An appraisal was performed on the private properties totaling
?
approximately $2,000,000 excluding legal fees and staff time. Project Team cost models reflect
$3,000,000 to account for the appraised value plus an acquisition premium, legal fees, staff time,
and relocation costs.
Cost of public properties. The County has indicated a willingness to sell if the City funds
?
replacement parking for the 228 spaces in the Butterfly lot and identifies a piece of land for the
County to build a future County Courthouse. Project Team cost models include an escalated cost
(to 2010) of approximately $4,400,000 to construct 228 spaces in an above grade structure. The
th
County’s preferred option of adding additional levels to the existing County parking structure on 6
Avenue has an estimated cost of $11,500,000.
Deed restrictions. City staff reviewed the deed restrictions of the Butterfly Lot in 2006 prior to
?
proposing it as one of the potential sites for the City Hall Complex and—pending further analysis—
felt that a city hall would be an appropriate use on at least the north half of the site and would not
violate deed restrictions. Subsequent research by the City Attorney of the deeds, plats and history
of the park blocks has further confirmed this opinion, though caution suggests that the City contact
the heirs of Eugene Skinner, if any can be found, before proceeding with a deal to acquire the
property. In May, the Court Administrator for Lane County Circuit Court issued a letter to the City
of Eugene and Lane County stating the Court’s opposition to the proposed sale of the Butterfly
Lot. While not a formal legal opinion, the letter did state that the position of the Presiding Judge is
“that the proposed sale would violate the deed restrictions.” However, the Circuit Court did not
provide its reasons for this opinion and has subsequently notified the City that all inquiries in the
matter should be directed to their legal counsel. If the Council elects to pursue the Butterfly Lot
further, the City can initiate an information-finding process through the Circuit Court’s appointed
counsel. However, it is possible this matter would need to be resolved through legal action.
Previous research on Potential City Hall Sites
A site for a new city hall was the focus of two Community Forums held in 2006. Forum #3 involved an
extensive examination of more than 25 sites. Forum #4 examined how the concept designs worked on the
two sites forwarded by Council, the Rock N’ Rodeo/ Butterfly Lot site and the Existing City Hall site.
Close to 100 people attended Community Forum #3 on August 24, 2006 to discuss potential sites for a
new Eugene City Hall Complex. Twenty-five downtown sites were examined by the Forum participants
after a presentation of criteria and factors to consider (a map of all 25 sites is included at the end of this
attachment along with the tally of support for each; to review the criteria and factors for the sites, refer to
the Forum #3 presentation available on the project website at www.eugenecityhall.com). Forum
participants expressed strong preference for a full-block site over a half-block site. Reasons included
wanting a lower-scale building, space for horizontal expansion, more open space, and better potential for
sustainable design.
In addition to the 25 sites examined, the group requested that an additional site (combination of #17
Broadway/ Charnelton & #19 former Sears) be added for group consideration as Site #26. By request
th
near the end of the forum another vote was taken on a combination of sites #3 (6 / Willamette) & #4
(County Health Building), called Site #27, that resulted in nominal support by a show of hands (a count
by clicker technology could not be established on site #27 due to technological constraints). Three sites
were clearly ranked above all others to carry forward into concept design with each receiving over 50
votes (the next highest grouping received votes in the 30’s). The sites that received the most support
were:
Site #9 (existing City Hall) 54 carry forward 19 remove
Site #8 (Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot) 54 carry forward 20 remove
Site #26 (Broadway/ Charnelton & former Sears) 52 carry forward 21 remove
In the fall of 2006, Site #26 became the subject of a multi-use development project. Because the site was
being reserved for this purpose, the Project Team explored concept options on the other two sites (#8 and
#9). At the November 20, 2006 work session the council removed site #26 from consideration to accom-
modate the development project.
nd
Community Forum #4 was held November 2, 2006 and asked for further input on a site for a new city
hall. The body of the meeting stimulated the Project Team to think about what distinguishes a City Hall
from other buildings and gives it lasting value, and how the two sites forwarded by City Council (Existing
City Hall and Butterfly Lot/Rock N Rodeo) compare in giving the greatest benefit for Eugene. The Rock
N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot site was favored over the Existing City Hall site by a vote of 36 to 17. The
Forum #4 presentation and report are also available at www.eugenecityhall.com.
At the December 11, 2006 work session five councilors initially supported the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly
Lot site while three supported the Existing City Hall site in voting on an amendment to the motion for
City Hall site selection. However, two councilors elected to change their vote on the final motion so that
the final vote was 7-1 to select the Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly Lot site for use in ongoing planning and
design for City Hall.
Indication of Preferences Tally
Community Forum #3
Site Option Carry the site Remove from consideration
forward
1: State Motor Pool 0 people 10 people
2: EWEB 6 people 65 people
th
3: 6 & Willamette 14 people 56 people
4: County Health Building 15 people 55 people
th
5: 6 & Charnelton 5 people 66 people
6: Good Times/Fed Parking Lot 14 people 57 people
7: Goodyear Site 9 people 64 people
8: Rock N’ Rodeo/Butterfly 54 people 20 people
9: Existing City Hall 54 people 19 people
10: East of Existing City Hall 37 people 35 people
11: East of Federal Courthouse 8 people 65 people
th
12: 8 & Charnelton 5 people 75 people
th
13: 8 & Olive 9 people 65 people
th
14: 8 & Pearl Sites 32 people 41 people
15: Courthouse District SW 22 people 51 people
16: Courthouse District SE 7 people 66 people
17: Broadway & Charnelton 25 people 47 people
18: Atrium/Broadway & Olive 12 people 60 people
19: Former Sears Site 38 people 34 people
20: Greyhound and Parking Lots 24 people 48 people
21: U of O Baker Center 7 people 65 people
22: South of Library 9 people 64 people
th
23: 10 & Pearl 6 people 67 people
th
24: 11 & Charnelton 8 people 63 people
25: PeaceHealth Sites 11 people 62 people
26: (added) Combined 17 & 19 52 people 21 people
Current City Occupied Sites
Parcade
Document Services
6th Avenue
Existing City Hall
Council Chambers
Council Of? ces
Municipal Courts
Human Resources
City Manager's Of? ce
7th Avenue
Police Department
800 Olive Street
Police Auditor
Park Place
8th Avenue
Human Rights
Commission
Public Works
Public Works Engineering
Broadway
Public Works Administration
Eugene Hotel
Public Works Engineering
Parkview Building
10th Avenue
Risk Services
Sahlstrom Building
City Prosecutor
Atrium
Permit Information Center
Planning & Development
Community Development
Library
Finance
Information Services
Library, Recreation,
Cultural Services
Occupancy in Existing Buildings
CITY OF EUGENE
EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
A1 - Rock N' Rodeo/Butter? y Lot Site
Total Project Cost $178 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
• Highest level of
City Hall
consolidation
Council Chambers
• Dense use of site
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
7th Avenue
City Council and Mayor
• Highest cost
City Manager's Of? ce
260,000
Human Resources
• Purchase
Finance
SF
additional property
Planning and PIC
Public Works
8th Avenue
Document and Distribution Services
Records Archive
Municipal Courts
City Prosecutor
Information Services
Broadway
Planning & Development Admin.
Community Dev. and Parking
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
Police Administration
10th Avenue
A2 - Existing City Hall Site
Total Project Cost $163 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
• Highest level of
City Hall
consolidation
Council Chambers
• High cost
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
7th Avenue
City Council and Mayor
• Uses existing
City Manager's Of? ce
260,000
Human Resources property
Finance
SF
Planning and PIC
Public Works
8th Avenue
Document and Distribution Services
Records Archive
Municipal Courts
City Prosecutor
Information Services
Broadway
Planning & Development Admin.
Community Dev. and Parking
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
Police Administration
10th Avenue
Occupancy in New Buildings
CITY OF EUGENE
EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
B1 - Rock N' Rodeo/Butter? y Lot Site
Total Project Cost $156 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
• Moderate level of
Federal Building
32,000
consolidation
Municipal Courts
SF
City Prosecutor
• Dense use of site
7th Avenue
City Hall
• High cost
Council Chambers
202,000
• Purchase
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
SF
additional property
City Council and Mayor
City Manager's Of? ce
8th Avenue
Human Resources
Finance
Planning and PIC
Public Works
Document and Distribution Services
Records Archive
Broadway
Police Administration
Library
Information Services
36,000
Planning & Development Admin.
Community Dev., and Parking
SF
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
B2 - Existing City Hall Site
Total Project Cost $144 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
Federal Building
• Moderate level of
32,000
Municipal Courts
consolidation
SF
City Prosecutor
• Uses existing
7th Avenue
City Hall
property
Council Chambers
202,000
• High cost
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
SF
City Council and Mayor
City Manager's Of? ce
8th Avenue
Human Resources
Finance
Planning and PIC
Public Works
Document and Distribution Services
Broadway
Records Archive
Police Administration
Library
Information Services
36,000
Planning & Development Admin.
Community Dev., and Parking
SF
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
Occupancy in Existing BuildingsOccupancy in New Buildings
CITY OF EUGENE
EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
C1 - Rock N' Rodeo/Butter? y Lot Site
Total Project Cost $134 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
• Lower cost
Federal Building
32,000
• Low level of
Municipal Courts
SF
City Prosecutor
consolidation
7th Avenue
City Hall
• Purchase
Council Chambers
157,000
additional property
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
SF
City Council and Mayor
City Manager's Of? ce
8th Avenue
Human Resources
Finance
Records Archive
Information Services
Police Administration
Document and Distribution Services
Broadway
Atrium
45,000
Planning, PIC, Planning & Development Admin.,
Community Dev., and Parking
SF
Public Works Administration
Library
36,000
Public Works Engineering
SF
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
C2 - Existing City Hall Site
Total Project Cost $124 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
Federal Building
• Lowest cost
32,000
Municipal Courts
• Low level of
SF
City Prosecutor
consolidation
7th Avenue
City Hall
• Two geographic
157,000 Council Chambers
nodes of City
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
SF
services
City Council and Mayor
City Manager's Of? ce
8th Avenue
• Uses existing
Human Resources
Finance
property
Records Archive
• Expansion
Information Services
Police Administration
potential on site
Broadway
Document and Distribution Services
Atrium
45,000
Planning, PIC, Planning & Development Admin.,
Community Dev., and Parking
SF
Public Works Administration
Library
36,000
Public Works Engineering
SF
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
Occupancy in Existing BuildingsOccupancy in New Buildings
CITY OF EUGENE
EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
D - Butter? y Lot Site &
Existing City Hall Site
Total Project Cost $137 Million
Patrol Building
36,000
Police Patrol
SF
Patrol Support Functions
Considerations
6th Avenue
• Maintain City Hall
Federal Building
32,000
• Low cost
Municipal Courts
SF
• Least consolidation
City Prosecutor
7th Avenue
• Purchase
City HallExisting City Hall
98,00075,000
additional property
FinanceInformation Services
SFSF
• High cost of
PlanningRecords Archive
Council ChambersCommon Space
8th Avenue
City Hall renovation
City Council and MayorPolice Administration
City Manager's Of? ce
Human Resources
Public Works Admin.
Meeting Rooms and Common Space
Document and Distribution Services
Broadway
Atrium
38,000
PIC, Planning & Development Admin.,
SF
Community Dev., and Parking
Library
36,000
Public Works Engineering
SF
Library, Recreation, Cultural Services
Occupancy in Existing BuildingsOccupancy in New Buildings
CITY OF EUGENE
EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
ATTACHMENT D
Thomas hacker
architects inc.
MEMORANDUM
:Sent By :
Date June 26, 2007 Dana Ing Crawford
Attn. : Mike Penwell Project :
Eugene City Hall Complex
City of Eugene Master Plan-Phase 3
Facility Management Division Implementation Plan
210 Cheshire Avenue
Eugene, Oregon 97401 Job No. :
0522
cc :
Jonah Cohen, File
Re : Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope Description
Via :
US Mail Fax E-Mail Other:
????
Background and Approach
At the February 14, 2007 work session, the council approved a portion of work to commence the
Implementation Plan Phase for the City Hall Complex Master Plan. This work, referred to as
Phase 3A, included financing and phasing explorations, public involvement activities, and public
opinion research. Phase 3A work is complete and will be applied to future planning studies in the
remaining Implementation Plan Phase efforts, described here as Phase 3B.
This memorandum describes the proposed scope of work required to complete Phase 3B. Unlike
the menu of technical services proposed in the Development Plan Phase 2, the proposed scope
items described below are planned as an integrated group of efforts, sequenced appropriately
such that early efforts inform later efforts in a strategic manner. It is recommended that all the
scope efforts be performed to efficiently and effectively inform one another and assist the council
in their decision making in preparation for a potential bond measure in November of 2008. Phase
3B culminates with a May 2008 Council work session. At or before that time, the Council may
choose to proceed with additional design, public involvement, or public opinion efforts, and could
elect to move forward with a Request For Proposal process to complete the design and
construction documents for a police patrol facility.
Technical Analysis
Expanded Concept Design:
From the results of the Public Opinion research we learned that a
new City Hall gains significantly higher support when the bond is at or under $100 million, and
that the public requires clearly distinct choices with different costs and benefits when considering
which option they will support. In applying this knowledge the Project Team recommends using
options A and C for master planning the wholly- and incrementally-realized full consolidation
options.
Explore and establish one design concept for development on one site at two levels: full and
immediate consolidation, and a reduced build-out to accommodate full consolidation
incrementally. Identify and illustrate major green building features that shape massing,
configuration, cost and public benefit. Test functionality of divisions with more developed plan
layouts. Explore building elevations. Prepare a cost model on the selected concept design to
establish project budget in preparation for schematic design. Produce two high-quality
renderings.
733 sw oak street, Portland, Oregon 97205 telephone 503·227·1254 fax 503·227·7818
MEMORANDUM
City of Eugene, City Hall Complex Master Plan
Proposed Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope
Page 2 of 4
Eco-charrette:
Facilitate a full-day workshop with City staff and Design Team members to
establish priorities and goals for environmental sustainability and energy efficiency, and identify
site-specific and design-specific strategies to accomplish those goals. Eco-charrette is
sequenced to occur near the beginning of the expanded concept design effort to maximize
integration of green building features and develop a shared vision. Charrette will be informed by
a Sustainability Specialized Input Group with members of the community having sustainable
design expertise. Given the high level of public support indicated by the Public Involvement and
Public Opinion research activities, the results of both the eco-charrette and the Sustainability
Specialized Input Group will be a primary topic of the design forum to expand awareness and
involvement with the public (See Public Involvement scope), and a topic explored further in the
Public Opinion research. Project Team will share results of eco-charrette with the council and
provide a summary report.
Federal Building Analysis:
Examine the feasibility and cost of relocating Municipal Court and
the City Prosecutor into the Federal Building while City staff begin discussions with the GSA
about a long-term lease or ownership of the courthouse wing. Identify upgrades as required and
prepare a cost model. Deliverables include conceptual renovation of available Federal Building
space, plan layouts, and a cost model.
Police Patrol Facility Planning:
Establish site selection criteria for Police Patrol facility, identify
up to four potential sites, and analyze site suitability. When site has been selected, perform
concept layouts and prepare a cost model. Prepare graphics and facilitate discussions with
Council and Public. Expand awareness and involvement with public through Focus Group and
Community Forum participation (See Public Involvement scope).
Public Opinion Research:
Approach:
Continue to inform and guide the project activities and development in light of public
opinion. Conduct a brief tracking poll in the fall to test baseline assumptions, assess any
changes in public perception of the City Council and the project, and gauge how other newly
developing city issues and initiatives impact the project. Conduct another round of focus groups
and a benchmark telephone poll in the early spring to test specific design components, public
benefits, levels of consolidation, and costs. Develop talking points and strategies that are
research-based and respond to public opinion. Advise the Council on if, when, and how a bond
measure should go on the ballot.
The tracking poll is a brief poll to explore the impact of the police patrol facility’s location and cost
on a potential bond measure, track changes in public opinion from the benchmark poll conducted
in May 2007, and assess the impact of other current public policy issues and initiatives on the
project. The tracking poll sample size will be 400 with a length of approximately 10 minutes,
conducted shortly after the council votes on a location for the patrol facility.
The focus groups will test reactions to the expanded concept designs and further mine public
opinion around a bond measure through an open discussion of issues and ideas that is not
possible in a telephone survey. The analysis of the focus groups will inform the messages,
strategies, values and financing options that get tested in the benchmark poll.
The benchmark poll will include additional specifics around design components, public benefits,
levels of consolidation and updated costs. It will also test in a balanced and objective way the
potential arguments in favor and in opposition to the potential bond measure to more accurately
assess the viability of the project. The poll’s sample size will be 800 with a length of
approximately 20 minutes. This sample size will give sufficient ability to test the public’s priorities
733 sw oak street, Portland, Oregon 97205 telephone 503·227·1254 fax 503·227·7818
MEMORANDUM
City of Eugene, City Hall Complex Master Plan
Proposed Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope
Page 3 of 4
for Eugene and support for a potential bond measure, anticipate opposition arguments, and help
guide the direction of the project.
Final deliverables include a written report and analysis of the focus group results, a statistical
analysis and presentation of the telephone polling, with summary conclusions and
recommendations.
Public Involvement Process
Approach:
Create a fair, inclusive, and transparent public process to inform and involve the
community and provide a two-way communication loop between members of the community and
Council. Add value to the city’s infrastructure for ongoing public involvement. Continue efforts
developed during the previous phases including community forums, Neighborhood Association
outreach, special input groups, and website communication. Enhance awareness and
participation with Communities of Color and youth. Conduct additional community meetings
within the wards to communicate project development and obtain feedback on priorities and
concerns.
Specialized Input Groups
: Obtain specialized input on three topics central to Phase 3B:
sustainability, accessibility, and Police issues. Recruit community members with special
expertise and credibility relative to each topic, facilitate meetings, and report results to Council.
The sustainability input group will be designed to tap into Eugene’s rich pool of local green
building practitioners to garner ideas about making a new city hall a model of sustainability. The
Accessibility Sub-committee of the Human Rights Commission will serve as the accessibility input
group and track the design impact of input received in a previous Accessibility Focus Group.
Additional input on accessibility will be collected by visiting Senior Centers throughout the city.
We propose utilizing the Eugene Police Commission for the role of expert citizen advisors on the
police-related aspects of this phase of Master Planning, subject to council approval. The Police
Commissioners are proven to be vested and informed at the level necessary for this task, and
have been through an official selection process that establishes their credibility in the community.
Community Forum
: Gather specific input as directed by Council. Continue to recruit citizens for
community forums. Facilitate (1) 3-hour forum of 100-150 people. Contact potential participants
prior to the forum, advertise in local newspapers, and time media coverage immediately prior to
forum to enhance project awareness and participation. Forum materials include presentation
materials (PowerPoint and graphic boards) developed from previous work efforts, surveys and
collation of survey results. The forum is planned to address the Police Patrol facility planning and
City Hall concept design development including sustainability features and costs. Prepare and
distribute forum summaries to participants and Council. Estimated expenses include
advertisements, graphics, room rental, refreshments, and mailings.
Community Meetings
: Conduct five meetings in different geographic areas of the city to share
design progress with presentation materials and potential costs and funding mechanisms. The
Design team will recruit participants in conjunction with City Councilors and Neighborhood
Associations, and report results of the meetings to council.
Public Involvement External Communication
Neighborhood Association outreach:
collaborate with Neighborhood Association staff to give
brief updates at every meeting as a standing part of meeting agendas. Attend and facilitate
discussions at any Neighborhood Association at their request. Place project-related information
in every Association newsletter as allowed by each newsletter editor.
733 sw oak street, Portland, Oregon 97205 telephone 503·227·1254 fax 503·227·7818
MEMORANDUM
City of Eugene, City Hall Complex Master Plan
Proposed Implementation Plan Phase 3B Scope
Page 4 of 4
Latino and Youth outreach:
perform specific outreach to Latino groups through bi-lingual
informational outreach and presentations at various events such as Latino Parents’ Group,
Joventud Faceta, LEAD, Cinco de Mayo, We Are Bethel, and the Latino Market. Perform specific
outreach to youth by working with school and community organizations to offer presentations and
create opportunities for high school community service hours.
Speakers Bureau
: schedule, participate in and summarize up to (20) presentations to build
project awareness in the community. Recruit participation at forums, and engage those following
the project through news media outlets. Presentations are anticipated at Chamber of Commerce
meetings, local Rotary Clubs, the City Club, Human Rights Commission, Planning Commission,
and similar groups.
Website/Comment Line
: enhance existing project website to promote information sharing and
create more links to other organizations’ websites; provide updates at key decisions or
milestones; continue to include information in Spanish; maintain telephone comment line and a
TTY line. Estimated expenses include use of an independent website server to facilitate design
team management and updates.
Displays
: develop a series of freestanding displays for use at community gathering spots
(Library, Saturday Market, malls, etc.) describing current work efforts and updated (2) times.
Displays will be provided in both English and Spanish.
Media
: continue to develop consistent news media exposure in print, TV, and radio including (4)
visits to local editorial boards, (3) articles for community publications, (8) radio interviews and (4)
television appearances.
733 sw oak street, Portland, Oregon 97205 telephone 503·227·1254 fax 503·227·7818
ATTACHMENT F
City Hall Complex Action Plan
At the February 2005 retreat of the Eugene City Council, concluding the discussion related to City Hall
and a new or renovated Police Building was identified as a council priority issue. This discussion has
centered on the questions of whether to renovate or replace the existing City Hall including when, where,
and how a Police Building should be incorporated. A 3-5 year horizon is used to identify what the action
plan will accomplish with particular focus on the first 18 months.
A. Planning Horizon and Focus
Concluding the City Hall/Police Building discussion will require a four-phased approach:
1. Policy Advisement Phase. This will be a relatively brief phase in which the City Council pro-
vides direction on a number of policy level issues related to this priority item with resolution
of as many issues as possible at the front end of the process. The Policy Advisement phase
should be complete within approximately 6 months including the consultant selection proc-
ess.
2. Development Plan Phase. This phase will include the technical work and public input re-
quired to generate an overall Development Plan. This is also the phase in which the remain-
ing policy issues from phase one will be resolved. The Development Plan phase should focus
on decision making and be complete within about 18 months to coincide with the current
council biennium.
3. Implementation Plan Phase. This phase will identify the specific steps required to implement
the Development Plan. The Implementation Plan phase should focus on priority action items
such as timing, financing, property acquisition, and procurement methods. This phase should
be complete within 2½-3 years in order to allow the option of a bond measure on the ballot
during the November 2008 general election.
4. Design and Construction Phase. The ultimate goal of the action plan is to provide sustainable
facilities downtown that meet the City’s environmental, economic, and social needs both now
and well into the future. The City Hall Complex Action plan will be considered a success if
the City has begun the design and construction of a new and/or renovated City Hall Complex—
including the Police component—within 5 years.
B. Priority Issue Outcomes
The proposed outcomes for the City Hall/Police Building issue fall into four timeframes coinciding
with the four phases identified above.
Phase 1
The Policy Advisement Phase would provide direction on the following questions:
1. Should City Hall be renovated and enlarged or replaced?
2. Where should City Hall and the Police Building be located?
3. How will the development of City Hall and the Police Building reinforce the goals in the
Downtown Plan?
a. Follow the adopted Downtown Plan?
b. Amend the Downtown Plan?
4. What level of City service consolidation should be planned for?
a. One building or several proximate buildings?
b. Include the City functions located in the Public Works Building, Eugene Hotel, Atrium
Building, etc.?
5. What planning horizon should be used for determining the space needs for the new facilities?
a. Ten years?
b. Twenty years?
c. More?
6. What co-location opportunities should be considered or pursued?
a. Victims service agencies and/or other non-profits?
b. EWEB, LCOG, 4J, and/or other governmental agencies?
c. Tenant space for food and beverage provider(s)?
d. Housing?
7. What is the general financing plan?
a. What financing options should be considered?
b. What is the target date for putting a bond measure on the ballot?
c. What is the back-up plan if a bond measure fails?
8. What level of environmental sustainability is appropriate?
a. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design™ (LEED) Silver or higher?
b. How much of a first-cost premium is acceptable?
9. How should parking be addressed?
a. Should there be dedicated public parking (visitors and/or staff)?
b. Should more secure parking be provided for City vehicles?
c. How should Police vehicle parking be addressed? Structured parking on a smaller site?
Surface parking on a larger site?
10. What will be the impact on adjacent properties?
a. Public?
b. Private?
Some of these policy issues may need to be carried over to the Development Plan phase so the techni-
cal work and/or public input generated during the second phase of the action plan can be factored in
to the policy discussions.
Phase 2
The proposed outcome for the second phase of the action is council adoption of a Development Plan
that resolves all the policy level issues and includes a conceptual design scheme that indicates the
general massing of the building(s), orientation and access, parking, open space, etc. It is important
that the Development Plan phase of the action plan be completed by December 2006 while all current
council members are still in office. Because of the magnitude and complexity of the City Hall/Police
Building issue, carrying over the policy level discussion to a council with even one or two new mem-
bers could result in repeated discussions of the relevant policy issues and decision points.
Phase 3
The third phase of the action plan will result in council adoption of an Implementation Plan that
establishes when and how the Development Plan will be carried out. As stated above, the Imple-
mentation Plan will include specific information about timing, phasing, financing, and project
delivery methods. Additional design development will need to be completed during this phase in
order to provide the detailed information required to finalize the Implementation Plan. This phase
should be complete by December 2007 in order to allow the option of a bond measure on the ballot
during the November 2008 general election. The Implementation Plan should also include an option
that does not require passage of a bond measure in 2008.
Phase 4
The proposed outcome for the fourth and final phase of the action plan will be to complete the design
and construction of the City Hall Complex, including the Police component. The action plan will be a
ringing success if construction has begun within five years. Completion of the City Hall Complex
will take some number of years depending on phasing, timing, and the success of financing efforts.
C. Progress to Date
The expansion or replacement of City Hall has been a major project for the council since 1999, when
council was presented with the possibility of selling City Hall to the Federal government as a site for
the new Federal Courthouse. In 2001, council adopted a policy statement that called for the replace-
ment of City Hall with one or more new buildings by 2010. At that same time, council also adopted a
policy to reduce the level of reinvestment in City Hall and the Public Works Building to provide for
an expected 8 to 10 years of remaining use.
On September 19, 2001, council addressed near-term and long-term projects that were required to
achieve the goal of replacing City Hall. Council directed that relocation of EPD personnel from the
basement of City Hall and relocation of Fire Station #1 should be the first priority projects in the
Downtown Space Plan. (The 9-1-1 Center had previously been relocated from City Hall to a new
nd
building at the 2 and Chambers Emergency Services Complex.) The construction of a new Police
Building and City Hall were the next project priorities, with design for the Police Building originally
projected to begin in FY05, and a replacement of City Hall was targeted to begin design in FY08.
Over the past several years, council has been setting aside funds to pay for this project. As of the
FY06 budget, it is anticipated that there will be over $25 million in the Facility Reserve for this pur-
pose.
On July 26, 2004, council placed a $6.79 million bond measure to fund civic center elements related
to a Community Safety Building on the November 2004 ballot. The measure was to fund social
service agency space, police headquarters expansion space, improvements to the parks blocks, and
th
improvements to make 8 Avenue a “Great Civic Street.” On November 2, 2004, voters rejected
ballot measure 20-88 by a margin of 60% to 40%.
Since November, 2004, council has been considering initiation of a City Hall Master Plan process to
develop a strategy for addressing both the Police and City Hall projects in a single vision.
D. Action Plan
The action plan will have three phases that will lead to adoption by council of a City Hall Complex
Implementation Plan by the end of calendar year 2007. The successful adoption of the Implementa-
tion Plan will be followed by a fourth phase, the design and construction of the City Hall Complex.
Phase One – Policy Advisement
Phase one of the action plan will begin with the selection of a consultant team through an open Re-
quest for Proposals (RFQ) process. The consultant team will likely have an architectural firm in the
lead role, but will need to include mechanical and electrical engineers, a landscape architect, a cost
estimator, and an expert in strategic planning facilitation. The first task for the consultant team will
be to review relevant background information including adopted plans, policies, committee reports
and recommendations, and council action history related to City office space, Police facilities, and
downtown. The consultant team will also need to meet with staff to form as complete a picture as
possible of the current status of the City Hall/Police Building issue prior to meeting with council.
The main task in phase one is for council to participate in a facilitated session to identify and provide
direction on policy issues relevant to the City Hall/Police Building question. Council can group these
policy issues according to the following three categories: 1) those issues for which council has clear
agreement and is ready to provide explicit direction; 2) those issues for which council wants public
input prior to making a decision; and 3) those issues for which more hard data is required before
making a decision. Phase one will be complete by mid-November, if council authorizes funding for
consultant services by the end of May.
Phase Two – Adopt a Development Plan
The second phase of the action plan will begin with a master planning process that includes a signifi-
cant public participation component. Starting with the results of the council strategic planning ses-
sion, the consultant team will work with selected staff from across the organization to establish pro-
ject requirements such as space needs, adjacency requirements, service delivery goals, sustainability
goals, and urban design standards. The input from council on policy issues can then be combined
with the input from staff on technical and operating issues to develop conceptual design options. The
conceptual design options will then go through a round of review and comment by council, the com-
munity, and City staff with the intent of generating a healthy dialogue around the issues that are im-
portant to Eugene.
This phase will culminate with council adoption of a Development Plan that resolves all the policy
level issues and includes the preferred conceptual design scheme indicating major aspects of the City
Hall Complex such as building location(s), general massing of the building(s), orientation and access,
parking, open space, etc. Adoption of the Development Plan should occur prior to the council break
in December 2006.
The detailed work program for the first two phases will be developed in conjunction with the selected
consultant team. However, a draft scope of work and proposed schedule is included as Attachment A
based on reasonable assumptions for the steps required to select a consultant team, schedule a strate-
gic planning session with council, develop a master plan, check in periodically with council, and
build consensus in the community. The tight schedule underscores the importance of moving ahead
in a timely manner in order to complete the Development Plan by December 2006.
Phase Three – Adopt an Implementation Plan
The third phase will be to develop and adopt the City Hall Complex Implementation Plan. This will
entail refinement of the conceptual design produced during the Development Plan phase into sche-
matic design options with enough detail for the consultant team to generate accurate project cost
estimates. The conceptual design options can then go through another round of review and comment
by council, the community, and City staff. This phase will conclude with council adoption of an
Implementation Plan that includes specific information about timing, phasing, financing, and project
delivery methods.
The Implementation Plan should be adopted by the December 2007 in order to leave plenty of time
for consensus building around the issue of a possible bond measure during the November 2008 gen-
eral election. Development options that do not include passage of a general obligation bond in 2008
should also be considered. Adoption of a development plan should lead to an appropriation of fund-
ing for the first phase of construction for the City Hall Complex as well as direction on next steps for
any future phase(s).
Phase Four – Design and Construction of the City Hall Complex
After the development plan is approved by council and funding is appropriated for the first phase of
construction, the City would initiate a selection process for the design team that would complete the
design of the City Hall Complex, prepare construction documents, and track the construction process.
Ideally, the project will be under construction by the middle of calendar year 2010.
The staff team for the first three phases of the action plan consists of Jim Carlson as the lead Execu-
tive Manager, Mike Penwell as the project lead, and a committee consisting of members from Facility
Management, Finance, Planning and Development, Public Works, Municipal Court, and Police as
well as the City’s Public Information Officer. Many other staff members from across the City organi-
zation will be tapped for their expertise in specific areas and to provide input to the consultant team
during programming and design review. The appropriate staff team for design and construction will
be assembled at the beginning of phase four and would presumably include some of the same com-
mittee members that participated in the first three phases.
E. Resource Needs
The total cost of fully resolving the City Hall/Police Building issue will likely exceed $100 million
including design and construction costs for almost any of the possible scenarios for the City Hall
Complex. However, the funds will be allocated and spent incrementally with multiple opportunities
for monitoring and evaluation by City staff, the council, and the public. A rough estimate of costs by
component is as follows:
1. Phase One – Policy Advisement
a. Select consultant team
b. Conduct a facilitated session with council to identify and provide direction on policy
issues: $30,000
c. Adopt initial policy direction
2. Phase Two – Adopt the City Hall Complex Development Plan
a. Complete the master planning and public participation process: $300,000 - $400,000
b. Adopt the Development Plan
3. Phase Three – Adopt the City Hall Complex Implementation Plan
a. Complete schematic design and implementation options: $250,000 - $350,000
b. Adopt the Implementation Plan
4. Phase Four – Design and Construction of the City Hall Complex: $100,000,000+
The majority of the costs related to completion of both the Implementation Plan and the Development
Plan are consultant fees. A portion of project staff time will be charged to the project as Professional
Service Fees (PSF), reflecting the City’s policy of recovering capital project-related staff costs
through charges to projects. Other staff time is already included in departmental budgets, but allo-
cating resources to this action plan may reduce time available for other ongoing departmental work
programs. The costs for materials, supplies, and consultant reimbursable expenses should be a rela-
tively small percentage of total project costs.
As a point of comparison, the consultant contract for EWEB’s current planning process is just under
$800,000 for a scope of work roughly equivalent to phases one through three described above.
F. Monitoring and Evaluation
This action plan is focused on specific outcomes in the form of initial policy advisement, a completed
City Hall Complex Development Plan, a completed City Hall Complex Implementation Plan, and
design and construction of facilities to carry out the Implementation Plan. A detailed work program
and time line for Phase One and Two of the action plan has been developed, and will be updated
during execution of Phase One. Progress on Phase One and Two will be monitored through the
detailed work program and timelines. Council approval of each project phase will be the primary
measure of success in meeting proposed outcomes for the first three phases, with authorization to ini-
tiate construction projects indicating the measure of success for Phase Four. Ultimately, the action
plan will be considered a resounding success if construction has begun within five years on at least
the initial phase of the City Hall/Police Building.