HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A: City Council Priority Issue - City Hall Complex
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
~
Work Session: City Council Priority Issue - City Hall Complex
Meeting Date: December 14,2005
Department: Central Services
www.eugene-or.gov
Agenda Item Number: A
Staff Contact: Mike Penwell
Contact Telephone Number: 682-5547
ISSUE STATEMENT
The purpose of this work session is to request council direction for implementing Phase 2-the Devel-
opment Plan Phase-of the City Hall Complex Action Plan.
BACKGROUND
On May 25,2005, the council approved the City Hall/Police Building Action Plan (subsequently renamed
the City Hall Complex Action Plan) which identifies the major policy issues to be addressed, the overall
description of project phasing, the nature of work to be accomplished, resource needs and proposed
project outcomes associated with the City Hall Complex.
The project team of Thomas Hacker Architects facilitated a council workshop on October 19,2005, for
the purpose of identifying and providing direction on policy issues relevant to the City Hall Complex.
Based on pre-workshop interviews with the mayor and council, six project values were presented by the
consultant team to which three additional project values were proposed by council members during the
workshop. The following project values were adopted by the council at its November 23,2005, work
seSSIOn:
1. Exercise fiscal responsibility
2. Produce government efficiency
3. Be user-friendly
4. Embody environmental stewardship
5. Enhance downtown
6. Inspire civic pride
7. Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its
representatives
8. Strive for simplicity
9. Plan for the future
In addition, eight key issues and five sub-issues emerged from pre-workshop interviews with the mayor
and council, and were presented during the workshop. Based on discussion at the workshop, position
statements on the four issues with the highest degree of consensus were presented to the council at the
November 23,2005, work session. The council modified and adopted the position statements as follows:
1. Incorporate meaningful sustainable design goals.
2. Utilize a long-term planning horizon of 25 years.
3. Consolidate City services to the greatest practical extent.
4. Develop the project in consideration of the Downtown Plan while not limiting location choices to
8th Avenue.
The next step in the action plan is the Development Plan Phase. The action plan states, "This phase will
include the technical work and public input required to generate an overall Development Plan. This is
also the phase in which the remaining policy issues from phase one will be resolved."
LICMOl200S Council Agendas1MOS12141S0S1214A.doc
There are two basic approaches to the Development Plan Phase presented here for the council to consider
that are consistent with the intent of the City Hall Complex Action Plan. Approach A incorporates more
detailed technical work and a comprehensive public involvement process, but carries a higher price tag.
Approach B is a more conceptual approach that relies on less technical work and a reduced level of public
involvement, and is therefore less expensive (see Attachment C for a detailed description and comparison
of Approach A and B). Approach B is also less expensive because it can be completed in seven months
(see Attachment B, Approach B Timeline) as compared to the 11 months required for Approach A (see
Attachment A, Approach A Timeline).
The table below summarizes the scope of services and costs for the two proposed approaches. The scope
of services in Approach A is more consistent with the action plan and the material presented at the council
workshop, but the cost is much higher than estimated in the action plan. Correspondingly, the scope of
services for Approach B is more limited than identified in the action plan or at the workshop, but the cost
is closer to the estimate in the action plan.
Approach A Approach B
Technical Tasks Cost Technical Tasks Cost
· Review Existing Conditions · Review Exist. Conditions (reduced)
· Space Needs Study · Space Needs Outline (reduced)
· Police Service Delivery Study · Eliminate Police Service Del. Study
· Site Options Study · Site Options Study
· Concept options · Concept options (simplified)
Public Involvement Tasks Public Involvement Tasks
· Citizen Interviews · Citizen Interviews (reduced)
· Community Forums (4) · Community Forums (3)
· PI Planning Meetings · PI Planning Meetings
· Community Communication · Community Communication
Meetings Meetings
· Council Workshops (4) · Council Workshops (3)
· Council Work Sessions (4) · Council Work Sessions (3)
· Project Team Meetings (w/City) · Project Team Meetings (w/City)
Sub-Total of Basic Services $920,000 Sub-Total of Basic Services $675,000
Reimbursable Expenses $75,000 Reimbursable Expenses $65,000
Project Management (City) $60,000 Project Management (City) $40,000
Total Approach A Costs $1,055,000 Total Approach B Costs $780,000
There are also several additional services mentioned either during the October 19 council workshop or the
November 23 council work session that could be added to either Approach A or Approach B as well:
Additional Services
· Police Service Delivery Study
· Generic New vs. Remodel Study
· Benchmarking Study
· Seismic Analysis of Existing Bldg.
· Financial Analysis
· Co-Location Study
· Spanish Translation of Community
Exhibit Fact Sheets
Cost (including reimbursable expenses)
$30,000 (included in Approach A Basic Services)
$80,000
$16,000 (could occur in phase 3)
$28,000
$21,000 (could occur in phase 3)
$13,000 (could occur in phase 3)
$2,500
LICMOl200S Council Agendas1MOS12141S0S1214A.doc
The costs for both Approach A and Approach B are significantly higher than estimated in the City Hall
Complex Action Plan for two reasons. First, the City has never done a facility planning project of this
size, scope, and complexity. As a result, the original estimate was based on a rather simplistic com-
parison to the EWEB master planning process. The contract for the EWEB master plan is up to about
$1.1 million for fees and expenses, and provides programming, planning, and design through schematic
design. By comparison, the next phase of the City Hall Complex master planning process includes the
technical work required to generate a complete development plan, but only includes concept level design
options.
However, the issues addressed in the EWEB planning process were much more limited and defined than
those being addressed with the City Hall Complex, the site options were already identified, and perhaps
most significantly, there was no public involvement process. By comparison, the City as an organization
is more varied and complex than EWEB with many unresolved issues to consider and resolve simultane-
ously. City staff and the council have also indicated a commitment to an inclusive, effective public input
process in keeping with the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Core Values of Pub-
lic Participation. Though higher than originally anticipated, the costs for both approaches are reasonable
given the scope of work required to provide the City with the information needed for informed decision
making.
RELA TED CITY POLICIES
The City Hall Complex master planning and public participation process relates to the council goals of an
effective, accountable municipal government, a safe community, and sustainable community growth and
change.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
The council has four options related to the Development Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action
Plan:
1. Direct the City Manager to proceed with Approach A for implementation of the Development
Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan plus Additional Services as desired by the
council and request on a Supplemental Budget an appropriation of$I,055,000 from the Facility
Reserve for Approach A Basic Services and additional funds as required to complete selected
Additional Services.
2. Direct the City Manager to proceed with Approach B for implementation of the Development
Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan plus Additional Services as desired by the
council; and request on a Supplemental Budget an appropriation of$780,000 from the Facility
Reserve for Approach B Basic Services and additional funds as required to complete selected
Additional Services.
3. Direct the City Manager to return with additional information related to the Development Plan
Phase for consideration by the council at a future work session.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends Option #1 with the addition of the Generic New vs. Remodel Study for a
totalof$I,135,000. Approach A-while more expensive than Approach B-is more consistent with the
adopted City Hall Complex Action Plan, provides more detailed technical information on which decisions
can be made, and offers a more inclusive, effective public involvement process.
LICMOl200S Council Agendas1MOS12141S0S1214A.doc
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to direct the City Manager to proceed with Approach A for implementation of the Development
Plan Phase of the City Hall Complex Action Plan plus the Generic New vs. Remodel Study and request
on a Supplemental Budget an appropriation of$I,128,550 from the Facility Reserve.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Approach A Schedule
B. Approach B Schedule
C. Project Scope Options Memo
D. City Hall Complex Action Plan
E. Preliminary Task List and Schedule
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Mike Penwell
Telephone: 682-5547
Staff E-Mail: michael.j.penwell@ci.eugene.or.us
LICMOl200S Council Agendas1MOS12141S0S1214A.doc
<
"E
~
S
~
u
,S
~
Ull.{)
.~H~
~~
~~
~s
m
I
Ul
m
~
I--
II
.....1 I
~I~I
O:J 1--:> I
inl I
""'1 I
-'-1
I I
I ~I
101
I I
I_J
I I
I I
1>1
I~I
I I
1-1
.....1 I
21 I
~Iul
~IOI
~I I
-i--i--
I I
I~I
IUJI
I I
I_J
I I
I I
I g'1
I~I
I I
I-~
m I I
~I-I
:J1..s1
~II
~-~
I I
I I
I~I
I I
I I
1-"1
I I
I~I
I~I
I I
I I
m[-l
~I.....I
OI~1
~_J
I I
I I
I~I
I I
I I
I-~
I I
I~I
ILL I
I I
I-~
m I I
~Iel
~I~I
=!-J -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
I I I
I I I
I~I I
I I I
I I......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1
~-r-r-r-r-I-r-r-r-r-I-r-r-r-r-I-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-1
l:g I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ ~ I~ ~ I~ ~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ Ie Ie Ie Ie Ie I
-'= Ig I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ I I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I~ ~ ~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ Is I I~ IE I~ 16 Is I~ I
-~ lto I;:: IN I.;:: 1M 1M 1(1) IN 1M 1(1) f~ f~ ~~ I I..... rg ~ fQ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1:= I I~ 1M II.{) I" 1M II.{) I:: I~ 100 I"'" I I;: I~ I~ I:: I:: 1:= I
~ I~ I~ I~ ILL IJ: IJ: I~ I~ ~ I~ I I f I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I~ ~ ~ I~ I~ I~ ILL IJ: I~ I~ I IJ: ILL ILL ILL ILL IJ: I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r I I I ~ I I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
--~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
l:g I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ I~ I~ I l:g I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I l:g I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I
+-' I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ I I~ ~ b~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ I I~ ~ ~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ Is I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I
~ I;:; I;:: I;:: I;:: IN I e 1M I" IN 1M I'<j" Ie Ie I ~ ro ro ~ I'<j" 1m 1:= I I..... I"'" IN 1M 1M II.{) I" I" 100 I"'" I I s:: Ie 100 1m 1m I"'" I
U5 I g 15 I~ 15 15 I~ l-g I~ ~ l-g 15 ~ ~ I ~ ~ (1) ~ I e ~ I (1) ~ b I I~ ~ ~ I~ IE IE 15 15 IE I ~ I I~ I~ I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I
1:= I~ Is I~ I~ I Is I> R Is ~ r r I po po g: po LQ B: B: B: ~ I Is ~ ~ Is II-- II-- I~ I~ II-- II-- I I I I~ I~ I~ I~ I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F I I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
--~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I
51tU 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m ~ ~ lffi I ItU r5 r5 r5 r5 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ItU ~ ~ l-{g I" ILl 1.gJ 1.gJ ILl I" I l.g l-{g 1.gJ l-{g l-{g l-{g I
.~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ b I~ I~ I~ b I ~ r- r- r- r- r- r- I"'" r- I I~ II.{) II.{) 10 I"'" I"'" 10 10 I"'" I"'" I 10 b b b 10 10 I
:g I;: I I"'" I" IN IN I"'" I"'" IN 1M IN IN r I I~ I I I I I I I I I I~ 1M I" 1m I I 1m I~ I I I I~ 1M 1M I"'" 1M I"'" I
--~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I~
I I I.~ I I I I~
IU) I I~ I I lli ~
I:~ I I~ I I Ig lli
I-E I I~ I Ul I ~ I ~
18.. I 10 ~ I~ I>. 15
I g. I.~ I ~ ~ ~B I ~ P
I Ul I ~ I.~ ~_ I'~ ~~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ I~
I.g I.~ I 0) r~ I~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ 1-'= Ii lli I ~
I'~ Fs I~ I~ ~ ~ I~ Ie rr:E: I~ ~I:t:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q ~Q ~Q ~Q I~ I~ I~ I~ II I~ I~ I~ 1 ~ 1 ~
I~ I~ 12 1U5 I~ I~.::"'_ 1m ~B I'~ '-' 10 19 19 19 19 I~ I~ I~ I~ I I"" I~ Im(1) I;J I;J lo:J Im(1) I;J I;J I~o.. 10 15
Ie' 1'= IUJ I~ It: I~ IUJ k3- ~~ Ie: IlU 10.. ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ I~ I~ I~ IE ~~ ~ I~ 10 10 ILl I~ 10 10 1(1) lu ,.... I~ N
1't5 I~ I~ 1(1) II~ II~ II~ 1(1) ~~ ~ II~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rs rs rs rs I~ Ie 10 10 ILL ILL 10 10 ILL ILL Ig I~ I~ 1(..) I~
I~ I.~ I~ I~ l<u l<u I~ ~ ~ ~ l<u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ I.~ I'~ I'~ I~ I'~ I'~ I'~ I 110_:0 I~ I~ I~ I~
(1) IS log 1(1) 1(1) I~ I~ I~ Ig ~ I~ I~ I~ ~ Ig Ig Ig Ig Ig Ig Ig Ig Ig I~ ~ Ig IE IE I~ Ig IE IE 10 - I~ I~ I~ I~
~ I.~ I'~ I e I ~ l,g I'';::; r.;::; I~ @1(1)r';::;I'';::; r.;::; ~ I:J I:J I:J I:J I:J I:J I:J I:J IE f~ f 0) I ~ I E I E I Q'l(1) I ~ I E I E 115.. I 0.. I > I U) I;;::: I Ul
210 1(1) 10 1'-'- 10 18- 18- IU) UJ IW ~ 18- ~ 1(..) k3 k3 k3 k3 k3 k3 k3 k3 1.2 0 ~ liIi 10 10 12 liIi 10 18 IQ) ItTI I~ 18 I~ 18
~ Ii' 10: 10 IUJ 10- I I IW 1 I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I l:g I 1 I 10 10 I I 10 I I g I I I I I
-~~~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
g I"'" IN 1M I'<j" II.{) ItO I" 100 r f ~ P P ~ f ~ ~ f ~ r r r r r r r ~ r I~ r 1M I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
1m I
M
~
o
~
.
~
.
o
-- ---- --- --- ---- --- ---- --- --- ---- --- ---- --- - ~--
o
o::r
C\I
00
O'l
to
.
.
en
r::
o
Il)
C\I
in
o
in
.
.
~
;;:r
o
><
Q)
c..
E
o
u
(ij
:I:
~
U
Q)
s::
Q)
C)
::3
W
M
-~--
co
M
.
.
<(
.s::
o
CO
o
Q.
c.
<(
Q)
3
"C
Q)
.s::
o
en
C\I
Q)
UJ
CO
.s::
a.
(1)
e
"
m
(1)
o
(1)
e
Ul 0
~ U)
Ul ~
m
I-- ~
J i
W W
[
>.
~
E
>. ~
~ UJ
E l)
~ (1)
"0
UJ c:
I .
Ul (1)
Ul e
(1) 0
0) Ul
0 (1)
c: ~
~
~ c..
I-- UJ
o
I.{)
o
(1)
~l!)
"0
~~
Ul,....
N"
0-(1)
tS
.~ Q.i
e~
0-0
o:l Ull.{)
"E ~~
S ~~
~ ~~
n ~S
~ :E
Ul
m
~
I--
II
I I
I I
I~I
IUJI
I I
I I
I_J
r-l
I I
I I
I g'1
I~I
I I
I I
l-J
I I
I I
.....II
~I~I
011
~I I
-i-i- -
I I
I I
I I
I sl
1--:>1
I I
I I
I_J
I I
I I
I I
I~I
I~I
I I
I I
I-~
I I
I I
m I I
tlo.J
81~1
-gl I
~I
i-r
I I
I I
I ~I
I~I
I I
I I
I-~
I I
I I
I~I
ILL I
I I
I I
I-~
I I
I I
.....1 I
~I~I
~II
~I I
-i-i ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
I I I
I I I
I t) I I
I~I I
I I I
I ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '1
.J-t--~-1i-~--~-1~-Ti-r--~-li-Ti-li--1i-1~--li-l--li-Ti-~- ~ -li-T~-ij--,-Ti-i-li-l~-Ti-~-ll
I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ Igj I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ ~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ 12 I~ I~ II
~ 1M I~ IN IN IN 1M 1M I I~ IN I~ I;;::: Ii?; 1<0 I~ I lco IN I;;::: 00 I~ Ii?; I;;::: I I~ Ii?; 1<0 I;;::: I;;::: I~ II
:~IG> I:J 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) I.;:: I IG> 1"0 I" I" I" I" 1(1) I I:J I:J I:J :J 1-'= I:J Ie I Iu: I" 1"0 1(1) I" ILL II
LL I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ ILL I IS I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ IS I I~ I~ I~ ~ 11-- I~ I~ I I I~ I~ I~ I~ I II
__I _J _ 1__1 __I _ 1__1__1 _J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II
ij fi 1e i ~ le T~ r ~-li-Ti-i--~-1e--i-l--l~-Ti-i- e -li-Tf-i--I-T~-i-l~-l~-T~-~-ll
t I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ ~ I~ 101 I~ I Ig I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ II
0511; II; I; I; I~ I~ I~ I I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ l-g I I; I~ I~ M IE I~ I~ I I~ 1-; I~ I~ I~ I~ II
G> (1) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 10 I IG> 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) Is I ILL ILL ILL ;E 11-- 1-'= 10 I I.s:: 1-'= 1-'= 1-'= 1-'= 1-'= II
Is IS IS IS IS IS I~ I IS IS IS IS IS IS I I I I I I 11-- I~ I 11-- 11-- 11-- 11-- 11-- 11-- II
__+-__~+ + I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II
e I ~ I ~ - I ~- I i-~-l~-T~-r--ri-l~-T~-~--~-Ti-T~-l--li-T~-r~- ~-l~-T~-li--r-Ti-T~l~-l~-T~-r~ll
.Q I~ I.@ I.@ I.@ I.@ I.@ I.@ I I~ 1"0 I" I" I" I" I" I I~ I.@ I.@ .@ I" I" I" I I~ I.@ I.@ I.@ I~ I.@ II
~ Ill') IN 10 10 II.{) 10 10 I I..... I"'" I"'" I"'" I"'" I"'" I"'" I Ill') 10 II.{) 0 I"'" I"'" I"'" I IN 10 II.{) 1m 10 I" II
t51~ I IN IN I IN IN I I~ I I I I I I I I~ IN 1:= ~ I I I I ICO 1M IN I IN I II
--r--~-~--+--~-~--t--~--~-i--t--r--~-~--+-~--~--t--~- -i--t--r--~-+--+-~--~--t--~-~
II II I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I 1M I I I I I
I~ Ij I I I I I
I ~ 10... I I Ul I I l.s
I~ I~ II I.~ 1.9 l.s 18
II OJ II ~ 18 10- I.~ I ~ 10.. 106
~ ~ 1- 12 1(1) 10 I~ l.s
I..;::; I~ I.!!? 1U5 10 106 I e I ~
I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ I.~ I~ I'~ Ig
I~ It) I~ l-g Ig I a:> 1m I~ p
I~ I~ I'@ I.~ I~ I~ I~ I'~ I ~ I~
I~ IE I.~ I~ I~ 10 I~ I~ 15 I~
I:~ IQ I~ I ~ I! I~ 18 I: 1'-; I~ 1-'=
l-g I.~ I'~ 18 I~ I~ I~ I e I~ 1.9 I~
I~ 18 10; I.~ I'~ I III 12 12 12 I'~ I'~ I~ 1_ I~ I:J
I~ Ii I~ I~ I~ I~ I! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~i ~
rn I Ii I~ I~ Ii Il II I~ ~ ~ II~ II] I~ II] I~ ~ ~
~ I'~ I (1) I 0.. I~ I~ I~ I ~ I~ 10 10 10 18 18 I 0 I~ 18 I ~
~ I~ I"' IUl I I I 10 I~ It) It) It) I I It) I~ I i
--F--~-+--+--~-~--+--~--F-1--+--~--~-+--+-~r-1--+--~-
01,.... IN l L l l l l l b ~ ~ ~ k ~ b k b b
-I I I I I I I I I r r r r r r r r r r
><
Q)
Q.
E
o
()
(ij
:I:
~
U
Q)
s::::
Q)
C)
~
W
m
.s::::
(.)
as
o
a.
c.
<(
Q)
~
"C
Q)
.s::::
(.)
en
C\I
Q)
en
as
.s::::
a.
0)
co
o
~
i'::
+
~
U)
o
o
Il')
o
~
;;:r
+
N
N
N
+
~
N
i'::
+
mmmmmummlml
Il')
~
+
0)
M
+
m
'g
~
06
-'=
t)
~
<3
t)
'1
i:Li
I Ul
10.. l.s
I,.... I~ I~
I~ Ii Ii I~ I~ I~ I~ N
II Ii II Ii II Ii III~ 111~0..(1) III~ III) I~
IE IE IE I III I~ I~ I~ I~ I!
~ ~ ~ Ii 1$ I~ 18 I~ 18
I I I Ig I I I I I
-1--+--{---~-+~-+-~--_+--+--~-__11
o I,.... IN 1M I'<j" II.{) lID I" 100 1m 10 II
IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN 1M II
~
m
(1)
o
(1)
e
~ 0
~ ~
~ ~
m
I-- ~
1 i
w w
[
>.
~
E
>- g
~ UJ
E t)
g (1)
'0'
UJ tL
I +
~ j
~
~
tL ~
~
~ 0..
I-- UJ
I.{)
o
(1)
"S
~
~
~e
E"
8~
N"
0...(1)
t5s
.~Q.i
e~
0...0
Attachment C
THOMAS HACKER
ARCHITECTS INC.
MEMORANDUM
cc
Jonah Cohen
Eugene City Hall Master Plan
0522
Dana Crawford; T.H.A file
Date
December 5, 2005
Mike Penwell
City of Eugene
Sent By
Project
Job No.
Attn.
Company
Re
Via
Project Scope Approaches and Options
E-Mail, US Mail
Remarks
The following is an expanded description of the scope approaches and options identified in
the Agenda Item Summary for the December 14, 2005, Work session.
Approach A - Comprehensive Basic Services
Approach A reflects an 11-month effort divided into two phases. The first 5-1/2 months would be an Analysis
Phase consisting of the following tasks:
Review Existing Conditions
Tour and photograph existing City Hall as well as other city-occupied and owned spaces to understand
current operations; develop working base plans of existing City Hall from Owner-provided AutoCad
drawings to inform the space needs study and other technical efforts; perform an evaluation of
City-owned buildings to assess their condition and future use as it relates to the City Hall Complex.
Space Needs Study
A detailed study of needs for all departments likely to be included in the City Hall Complex
documenting area requirements, adjacencies, level of public access, equipment, service and parking
needs, special mechanical, electrical, security and other requirements for all departments, public
spaces, support spaces, and circulation. Products include adjacency diagrams, area needs summary,
concept layouts for complex departments or specialized rooms, and room data sheets.
To inform decisions about future growth, the space needs study will also consider five (5) planning
milestones: current (as occupied), current need (if different than occupied), need projected five years
(to the time of move-in), need projected 15 years (move-in plus 10 years), and need projected 25 years
(move-in plus 20 years).
Police Service Delivery Study
A facilitated exploration of the implications of alternative Police Delivery models to inform decisions
about consolidation of Police with other City services. This study includes analysis of space needs,
efficiencies, constraints and opportunities, and construction cost implications for multiple approaches.
Memorandum
Eugene City Hall Master Plan
December 5, 2005
Page 2 of 4
Site Options Study
Establish comprehensive site evaluation criteria. Work with staff and Council to identify potential
development sites (including land acquisition and swaps); evaluate all considered sites with site
evaluation matrix. Identify approximately three sites for detailed analysis (compatibility with program,
adjacent uses, pedestrian and vehicular access, topography, sub-surface conditions, future growth,
solar access, views, traffic impact, etc.). Facilitate decision about most appropriate site/so
At the completion of the Analysis Phase, a 5-1/2 month Conceptual Design Phase would then lead to an agreed
design direction.
Concept Options
Explore concept options on preferred site/so Illustrate and present options to staff and Council; identify
preferred options. Develop preferred options (three maximum), review with staff and Council, and
perform concept cost models (three maximum). Refine preferred options, review with staff and
Council, and refine concept cost models. Prepare summary report.
Workshops/Meetings/Public Process
Throughout this 11-month effort, (4) two-hour Council Workshops and (4) 45-minute Council Work
sessions would occur. During that same period, an extensive Public Involvement process consisting of
citizen interviews, neighborhood, electronic and media outreach and (4) Community forums will also
take place.
This represents an approach in which multiple technical studies would occur in a linear process allowing the
City Council to make highly informed decisions.
Approach B- Less Comprehensive Basic Services
The most significant differences between Approach A outlined above and Approach B is that a complete Space
Needs Study would not initially occur, the Police Service Delivery Study would be eliminated and some Phase II
Public Process milestones would be moved to Phase III. The overall schedule for Phase II would also be
shortened from 11 months to seven (7) months and divided into two phases. The first two (2) months would
be an Analysis Phase consisting of the following tasks:
Cursory Review of Existing Conditions
In lieu of detailed review of existing conditions described above, this effort would consist of a one-day
tour of existing facilities. Working base plans of existing City Hall would also be developed.
Program Outline
In lieu of a full Space Needs Study, a Program "Outline" would be developed allowing the design team
to estimate an approximate area (GSF) requirement for the new facility. It would, however, establish
major departmental adjacencies, access, security relationships and parking/C ity-owned vehicle
requirements. No detailed program or equipment lay-outs, inter-department adjacencies or narrative
descriptions would be provided.
Simplified Concept Options
A simplified version of Approach A described above. The major difference is a reduced level of
consultant input in development of concept options. Concept options on preferred site/s would be
explored. Options would be Illustrated and presented to staff and Council; preferred options would be
identified. Preferred options (three maximum) would be developed, reviewed with staff and Council,
and concept cost models (three maximum) would be performed. Preferred options would be refined,
reviewed with staff and Council, and concept cost models would be refined. Summary Report
prepared.
733 SW OAK STREET, PORTLAND, OREGON 97205 TELEPHONE 503.227.1254 FAX 503.227.7818
Memorandum
Eugene City Hall Master Plan
December 5, 2005
Page 3 of 4
Workshops/Meetings/Public Process
Substantive Public and City Council input on the above issues would also be solicited throughout
Phase II. Throughout this seven (7)-month effort, (3) two-hour Council Workshops and (3) 45-
minute Council Work Sessions would occur. The Citizen Interviews as well as electronic and
neighborhood outreach efforts would commence as originally envisioned. Three (3) Community
Forums would take place; one (1) during the analysis phase, and two (2) during the concept design
ph a se .
In selecting from the two approaches identified, the following should be considered:
Approach A
Pros
Council and the Public will have better information on which to make decisions
Comprehensive and efficient process (no duplication of work in future phases)
All cost information will have more accuracy
Public Process will have more time to percolate
Cons
Higher fee
Fee spent on efforts which could be performed in future phases or may ultimately not be needed
Approach B
Pros
Requires City Council to be decisive about difficult decisions
Lower fee
Focuses effort on big picture issues before details are verified
Cons
May result in decisions made without complete Public involvement
Council and the Public will have less information on which to make decisions
Less about project costs
Less expertise from Design Team sub-consultants
Some duplication of effort in future phases (i.e., two separate program efforts)
Optional Services
In an effort to give the City of Eugene some flexibility, a portion of the scope has been identified as Optional
Services. For the City Hall Complex, Optional Services are defined as efforts that can be performed in future
phases, can be performed by staff, or inform decision-making but are not necessarily required for the design
process. Any Optional Service may be added to Approach A or B. The following describes each in more detail.
Police Service Delivery Study (see above description)
Note this is already included in Approach A, and deleted in Approach B but could be added back.
Generic New vs. Remodel Analysis
This option would establish a fixed date, two months after commencement of the work for a final
decision by the City Council about whether the Existing City Hall should be retained in its present form,
substantially renovated or replaced with a new building. Prior to that decision, the design team would
facilitate an analysis identifying the major issues and considerations affecting that decision. During that
same two-month period, the Site Options study would occur so that at that milestone, there would be
some confidence about the likely site/so
733 SW OAK STREET, PORTLAND, OREGON 97205 TELEPHONE 503.227.1254 FAX 503.227.7818
Memorandum
Eugene City Hall Master Plan
December 5, 2005
Page 4 of 4
Benchmarking Study
Data from similar jurisdictions would be researched and collated to confirm assumptions of areas and
staffing levels projected for new City Hall Complex.
Seismic Analysis
All previous seismic evaluation of existing City Hall would be reviewed. Conceptual structural upgrade
would be developed, integrating space needs (projected at move-in) and optimal functionality, aesthetics,
and cost effectiveness.
Financial Analysis
Multiple financial models (publicly funded via bond, public and/or private partnerships, etc.) would be
identified. Assistance in identifying site opportunities (explore land acquisitions, swaps, partnerships, etc.)
would be provided. Financing strategies from construction cost models would be explored and
developed, and summary report prepared.
Co-location Study
Comprehensive list of all potential co-location entities would be developed. Selected entities would be
interviewed to inform the Space Needs Study, future growth strategies and concept options.
Spanish Translation of Community Exhibit Fact Sheets
Translation of three (3) exhibit display fact sheets into Spanish.
733 SW OAK STREET, PORTLAND, OREGON 97205 TELEPHONE 503.227.1254 FAX 503.227.7818
ATTACHMENT D
City Hall/Police Building Action Plan
At the February 2005 retreat of the Eugene City Council, concluding the discussion related to City Hall
and a new 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 new
Police Building should be constructed. 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 212-3 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/Police Building Action plan will be considered a suc-
cess 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
building at the 2nd 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
improvements to make 8th 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 C
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.
ATTACHMENT E
CITY HALL/POLICE BUILDING COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
Preliminary Task List and Schedule
Phases One and Two
May 25,2005
. Council approval of the City Hall/Police Building Action Plan *
. Council authorization to fund $30,000 for consultant services to prepare for, conduct, and sum-
marize a facilitated work session with council for the purpose of identifying and providing direc-
tion on policy issues relevant to the City Hall/Police Building question
May 25 - end of June 2005
. Prepare a Request for Proposals for City Hall/Police Building strategic planning with an option to
proceed with the City Hall Complex master planning and public participation process dependent on
council approval of continued funding.
July 2005
. RFP period for consultants to submit proposals for the master planning and public participation
process
August 2005
. Evaluate proposals, interview short list, and select consultant
. Negotiate fee and prepare initial contract with consultant
October - Mid-November 2005
. Consultant team to review background material and meet with staff to get an overview of pertinent
Issues
. Council strategic issues work session, facilitated by consultant team, to identify and prioritize
policy and/or strategic issues
. Council receives a summary documenting strategic issues work session and resulting policy
direction
. End of Phase One
Mid-November 2005 - Mid-March 2006
. Council to authorize funding for consultant services and expenses to complete the master plan-
ning and public participation process
. Consultant team to develop program document including space needs assessments and overall pro-
j ect goals
. Consultant team to develop several basic conceptual design options for review by staff, council,
and the public
. Consultant team and staff team to finalize details for the public participation process
. Council work session to review conceptual design options, cost estimates, and range of financing
options prior to public participation process
Mid-March - May 2006
. Consultant team to facilitate a public participation process for review and comment on conceptual
design options and project goals
. Public participation to include at a minimum: open houses and/or workshops with Neighborhood
Associations; at least one workshop open to the general public; briefings/workshops with identified
stakeholder groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, Friends of Eugene, Downtown Eugene,
Inc., and the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects; possible use of focus group(s) to
elicit input from unrepresented or under-represented individuals or groups
. Consultant team and staff team to prepare a report documenting input from the public participation
process
. Council work session to review input from public participation process and provide direction on
remaining policy issues for use in refinement of the Development Plan
June - Mid-July 2006
. Consultant team and staff team to complete Development Plan option(s)
. Council work session to review Development Plan options and provide direction for final refine-
ment
Mid-July - September 2006
. Consultant team to facilitate a limited public participation process for review and comment on
Development Plan options
. Public participation to include open houses with Neighborhood Associations and at least one open
house for the general public
. Consultant team and staff team to prepare a summary documenting input from the public participa-
tion process
. Council work session to review final Development Plan recommendations
October - December 2006
. Additional work session(s), ifnecessary, to adopt the City Hall Complex Development Plan
. End of Phase Two
*Note: tasks in bold and italics are points at which council will provide input to the process