Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A: City Hall Complex Strategic Issues EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ~ Work Session: City Hall Complex Strategic Issues Meeting Date: April 26, 2006 Department: Central Services WWW.Cl.eugene.or.us Agenda Item Number: A Staff Contact: Mike Penwell Contact Telephone Number: 682-5547 ISSUE STATEMENT The purpose of the April 26, 2006, work session is to discuss the results from the first Community Forum regarding the Project Values and level of police consolidation, as well as to discuss the Space Needs Study. BACKGROUND The first of four community forums was held Thursday, March 23,2006, from 6 p.m.-8:30 p.m. at the First United Methodist Church. Nearly 100 people participated. The program included an introductory presentation regarding key issues and small group exercises-which led into large group discussions-to facilitate a discussion of the questions posed by the City Council regarding the project values and police consolidation options. A summary report of the forum is included as Attachment A: Community Forum #1 Summary Report. The forum was videotaped and copies have been made available at Eugene's three libraries. Results from Proiect Guiding Values Discussion: In a small group format, community members discussed the Project Values and were asked to consider Question 1: "Which five of the project values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support?" Attendees identified the five values they believed were most critical and recorded their comments. Additional values were suggested during these small group discussions and also received votes. The results are as follows, with project values listed in order of number of votes received: · Proj ect Value A: Exercise fiscal responsibility ( 65 votes) · Project Value D: Embody environmental stewardship (56 votes) · Proj ect Value I: Plan for the future (47 votes) · Project Value B: Produce government efficiency (43 votes) · Project Value C: Be user-friendly (40 votes) · Project Value E: Enhance downtown (38 votes) · Project Value G: Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its representatives (3 7 votes) · Project Value F: Inspire civic pride (35 votes) · Project Value H: Strive for simplicity (22 votes) Additional suggested values are listed in the report. Collectively, these several additional values totaled 51 votes. Please refer to the Community Forum # 1 Summary Report for more detail. LICMOl2006 Council Agendas1M0604261S060426A.doc Results from the Police Consolidation Discussion: The project team provided five consolidation options for incorporating police facilities into the City Hall Complex and how they relate to City Hall building configurations. The consolidation options included the four options A-D that were presented at the March 8 City Council Workshop, plus a fifth consolidation option (Option E: All police functions in a separate facility from City Hall) that was discussed at the workshop. All options were shared with the public at the March 23,2006, Community Forum as shown in the summary report (Attachment A). In a small group format, community members discussed Question 2: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall?" and Question 3: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities located downtown?" After discussion, group members cast their votes on the importance of the location of police patrol facilities. Design team members then tabulated and graphed the results and recorded comments. Nearly 73% of those responding (66 participants) voted that it is not important to have police patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall. Ten participants (about 11 %) voted that it is very important to have police patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall. Participants were divided over the importance of having police patrol facilities located downtown. About 43% (36 voting participants) voted that it was not important (1 and 2 on the scale), while approximately 49% (41 voting partici pants) voted that it is very important (4 and 5 on the scale). It is noteworthy that people voting on opposite ends of the scale agreed that a mutual goal was to integrate the police into neighborhoods and the civic fabric, and to decrease the perception of isolation and militarization. There was concern that the police would be less visible and less integrated in the community if they are not downtown. Yet those who voted "very important" also supported the addition of substations. Many expressed a desire for a storefront or precinct model of community policing and were unsure how the location of patrol facilities related to accomplishing that objective. Other comments included that it might be more cost-effective if police patrol facilities were located outside of the downtown, as well as that efficient use of downtown land for other city planning goals should be a concern. In addition, there were many who believed that it should be an administrative decision and police patrol facilities should be located in whatever manner is the most operationally and functionally efficient. Please refer to the forum summary (Attachment A) for a full and unedited range of comments. Space Needs Study: The Space Needs Study comprises the staff and space needs (including the area calculations summary shown on Attachment C) for a consolidated City Hall using current 2006 needs and projected planning milestones of2010, 2015, 2025, and 2030. The study will guide future planning efforts in building organization, size, division adjacencies, and other factors. Key findings in the Space Needs Study include: · Population-to-staffing projections: City staffing levels have historically grown at approximately the same annual average rate as City population, and the combined growth projections of all divisions except police are projected to continue at the same annual LICMOl2006 Council Agendas1M0604261S060426A.doc average growth rate. Police staff is projected to grow at a higher rate due to current under-staffing as a result of significant staff reductions in the 1990s. · Planning for the future: A healthy and equitable work environment capable of addressing changes in service delivery over time favors an open, flexible building with an appropriate mix of open office spaces, enclosed rooms, and private offices. As often happens in a space needs study, the initial requests for private offices were higher than industry standards. The design team is working with staff and Executive Managers to reduce the number of enclosed offices. · Area per person: The average net area required per person is approximately 245 square feet - slightly less than other jurisdictions of similar size as listed in Attachment C. RELATED CITY POLICIES The City Hall Complex master planning and public participation process relates to the council goals of effective, accountable municipal government, safe community, and sustainable com- munity growth and change. COUNCIL OPTIONS The council may decide to narrow the police consolidation options for use in future planning studies. The council may also decide to accept the preliminary space needs findings as a guideline for future planning studies, and select a planning milestone for use in upcoming studies such as the renovation and/or replacement analysis. Because many factors will influence how the data within the Space Needs Study will be implemented into a built project, it is advised that the data guide, but not rule, the process. For example, different sites could lead to slightly different area totals due to building layouts that respond to the opportunities and limitations of those sites. The council may choose from the 2010,2015,2025, or 2030 planning milestones. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION There are no specific recommendations on the project values at this time, but ongoing discussion of the implications of these values and their relevance to City Council decisions is encouraged. The City Manager recommends that the project team eliminate police consolidation options A, D, and E, and continue using Option B and Option C in future planning studies, until other issues (e.g. renovation and/or replacement) have been considered and one option is ready for proposed adoption. Using multiple options accommodates choices, but narrowing the number of options allows greater focus on future planning studies. This is not intended to preclude other options from emerging as the planning and design process unfolds but, rather, to allow the consultant team to focus on the two police consolidation options that currently enjoy the most community and City Council support. The City Manager recommends that the council adopt the Staff and Space Needs Summary as a guide for ongoing project planning efforts. Given the council's decision to use a planning horizon of25 years and the project value to Plan for the Future, the City Manager recommends using the 2030 planning milestone. LICMOl2006 Council Agendas1M0604261S060426A.doc SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt police consolidation Option B and Option C for use in future planning studies until the council is prepared to adopt a single option in relation to an overall Development Plan. Move to adopt the 2030 staffing and space requirements identified in Attachment C to guide future project planning efforts. ATTACHMENTS A. Community Forum Summary Report B. Police Consolidation Options A-E C. Staff and Space Needs Summary and Comparative Data FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Mike Penwell Telephone: 682-5547 Staff E-Mail: michael.j.penwell@ci.eugene.or.us LICMOl2006 Council Agendas1M0604261S060426A.doc Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan ~ ~ I r J III J: :.01 I - 1 J n ,...- -- =- [ I J i" -, Ii I ':J...,:, I I. -' 1 --l J-- Ir~ -- J } II r r ..~ r I . . I ~c I .q-, C\ - ---- -. Il., r... ~ '0......" ~ fl '::I -~ ~ - ........... Community Forum #1 Summary ~~~ ,.? ..... 1 I' : .1 "lI I., L- "\ ... " ')., ~ r'I~ II .., '::!: l~ ~:r'l f:i' h IIlI ~ 1 ...........~ .I ~ ... 11 ~ ---, I"'J I:; _ 'Ji ;;; il il I [jl -, 't L' - 1 ............... __ ----... '-----i.IlI ~~ : ~ _ _ ~ 1....1 I- ="',_1" ~ 51- ;:.~' ~, II :"1 [' 0 0 1"'1 ~ !;Ii ~..; .....0 (J ... :] :J ~ j J ( ,.'" ~r"" ........ C - )~ ;= I pC ~ ["l ... ~ :J....o....-...I.... City of Eugene 777 Pea rl Street Eugene OR 97401 Thomas Hacker Architects Inc 733 SW Oak St. Suite 100 Portland OR 97205 T: 503.227.1254 F: 503.227.7818 rI City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1 Summary Report INTRODUCTION The City of Eugene (City) held the first of four community forums to receive citizen input on the future of the Eugene City Hall complex. The community forums are designed to provide input to the City Council in order to assist them in the decision-making process around the issues related to the City Hall Complex. The community forum was held Thursday, March 23,2006, from 6 to 8:30 p.m. at the First United Methodist Church in Eugene, and was attended by 96 people. The purpose of this first forum was to introduce the project, gather specific community feedback for the City Council, and foster dialogue between the community and the project team. The forum agenda included the following items: . Proj ect background . Public involvement process . Small-group work sessions and large-group discussion: o project values o space needs and consolidation . Questionnaire . Next steps The presentation included a PowerPoint slide show conducted by the project team members from Thomas Hacker Architects Inc. (see Appendix A: Forum #1 PowerPoint Presentation). Following the presentation, small group exercises allowed attendees to discuss questions posed on behalf of the City Council relating to the project values and police consolidation options. Exhibits and dots were provided to small groups at each table to record their votes and comments (See Appendix B: Forum #1 Small Group Agenda). After the conclusion of each small group exercise, results were tabulated and displayed to the entire group for discussion and verbatim comments were recorded. Results and a record of all verbal and written comments from these exercises are included in this report. The project team also presented next steps and participants were provided project questionnaires (see Appendix C: Forum #1 Questionnaire and Appendix D: Questionnaire Summary Responses) and index cards to record their comments. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 1 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report The forum organizers and presenters included: Kyle Brown, The JD White Company, Inc. (JDW) KC Cooper, JDW Jonah Cohen, Thomas Hacker Architects Inc. (THA) Dana Ing Crawford, THA Mike Penwell, City of Eugene Jana Rygas, T'nT Consulting (T'nT) Ellen Teninty, T'nT Maegan Vidal, JDW Chris Watchie, T'nT Issue 1: Project Guiding Values Small groups were given exhibits with the nine project values adopted by the Eugene City Council at its November 23, 2005, work session; they were: A. Exercise fiscal responsibility B. Produce government efficiency C. Be user-friendly D. Embody environmental stewardship E. Enhance downtown F. Inspire civic pride G. Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its representatives H. Strive for simplicity I. Plan for the future Each group was asked to consider the question: "Which five of the project values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support?" After small group discussion, individuals placed dots next to the five values they felt were most critical and recorded comments on blank paper. Graphs illustrating the results of each question were displayed and a large group discussion ensued. Additional values were suggested in small groups and received votes from people at those tables. These additional values are tabulated as "other" and are included in the comments section below. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 2 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report Question 1: Which five of the project values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support? Figure 1: Which five of the project values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support? (note: numerical values indicate number of votes) Additional Values (51 I. Future Planning (47) H. Simplicity (22) G. Use of City Hall (37) F. Civic Pride (35) E. Enhance Downtown (38) A. Fiscal Responsibility (65) B. Government Efficiency (43) C. User- Friendly (40) D. Environmental Stewardship (56) Project Value A: Exercise fiscal responsibility Votes: 65 Comments from large group discussion . Value is strangely-worded and loaded. What is the opposite of the value, "fiscal irresponsibility?" . Fiscal responsibility should be an aspect of government in general, not just the Eugene City Hall Master Plan project. It should include repairing roads and funding police. . Building for the future is fiscally responsible. However, the 25 year planning cycle is too short. The cycle should be 50 to 100 years. . How will the proj ect be paid for? . (Team response: Discussions will take place in the third phase of the project.) . Outsource some aspects of the project to save money and stimulate the economy. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 3 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report Comments from small groups and written comments . Build for 100 years. Build bigger than the present need and become a landlord in the interim. . Important if we use this to enhance all of downtown. . Be affordable. . Do not spend taxpayers' money on an unnecessary new building. . Now and for the life cycle of the building. . Insert "actually" before "exercise." . Long-lasting, more than 200 years. . Be affordable. . The fiscal aspect should not only be transparent, but true and accurate. . V oters will not take seriously that the City values "fiscally responsibility" and "environmental stewardship" when the executive bureaucracy is selling unneeded parking garage to half-witted city councilors. . Re: Fiscal Responsibility. Avoid trendy colors and design elements-they age much too fast. . Fiscal responsibility. Any new construction, reconstruction, or retrofit of existing buildings must not occur without voter approval. . Fiscal responsibility $11 million to City Hall NOT parking garage . Upfront costs . Ongoing operating building costs . Minimize tax increase impacts reuse existing structure (Are emergency services best located in downtown?) . This is a flood zone Project Value B: Produce government efficiency Votes: 43 Comments from large group discussion . Construct building that will integrate the various parts of the City. . Government should represent the people-would support the project if it is representative of the populace. . Need a process in which the public can express its priorities before funds are allocated for a proj ect. . Efficiency is a virtue when the government is acting on behalf of the populace. . Do not like the wording of the value-it should read: Enable or facilitate government efficiency. . Employees may be more efficient in a better building, not just through consolidation. . Need to know how it will be paid for-do not plan for something when you do not know how you are going to pay for it. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 4 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Co-locate with County functions, wherever it makes the most sense. Make this a new value. . The media is saying that a new City Hall will be built regardless. Council is allocating funds for the project. Perhaps some employees could work from home to produce efficiency. . We have an opportunity to look at decentralizing some functions to remote locations. . Could provide mini fire and police functions to save money. . Consider outsourcing some government work Comments from small groups and written comments . Add "consolidate." . One-stop shopping versus total capitalization. . Add through consolidation. . "?" next to efficiency. . Offices for city councilors to be more accessible to the public. . Work better. . Build a facility we are proud to show off. . Consolidation: The future will lead to consolidating services-city, county, state. Need partnerships (now) of multiple agencies. Think integration. . Regarding comments on building City Hall for public-not staff. Please remember that City staff are also tax-paying members of the public. . My response was not captured completely. It is #13 on the Excel spreadsheet (values). It should read: When the Government is acting in the interest of the public, efficiency is a VIRTUE. When it is not, in-efficiency is a VIRTUE. . Many cities have dispersed services. We would need a much bigger building. Group related services that interact. Government efficiency important. . Impact on efficiency of city operations. (Move police-retrofit existing structure, create a neighborhood police) . Walking place to place-good. Sedentary? Efficiency. Project Value C: Be user-friendly Votes: 40 Comments from large group discussion . Value includes wheelchair accessibility. Accessibility to City Hall, including restrooms and other areas, is important. . More important to be public friendly. . The current City Hall is not user-friendly for the sight impaired. . Value should be edited to read: "Be user-friendly online and in buildings." . The City needs an ombudsman-the edifice needs a public face. The ombudsman would help people with what they need; and to navigate them through the City government. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 5 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . City Hall should be non-intimidating and accessible for all disabilities. . Hearing impairment is the most common disability and should be accounted for in the future plans for City Hall. . Avoid computer kiosks in future plans; they are not user-friendly for the sight-impaired. . Increase the use of way finding signage. . Create a village green atmosphere and make City Hall inviting for people to linger and visit-amenities. Comments from small groups and written comments . Add "to the public" after "friendly." . Public- friendly is more important than staff-friendly. . Keep the current, user-friendly building. . Add "online and in buildings" (accessible) to the end. . Handicapped accessible. . For public, staff, and officials. . Also by wheelchair users. . Accessibility. . The City does not have the right to provide (be landlord for) private business. There should be no restaurants, galleries, or similar in the building. Small coffee shop O.K. . Building should be in proximity to Lane County public services. Keep in mind access/accessibilities for alter-abled, elderly and children. Build should reflect a welcoming environment for all races and economic classes. A public plaza with user friendly amenities-sitting, eating and comfortable areas for customers. Like the Atrium. . User friendly should accommodate handicapped. Work at home whenever feasible-could reduce area needed for workspace. . Current building not user-friendly. Open space not effective. Consolidation is important for user-friendly. Consider alter-abled people. Move police, concern about e.g. Blue River flood zone. Need some downtown. . Azra Khalidi provided a sketch outlining the potential layout of a six-story new city hall building. The building would be situated between High and Pearl Streets on 8th Avenue. The structure would be separated from a parking area by an alley. The first floor would house the police department and investigation, and provide secure parking. The second floor would house public works; the third-police administration and the City prosecutor; the fourth-the City manager, mayor, and council; the fifth-city planning and permits, and the sixth- finance, documents, and distribution. The structure would feature a rooftop garden and bird sanctuary. . Have a welcoming central courtyard-perhaps some play equipment-tables and places for people to sit and eat lunch or relax and talk. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 6 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Work to have meeting rooms and spaces as welcoming and open as possible-lighting visualization and how about rooms with circular tables so there is no head of the table (spoken or unspoken focus of authority.) . The current City Council chamber has City Council members elevated on a platform, tables with recorders, and City officials below and then a railing to separate all those important people from the other really important people. Community members are architecturally isolated from the City Council who looks down on them. Oh well... . Somehow figure out how to make this place youth friendly. How nice it would be to have a courtyard where youth felt comfortable coming and hanging out. . Do the same for other segments of the community who usually don't trust City Hall and don't feel welcome and how may feel disenfranchised-non-English speakers, low income folks, and the homeless. How wonderful it would be to create a place, a City Hall that really is open to and used by all parts of this City. This is not impossible and certainly would take some time. Project Value D: Embody environmental stewardship Votes: 56 Comments from large group discussion . None Comments from small groups and written comments . Recycle, instead of using new resources. . Add green building. . Incorporate edible landscaping throughout, everywhere possible. This will be increasingly important. . Would like to see a green, energy-efficient building. . In creating energy efficiency ideas into the building, make sure that those features are showcased so the public will be able to see, understand, and learn how they work. . Priority # 1 environmental stewardship is predicated on the careful determination of the basic need assessment for a new site. Total energy lost or gained in materials or energy usage to justify a new city hall. Employ independent group to analyze this in order to build trust. Careful financial analysis with priorities of other needs of the City. . The principle of environmental stewardship has to be paramount in the design. . Passive solar . Photovoltaic solar . Native landscaping . Energy efficiency . Use of green building materials . The building should be a model for the community as a work place for employees and a meeting, working, business center for the public. Reuse-Recycle-Minimize. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 7 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Design with nature in mind. Manage stormwater on site, make space for wildlife/birds, and design for cloudy winters. Have a space for public gatherings (large) inside and outside. Integrate natural materials in the design of the building. . Life cycle energy costs should take into account large future energy cost increase. . The value is too vague. Value should be, "Reduce, reuse, recycle, build LEED platinum." . Include edible landscaping. . Maintain the water feature. Mallard ducks visit it every year. . Consider the use of solar power. . Consider the site as a permanent venue for the farmers market. . Incorporate permaculture planning and a public education component. . Include green building components (sod roofs, etc.) . The building should be the epitome of green building-perhaps include a farmers market on the roof? . Do not want the safety patrol to have the problem of deterrents in the event of a quake, etc. Fix the structure. Project Value E: Enhance downtown Votes: 38 Comments from large group discussion . Incorporate open space and relate City Hall to adjacent structures. Harmonize with surroundings. . The current City Hall closes at night-consider planning for nighttime use (i.e. include shops on lower level, etc.) . If the building is going to be expensive, it should be the nicest. . Encourage employees to use and patronize downtown businesses. Comments from small groups and written comments . This should not mean building City Hall downtown. This should mean making the downtown friendly and inviting at all hours-no dead zones. . Enhance is a vague value to be a guide. . Closed at night/how to do this? Civic centers/campuses are closed-how to make sure it does not create a dead zone. Need G for E to happen. Project Value F: Inspire civic pride Votes: 35 Comments from large group discussion . City Hall should represent local artists, as a gallery and in the building's design, such as doors and windows. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 8 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . The City needs to restore public trust before moving forward with this project in order to inspire civic pride. . Thomas Hacker Architects should display their projects to the public-provide a sense of what they represent. (Team response: link to THA website is on the project website.) . This value is tied to fiscal responsibility-the public will be proud of the wise use of funds. . If the public's key values were embodied in the city hall, "civic pride" would be the result. Comments from small groups and written comments . Inspire is a vague value to be a guide. . Access to facilities for all citizens is a source of pride. . Inspire civic pride by: restoring public trust before moving ahead-even if it takes longer than the allotted year. Project Value G: Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its representatives Votes: 37 Comments from large group discussion . None Comments from small groups/written comments . Work out a plan for downtown. . Elected officials centrally located in City Hall. . Value G means Values Band C combined. . Add "and restrooms." Project Value H: Strive for simplicity Votes: 22 Comments from large group discussion . Focus on a timeless design. . Include natural light by using passive systems to heat and cool buildings. . Consider night court as a means of simplifying operations. . Be wise in use of simplicity. Strive for appropriate simplicity. Comments from small groups and written comments . The current system works, having emptiness in different spaces is okay. . Strive for appropriate simplicity. . Later include open space. . Simplicity is a questionable value because it is vague. . Our group's comments on the simplicity value were passed over by the moderator. They were not shared with the overall forum. But we got them in after all anyway. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 9 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report Project Value I: Plan for the future Votes: 47 Comments from large group discussion . Use existing EWEB buildings for expansion and allow it to facilitate a connection to the rl ver. . The City Planning Department needs to be more accountable in its decision-making processes (e.g. massive hole in downtown Eugene). Comments from small groups and written comments . 50 years. . Peak oil. . Add with compact, multi-story, urban growth. . More than 25 years-1 OO! . It should look good! If City Hall is going to represent us, it should be modern and should last a long time! . All new building should be designed to add upper stories-up instead of out. Avoid urban sprawl . We should anticipate moving the City Hall into the EWEB administrative building and add additional space along the river-not to the new court house. . Use a 50-year planning cycle. Think long term. Additional Values Votes: 51 In small group discussions, participants could create new project values, modify existing values, and vote on the additional values they created. These additional project values were not uniformly presented and voted on in the large group discussion due to time constraints. Additional values recorded on exhibits (votes) . Value A.A: Recycle existing facilities. (5) . Value B.B: Close to public transportation and pedestrian routes. (2) . Value C.C: Decentralized/distributed facilities located in neighborhoods. (1) . Value D: Reduce, reuse recycle. Build LEED Platinum. (Duck friendly too!) (5) . Values H.H: A structure that is very modest and low cost because of all of the other human needs that are not being met currently. (2) . Value J: Retain the connection between the past, present, and future. (1) . Value J: Don't demolish atrium building. (8) . Value J: Embody cultural stewardship. Respect history. (4) . Value J: Meet or exceed existing downtown planning guideline (FAR). (6) The JD White Company, Inc. Page 1 0 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Value J: Flexibility of department use. (4) . Value J: Add a human dimension to this space, such as an ombudsman. (1) . Value J: Reflect Northwest, local culture, and sense of place. (5) . Value J: Accessibility in City Hall and restrooms. (3) . Value K: Retain some of exiting building. (1) . Value K: Display art work by local artists. . Value X: Build Community and government participation. (1) Additional written values . Relationships. . Having council members centrally located in City Hall. . Elected officials. Additional values from large group discussion . Embody cultural stewardship should be a value. . Co-locate with County functions, wherever it makes the most sense. Make this a new value. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 11 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report Issue 2: Police Consolidation To stimulate dialogue in the small groups, the project team provided five graphics showing different locations of police facilities and how they related to City Hall building configurations. The groups then discussed Question 2: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall?" and Question 3: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities located downtown?" Groups were provided with exhibits with scales ranging from "Not Important" to "Very Important" that related to both? questions. After discussion, group members placed a dot on each question's scale indicating the importance of the location of police services. Project staff tabulated and graphed the results. Participants could record their comments on blank paper and index cards to be documented following the forum. Question 2: How important is it to you to have police patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall? Figure 2: How important is it to you to have police patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall? 70 66 60 50 40 30 20 10 10 6 6 o 1 Not Important 2 Somewhat1mportant 4 5 Very Important . Votes for Not Important: 66 . V otes between Not and Somewhat Important: 3 The JD White Company, Inc. Page 12 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Votes for Somewhat Important: 6 . Votes between Somewhat and Very Important: 6 . Votes for Very Important: 10 Comments from large group discussion pertaining to "Not Important" choice . It is too expensive to locate all City employees downtown. . Does not foster community policing. . Not having the police station at the same site: It's been fine all these years to have it across the street. Our group doesn't want a new police facility, doesn't want to pay for it. We voted no so many times. . Good to have admin police functions with other government functions good supervision. If police/public interface is close to other public services people in need are more likely to use multiple services. Police should be demilitarized. . Not important to have police inside city hall because separating police means city hall doesn't have to be built to as high seismic standards. Separating police would save money. . Police patrols become community policing centers. City hall-simple, lasting, beautiful. Close to county. Citizen meeting rooms. . Police services and municipal courts should attempt to be part of a justice center-separate from City Hall-with additional jail cells and circuit and district courts. . It seems horribly inefficient and expensive to have patrol officers go to City Hall to check-in, get their vehicle and then go out in the community on patrol. . Integration of police into City Hall doesn't preclude remote community stations. Counter the trend to militarization of police. Integrate police force into government. This is a chance to incorporate the values that make Eugene unique: farmers market, green building, public participation, solar, public transportation. Affordability. . Patrol is a function of logistics not for public discussion. Police administration and investigations are far more important to other civic functions. . Removal of police patrol from city hall will allow roll call to be done at ward level stations- police will spend less time commuting and more time patrolling. City Hall should have military-like presence of patrol removed. City Hall should emphasize open relationships and citizen authority-not police authority. . Police department funding has been voted down 3 times and should not be attached to city hall funding. . Has the defeat at the polls of building a new downtown police station reflected an opposition to this proposition or a negative reaction to some police actions like Lara & Magana crashing a National Guard tank into a house in Whitaker, etc. - Denny Guehler . I believe it is important for the police and other city government. Police should not be isolated. If they are seen as part of government as a separate entity perhaps some of the public's fears may dissipate. Whether they are in the same building or in very close proximity to interact with the rest of city employees/government/courts. Are we large enough The JD White Company, Inc. Page 13 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report to support a precinct model? One central unit that police could rotate through. The primary location should be downtown to promote greater presence in the community. . Patrol needs district facilities. . Option of not having a centralized patrol facility in. . Something downtown substation but not needed at same site. . Good to have administrative police functions with other government functions. Good superVISIon. . If police/public interface is close to other public services people in need are more likely to use multiple services. . Police should be demilitarized. Written comments pertaining to "Not Important" choice . It is too expensive to locate all City employees downtown . Does not foster community policing. Comments from small groups and written comments . Patrol should be located where operationally functional. . Base patrol location on access to transportation corridors. . Administrative decision. . Essential facilities. . Community policing. . Consensus of all six table members: It is important to us that the patrol facilities not be in City Hall. . It is important to have patrol facilities close to other police functions and City Hall; assuming City Hall is downtown. . Consolidated, not necessarily at City Hall. . Police administration in City Hall is needed, but not needed to have patrol facilities there. . Patrol facilities should be visible downtown, but not necessarily in City Hall. . Why worry so much about police, when fire was decided administratively? There are some similarities in the departments. . It is paramount to keep the chief of police separate from the city manager. This physical division could further the necessary separation of powers. . Important to keep police headquarters/central patrol facility separate from City Hall-too congested, too intimidating for public. Doesn't need to be downtown. Less costly elsewhere. . Perhaps a separation of the Eugene Police Department (EPD) and the Human Rights program into two wings on opposite sides of a courtyard. Some people coming to the Human Rights office are anxious about the current close proximity of the EPD. Comments from large group discussion pertaining to "Very Important" choice . Surprised that not too many attendees found this choice important. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 14 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Do not want the police militarized and separate. Want them incorporated, but understand that people want them incorporated into the community too. Perhaps rotate police through the downtown station. . Once the police are removed from City Hall, there is no need for seismic retrofitting. . Continue discussion on this topic at Friends of Eugene web site forum. . It would be a mistake to include the police as part of the Eugene City Hall project-the bond measure for a new station has failed three times. . Undemocratic Question 3: How important is it to you to have police patrol facilities located downtown? Figure 3: How important is it to you to have police patrol facilities located downtown? 35 5 - 32 - 28 - - - 13 - 7 - 4 I I I I I 30 25 20 15 10 o 1 Not Important 2 somewha11mportant 4 5 Very Important . Votes for Not Important: 32 . V otes between Not and Somewhat Important: 4 . Votes for Somewhat Important: 4 . Votes between Somewhat and Very Important: 13 The JD White Company, Inc. Page 15 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . V otes for Very Important: 26 Comments from large group discussion pertaining to "Not Important" choice . Need neighborhood precinct sites. . Downtown has a high crime rate and it appears that locating police station there would have no affect on the crime rate. . Downtown parking is expensive-not cost effective to locate police there. . Moving the police out of City Hall frees up space and may determine that no new City Hall is needed. . Need to integrate the police within the community and government. . The project team should educate interested parties regarding Measure 16 from 2002-the availability of State bonds for essential service facilities. Comments from large group discussion pertaining to "Very Important" choice . The question is worded poorly-the police's ability to respond is a key part of their functions. You do want some police downtown. Need substations. . Locating police downtown does not preclude remote sites and community policing. . Favors downtown location to promote density, and participation with the community. If they are not downtown they will be less visible. . Where do police begin their patrols?-we are discussing where they begin. The police need to be close to City Hall. It could be more cost effective for the facilities to not be on the same site as City Hall. Written comments . Demilitarized precincts on either side of the river. . It is important not to be downtown. . Patrol in neighborhood precincts. . It is important to have patrol facilities away from downtown. . Important to be outside downtown. . Convenient! . Some, or all? . Some patrol facilities located downtown. . More important to have highly visible, well lit sub-stations. . Patrol officers and facilities should be spread throughout the community. At least one facility in downtown core. . Avoid police fortress. . Do not isolate police from the public. Deinstitutionalize. . Do isolate public from police (not consensus!). . I agree wholeheartedly that the EPD be demilitarized and be more community-friendly. Also, neighborhood precincts with walking patrols would facilitate this. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 16 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . It's important to have some police presence downtown, but I'd like to see precincts. . Lane County Disaster Manager, speaking to City Club, reported in December 2005 "if you have critical services in the basement, you might want to move these services to the 2nd floor." Our comments: If an earthquake of the size that would topple buildings in the downtown happens... dams will probably break and the city downtown may be severely flooded... Leading us to believe the Police Dept. should be moved out of the downtown core. .. closer to the hills. It depends on how it pencils out. (Keeping police facilities there) . I think police presence should be more evenly distributed in "substations" rather than downtown concentration. . Having satellite police stations set up with or similarly like our fire stations that seem to work well for response. . Patrol offices can be spread throughout the city. There must be some patrol facilities downtown but not all facilities need to be downtown. . Precincts! == sense of community. This is possible and works. What about a precinct model with a downtown precinct located to allow interaction between patrol and city employees? What about victim and arrestees interactions with public? It should be different than interaction with patrol. . Police patrol should be outsourced to the satellite community police centers. . All city government functions should be located within the designated downtown area. . Dispersing patrol into neighborhoods helps build community relationships, dissipate the militaristic model that presently exists in our dept. model. . Think about the future of policing needs in the next 20-30 years of growth. That to me means dispersing them to precincts. . Why patrol not downtown? Does not promote community policing! Create neighborhood precincts and spread the Patrol Division out across the City. . Re Question 3: 1. Land costs downtown are too high to use it to store automobiles. 2. Establish precinct stations out in the community. 3. The Chief belongs near the City Manager in City Hall-the rest of the police functions belong in precinct stations or in a single facility located at 2nd and Chambers. . 50% of opinion favored dispersing police functions, principally for economic cost and efficiency reasons. A minority felt it was important that police not be isolated from the public/other city government. . For diversity of earthquake safety, have a police station on each side of the river. . Revised to read: How important is it to you to have some patrol facilities located downtown? . If patrol function is moved from existing building, important to find ways to bring light into rehabilitated spaces (glass block?). . It is not important to have the police downtown: Dispersal to neighborhood police stations could be enabled by this. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 17 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report Other Comments from Large Group Discussion . Would like an e-mail highlighting the results of the forum. . Would like a broader discussion of principles, otherwise citizens will lose interest in process. . The City Council disregards participation and the Whole Foods process colors the City Hall process. There is a low level of trust with the City Council at the moment. . Project information is biased-you should not be selling the project to the public. . The City Council has decided not to maintain the City Hall facility as a means of making the problems seem worse than they really are. . Why not maintain the status quo? . Include "other" as part of tallying votes for the values voting exercise. . Improve microphone sound quality for future meetings. . Please speak to our civic groups as part of outreach process. . By the time a farmers market becomes part of City Hall, the conglomerates will have already absorbed demand. . Include the public in conceptual design choices before any bond measure. Other Written Comments . As an aside use Ballot Measure 16 from 2002 as a tool for financing. . Do not like police department getting funded in this manner-by passing overwhelmingly defeated tax levies. . Issue seems disembodied from other parameters. . Why 20 minutes for this weird make-work issue? . What about community policing? Decentralization. . What about other, bigger problems with the bubble diagrams that are not related to police? . What about a farmer's market downtown? . Process is not very open because the dot game is only polling. . "Other City Hall Functions" is all the interesting stuff. . When only one speaker has a mike it is not a community discussion. . Why do city space uses seem to have 300-400 square feet per employee? . Space numbers and what is in and out of the picture on the propaganda map in Newsletter #1 are confusing and arbitrary. . The time management and focus plan need work! . This public involvement process is empty at its heart as long as you let the City Council keep it on a too tight a leash. . After largely wasting people's time tonight, are you going to have: 1) less participation, or 2) angry participation, next time? The JD White Company, Inc. Page 18 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . No Police in City Hall- LACK OF TRUST!!! No militarized police. No more 'tank' /SW AT raids. Last Tuesday, March 14, there was a 5:00 a.m. "tank"/SW AT raid on a Eugene family (near 22nd Street) who are pillars of the Eugene community. This family owns two bakeries, a restaurant, and runs a charter school. Neighbors turned out and tried to stop the attack. A 10-year-old boy was on his knees in the front yard; hands on his head; with multiple assault rifles pointed at his small body. WE ARE OUTRAGED that the out-of-control SWAT team is once again, attacking citizens and terrorizing our neighborhoods with the "tank." Concussion (flash-bang) grenades were thrown into the house. A young man was arrested with an ounce of marijuana. Our new police chief, Bob Lehner, promised/stated to the press that the "tank" would only be rolled out for hostage situations/violent emergencies. What happened to the SWAT matrix? This was a LOW RISK search warrant. The EPD and LCSO are more and more becoming "bad guys." The citizens of Eugene deserve an apology. Why are Lt. Tom Turner and Capt. Steve Swenson STILL employed by the city when they are ignoring Constitutional rights of citizens and generating lawsuits? . Look at the IAP2 spectrum again please. Where on the scale is "selling an idea" to the public like Newsletter #1? How will you redress that newsletter? . This process should have been used to determine the Whole Foods/parking garage issue. . Related to comment #2, if at any time it becomes apparent to me that the City officials have already decided the outcome of the City Hall Master Plan, I will withdraw from participation and be very vocal about it. . Above all, use existing structures. . City staff walking between offices is often a welcome activity. Fresh air (?), exercise, change of scenery, opportunity to relax/rejuvenate before that next meeting or. .. (Far too much sitting; far too little space/time to think/be alone for short periods/freshen up. . Opinion without rationale doesn't help responsible decision-makers. Informed opinion is more objective than frivolous opinion. . Install microphones in all executive staff offices wired to a public switchboard in the lobby so citizens can check to make sure staff isn't scheming secretly against the public interest. . City propagandists are positing theories of "nodal development" and "urban density" that are mutually contradictory. . The questions can be interpreted in any way, as they are so general. There was no way to clearly state that we like the current city hall, that it can be updated successfully, and enlarged simply. . Suggestion on process: Provide vehicle for internet communication; virtual discussion. [accessthediscussion@ friendsofeugene.org]. Get this to the planning team. . How do we verify that what we are relating here tonight will be conveyed correctly to City Council? . How can we rearticulate our choice-can we restructure the next forum? . There are a number of questions within the questions and it is difficult to articulate. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 19 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . There was discussion at some point to luring non-profit groups i.e., Women Space, that benefited by being in close proximity to police services. What has become of this idea? I recall Women Space, at one point anyway, wanted this relationship. . It seemed like a sadly confusing and cumbersome process tonight. I'm glad I came anyway because I appreciate that you took all comment down and invited us to write down any that didn't get voiced. . City planning should be centered on utilizing existing resources more than spending extra- even if it's "in the budget". The presentation could have included the lowest cost plans as A & B & not left it out. Since you didn't include it on the overhead, display, I lost trust in the process-seems misleading. . How is this structure going to be paid for, and what services and needs are not being funded to build this structure? . Mayor Piercy has stated that she thinks a good place for an expanded farmer's market is in the city hall complex. Why is it not included? . Next session: Have a roving microphone for public comments so we can hear. . The only reason to redo city hall is to make it earthquake proof. Without the police patrol in the building, the city hall does not need fixing. . Broader base of participation: How can we increase the diversity of comments? This group is the usual public process "groupies". All generally anti-government. How about a "kid's night" to draw families or other ways to attract broader range of ideas. . The police need to be watched in a clear bubble building by the public and civil rights advocates. · I agree! (sort of). . Minimize impact of opinions of those who just don't believe in government. . You need to reestablish public trust; many feel this is already a done deal. . Where were all of the other councilors and Mayor? Betty Taylor was the only one present. . Are meetings between design team and council open for public observation? . Downtown based on the Pareto Principle, The 80/20 rule. Business: 20% of goods, services, and customers accounts for 80% of the business. Which single enterprise, besides governance, has the most draw to downtown? It has local material, production, and transport. It not only has a major draw but fills a basic need. It has an exponentially expanding customer base. It is so successful that it is looking for more space. It keeps money local instead of removing it. It is not empty storefronts and offices. It is not a gamble of a tax subsidized anchor store. It is not based on the SEPARATE ISSUE of high density. It is locally grown food, The Farmers Market. The Pareto business tool shows that expanding the Farmers Market is a much more viable and proven option than Whole Foods. The Pareto business tool shows we are wasting our time and revenue on Whole Foods. We really should be talking about our FARMERS MARKET having too little space and how to expand its space Happy Humus! . I am very much in favor of a new City Hall. . Include as many non-Western, non-European images and touches as possible. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 20 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report . Thanks for the public forums. I'm wondering how or whether you are contacting those who ordinarily don't come to such forums. What a revolutionary idea to go to youth centers and homeless shelters to listen and learn. White Bird, St. Vincent de Paul's, Looking Glass, New Roads, Centro Latino, and Sponsors are places that immediately come to mind. . Civic Campus Concept After attending the public forum on the City Hall last week, I was struck by the concept of a "Civic Campus". I do not believe that all city functions must reside in a single building. However, the civic campus concept allows for proximity of city services in an attractive downtown setting. A "Civic Campus" would consist of adjacent buildings with a park-like "courtyard" separating them. The campus could be composed of existing buildings and buildings yet to be constructed. Moreover, the campus could accommodate a number of concerns raised at the forum. Eugene is the proud home of a plethora of non-profit agencies that provide a wide variety of services, education, arts programming, recreation and advocacy. Some such as the Lane Independent Living Alliance or LILA are due to be displaced by East Broadway re- development. Affordable, accessible space could be made for some of these organizations in a civic campus. Inclusion of non-profit organizations offers municipal and community acknowledgement of their importance. The courtyard of the campus would also offer a home for the Farmers' Market, a concern raised by two speakers at the Forum. An open courtyard would also provide a venue for any number of community cultural and political activities. Putting a "human face" on city business was also mentioned. An information service could be positioned at street level near the courtyard. Citizens could receive direction to specific city services. Personnel who worked in the information desk should be fully aware of city government and its workings. Ideally, the information desk could be the repository of community-wide information to be provided to inquiring citizens and visitors. A small percentage of ground-floor space could be made available for commercial endeavors. For example, a small cafeteria like those operated by clients of the Oregon Commission for the Blind, would be appropriate. Design of the civic campus should also include features reflective of Eugene's four sister cities. Artistic and cultural elements of Kakagowa, Chinjou, erkutzk and Kathmandu could be incorporated in the structural design, artwork and landscape of the Civic Campus. In surveying the space needs of city government, a "Civic Campus" would address the concerns of municipal workers and city residents. As we plan for the next 25 - 50 years we ought to look at re-defining Eugene's downtown and its city services. A well-defined civic campus offers an opportunity to address city government needs and citizens' concerns. Next Steps KC Cooper discussed the project next steps and how the participants' feedback would inform the City Council. A summary report of the forum will be presented at the City Council's next session. Project updates, newsletters, project questionnaire, and materials from the forum can be The JD White Company, Inc. Page 21 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Summary Report found at www.eugenecityhall.com and at Eugene's three libraries. KC noted that participants can also provide their comments on the web site or the Eugene City Hall comment line ( 541.682.5222). The JD White Company, Inc. Page 22 April 2006 Appendix A: Forum #1 PowerPoint Presentation " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Citizen Forum #1 Agenda · Project background · Public involvement process · Small group work sessions and large group discussion: - Project values - Space needs and consolidation · Questionnaire · Next Steps " [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Welcome! Citizen Forum #1 March 23, 2006 6-8:30 p.m. First United Methodist Church 1376 Olive Street Eugene, Oregon 1 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ What Is Values-Based Decision Making? · Inclusive criteria · Exploration of alternatives · Accurate information -- __OW" ----- ----~ -........____~___~_~~ 2 ~ [E)!S~ ~ [Hld 1M~ IP1m Citizen Forum #1 Agenda · Project background · Public involvement process · Small group work sessions and large group discussion: - Project values - Space needs and consolidation · Questionnaire · Next Steps 3 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Defining The Issues · Dispersed services · Flexibility · Energy consumption · Accessibility · Security and safety · Civic presence and connection " [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m City-Occupied Sites Downtown Eugene aerial photograph illustrating the current distribution, location, size, and number of staff. The departments and sites shown (City Hall, Public Works, City Prosecutor, Atrium, and Finance and Information Services (located in Library building) will likely be considered for consolidation with the exception of the Roosevelt Yards, 2nd and Chambers, and Skinner Butte facilities. t fO(K(!Vt!,,\vard:s.,..~nn.~:- -. - , , ~!..oIIXI.J. ., li~~l.~ ~ ....,.. l 2nd & Chilmbo.r5 0-1,-,_ SM-I ~ I." @~ 1,,~:lJ io'..,yoo.,._ J .n - ---l - I) 1 ICily Hall ~ ...eta '.', II)..,...... ~ I , "I I c.JCotn:I~ I I I 1 .J l>ubMc "\:A~ ~ :21 ri~~ ....- ~~~~ lp,...~., .' I Atrium -=-- .~~.:......a. _ 'D~ Libnlry" I~ ~ - ~--J!-~ ..........., (;111 0J:ll:~ ~ I r;:cy 00l1Jt-0II0J0IM! ~ (;~ I...... a-ul I I GI... SlI_ :-1 4 " [Bl)l~~ CCOOy ~ li\{~ ~ C '..:.J~ __ - Seismic Design in Oregon Chart illustrating the increase in 800 Oregon's code requirements for 700 1993 standard facilities since 1945. The LO l(ln~ 3 """ original City Hall was constructed in m ()iJO - 1964. New buildings constructed to a house or deliver emergency services *' 500 1988 w Zono 28 such as police stations must withstand f: 400 rnM..!..li! 0 1se2 heavier structural forces than standard ..... Zone Z (1) buildings and are referred to as .:.t: 300 CitY1 H.dl m "Essential Services Facilities" (ESF). :I 0- 1951 € 200 ~ 100 195~ 19-4& (J Hl1l0 HJ~ Hl60 1970 1980 '990 2000 Years [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Phase 2 Schedule Project decision points are ordered to coincide with Council workshops and work sessions and will be informed by public input. P;;I~ 1 D 10 Pha;ep~ Ph lmple;~~l:eli~n PIUfi AtMsernenl el/e prnen an dse Phase 1005 JanuaJy febR/dJy Murch April May June July Augusl September Cktoblll I November Doccmbcr 2007-2008 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 Tedmical Rese4lrch & . . . . . . Analysis Concepl Design . . . . . Nelghbmftood & . . . . . . . . . . . . Orgunizdlloncl Oulre<<h Cilizen Interviews . . . Council Workshops Comlnunitl' fOR/IllS Council Work Sessions (voting & decision- making sessions) 5 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Eugene City Council Adopted Position Statements · Incorporate meaningful sustainable design goals. · Utilize a long-term planning horizon of 25 years. · Consolidate City services to the greatest practical extent. · Develop the project in consideration of the Downtown Plan while not limiting location choices to 8th Avenue. " [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Public Participation Core Values (As established in 2005 by the International Association For Public Participation) 1. The public should have a say in decisions about actions that could affect their lives. 2. Public participation includes the promise that the public's contribution will influence the decision. 3. Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision- makers. 4. Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. 5. Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate. 6. Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way. 7. Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision. Above all, the process must be inclusive and fair. 6 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Public Participation Spectrum and Tools An illustration of the spectrum of public involvement and tools to consider specific to the Eugene City Hall public involvement process. IH(:REIISING ~[VU. Of PUBLI(: INVO~l,It...[tH lHFOfl;M CONSUl.1 INVOLVE COLLA&ORAl( U.1POWEA Tilfl__ p...&lI~ =1~n>11~ 1MfW~ nI [II~"",,, lJ>Ij lIg-~ llI1d'Of "'-"'I\A1I:ln uCUlitI ~ '-lI*~ :~~ Vof[n o-r1JPt, _h._ pJbll(: II~~. 10''''>- _ ~ ...... 11\0I I."rJtc (ltl'Ul'nl"OIIIlIOlj._.. ::.~~-::;::. 10;0 1_ _v. pUP- "'L1,~,~ull/OIO lJIICIbIIri ~ II. h> wIllp,at ...._ _....~lll _I.......... -..- InpUql""1~ nn"i."'!I'" r. hoI....,p- IhII ~ 'N~ . ~- "- . ~"'J . ~ ,.,.....,.". . , QUA 11V-'l- . 1.~ pbll; "~ '~r_ . If1ImowI 1JOCIi~ '~iJ'O'.oIII - L.J Y Illl 0'QIi]t . ~ IliUa . IIIuot ~"91 . ~...y I."... . ~..- .fln:ay , (",pm,.."" . fl..Ud. '~I~ .,,~ jn.1E-.". \II ~, , NWo'\PIptr ~ . Wr;,l."IlIWP" ~ .-;fIL . ~.m.'lAC1 .~....,,- . Dw.c.-~"i .~~ il;tI i*l'ltl Atlo\I . .:c..r.. IO"VPII . ~.lIRJo IIO'I'.~ . lA'II"1l1J! r&4) ~ oOaI . 1.1. b.... 11_ 1..-IJu_11 . :=::: ~ . 1I'lr:1OpIImy~' .....un,j . luiL 1laoI...,. . O'-H....... .~.--. , Cdcl~ lIiII -r- .. Nt".'nt..~_1II1a. Copyright IAP2. All rights reserved. " [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Project Values The following project values were adopted by the Eugene City Council at the November 23,2005 work session and are intended to guide the project's progress. A. Exercise fiscal responsibility B. Produce government efficiency C. Be user-friendly D. Embody environmental stewardship E. Enhance downtown F. I nspire civic pride G. Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its representatives H. Strive for simplicity I. Plan for the future 7 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Question #1 Which 5 of these values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support? A. Exercise fiscal responsibility B. Produce government efficiency C. Be user-friendly D. Embody environmental stewardship E. Enhance downtown F. I nspire civic pride G. Maximize use of City Hall public spaces by the public and access to government and its representatives H. Strive for simplicity I. Plan for the future [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Preliminary Space Needs Illustration highlighting relative space needs of each City service. Preliminary Space Needs o fiRE ~.. EMS. CI tY COUNCil COUNCIL O LIBI~ARY. RlCt l~iA~YOR CHAMBE~S MUNICIPAL ~O$(CU1OO CUUURAt svcs O RECORDS CITY MCHIVE MEETlN G ~MGf;: ..., ROOMS ~..~~~~ ......,,'...... ~\\ FINANe{ ~ ~ ~ '.. ........ ' O~.. ~, .........------ H IJMAN RESOURCES &- ~rSK SVCS I PlJI~UC -- - -I STAlF _ T SEe U RE PARKING 8 [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Consolidation Option A Option includes all police functions, municipal courts, non-secure parking, and other City Hall functions within one building envelope. A CON SO LI Dl.. T ION OPrJON ON E au ILDI NG FULL CONSOUDAnDN ....( ~UBLlC ro.) OTHER CITY HAll FUNCTIONS BUILDI NG ENvROPl: [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Consolidation Option B Option includes all police functions in a separate wing on one block adjacent to other City Hall functions. Municipal courts, non-secure parking, and other City Hall functions would occupy another wing on the same block. B CONS,O 1,101\ T I ON OPIION CAMPUS MOD~L POLICE FUNCTIONS S,EP^RAH WING ..../~ P~BLlC r.) t=. OTHER CITY HALL F U NeTIO NS BUILDING ~NVnopr au ILOIf.:G ENVELOPE 9 [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Consolidation Option C Option includes police patrol and secure parking in a separate building within walking distance of City Hall. Municipal courts, non-secure parking, and other City Hall functions would be located within a separate building envelope. City Hall would comprise other police functions, including: administration, investigation, lobby, and storefront. C. CONSOllDAf ION OPIION PATROL FU NcnONS SEPARATE Wll HIN WAllo;lNG DIs,rANCE E1Ui.I.OING [l'NnOPE , I I , I l~ ~ :~ ~ ' ~ : is I ~ . ~ \ , , I I I l'Il ~: , I I I [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Consolidation Option D Option includes police patrol and secure parking located remotely (i.e. not within walking distance). Municipal courts, non-secure parking, and other City Hall functions would be located within a separate building envelope. City Hall would comprise other police functions, including: administration, investigation, lobby, and storefront. D CONSOli DMI ON OP110.., IJATROL FUNCTIONS REMOTE ~ ~ ..:.. i , ... , , I I I I I :~ ~I IU i: I~ I I I I I I I I I j \ , 10 [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Consolidation Option E Option includes all police operations separate from City Hall functions, either nearby or remote. E. CONSOLI OMION GPrI DN ALL POLICE FU NCTIONS SEPARATE ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ) !l;1 ~ OTHER l:' CIIY HALL ru NCTIONS ~ 5 ;5l ...:.,. ~ ~ [E)!S~ CCOOy [Hld 1M~ IP1m Question #2 How important is it to you to have patrol facilities on the same site as City Hall? 1 Not Important 2 3 Somewhat Important 4 . 5 Very Important Question #3 How important is it to you to have patrol facilities located downtown? 1 Not Important 2 3 Somewhat Important 4 . 5 Very Important 11 " [B!J~~ CCOOy~ 1I\{~ ~ Thank You! Additional forums are scheduled for: May 25, 2006 August 24, 2006 November 9, 2006 12 Appendix B: Forum #1 Small Group Agenda ~ :~t)~ ~!f ~nn ~~~ ~~ :r~:~'~~~ ~lJ~ ~ 11~l.\~ ~lJ Community Forum #1 Small Group Agenda Question #1 Instructions: 1) As a group, look at the nine Project Values. 2) You are answering Question #1: "Which five of these values are the most critical decision-making guides for this project to gain your support?" 3) Discuss your opinions on the importance of each-you will be reporting back to the large group. 4) Assign a note-taker from the group. On the blank paper provided, record opinions about the importance of each value or any values you would like added. 5) After discussing, each participant places one dot on each of the values they feel is most important-a total of five dots per person. 6) When finished, give the values sheet to a staff person for tabulation. Question #2 Instructions: 1) Look at the sheet with Questions 2 & 3. 2) As a group discuss the Question #2: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities on the same site as city hall?" 3) Share your opinions, have the note taker record opinions on the blank paper provided. 4) When finished discussing, each participant places one dot along the scale to indicate their opinion of the importance of this issue. Question #3 Instructions: 1) As a group discuss Question #3: "How important is it to you to have patrol facilities located downtown?" 2) Share your opinions, have the note taker record opinions on the blank paper provided. 3) When finished discussing, each participant places one dot along the scale to indicate their opinion of the importance of this issue. 4) When finished, give the sheet to a staff person for tabulation. Appendix C: Forum #1 Questionnaire ~~~nm roJr!y IHm1U nlmrwr ~ Community Forum #1 Questionnaire 1. What do you like and/or don't like about the current City Hall building? 2. Would you like a tour of the Eugene City Hall building? _ Yes No 3. What, if any, public amenities would you like to see in a City Hall Complex? (some examples include plazas, food or beverage service, public meeting space, information kiosks, etc.) 4. Do you have access to any newsletters, emaillists, electronic updates, websites, etc. that could share information about the City Hall Master Plan project? Group Opportunity Contact Info 5. Can you suggest any groups that would be interested in a presentation on the Eugene City Hall Master Plan project? Group Contact Info 6. Do you have any suggestions on how the forum process could be improved? (over) Please tell us who you are! Name: Address: Phone: day evening Email: Thanks for completing this questionnaire and participating in discussions about City Hall. Your Opinion Matters! Appendix D: Questionnaire Summary Responses City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1 Questionnaire Responses Project questionnaires were distributed to all the participants at the March 23, 2006 Community Forum, and 69 completed the questionnaire. Participants' responses to the questions follow. Question #1-What do you like and/or don't like about the current City Hall building? . Dislike current earthquake-risk problem. Very much like having City Council chambers at center of complex. . It is ugly and looks run-down. . Democratic-rooms and passageways are communal-like, on same level. External spaces compatible with internal focus. . I do not have a lot of experience with the present City Hall, but the City Council "island" strikes me as pretentious; an adequately sized, integrated meeting room would be just fine. . Like location. Do not like ugly building, services not consolidated. . It is ugly and not inviting to the public. . Like open space and central council chamber. . Outdated and not very attractive-could be renovated or moved to current Federal building. . ( +) Good location and great inner courtyard. (-) Not energy efficient and aesthetically unpleasing exterior. . Too dilapidated. Inaccessibility. . Ugly one-story, dated building==no civic presence. Poor use of space (one city block). . Lots of wasted space. . I do not want to see us having to dig first responders out of rubble or civilian command and control in the event of an earthquake. . It is there, and it is paid for. A big plus! . I like the open design, especially the pond. . Like that it is paid for. . (-) Too removed from sidewalk, aloof, unfriendly. (+) Symbolism of council in center. . Unattractive, uninviting, does not promote civic pride. . It is paid for already. Our streets are falling apart and the City wants to build a new City complex. Think again! . Do not like: energy use is high, lack of space, accessibility, departments scattered in other buildings, no bathroom in City Council chambers. Like: openness. . Poor signage-how about maps like they have at malls which show where various shops are located. Like the architectural style. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 1 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Meeting hall in center. City manager system of government-remove him. Do not like unconnected nature of administrative officers. . A work of art-keep it! . There's nothing I like about it (except the location-rebuild there), ugly, unsafe, obsolete, poor use of land, inefficient, ugly. . Like: location. Do not like: lack of use of atrium (space now at a premium). Also-more function, less style and appeal to artistic factions. . Like: efforts to make it accessible. Dislike: cramped inside building. . Landscaping is good on 8th and Pearl Street. City Hall and Council chambers are good- looking. Rooms are small for meetings and no air during night meetings. . Too small for City government. . Street level access/interaction is very tough! . Location good. Facility bad. . Not very attractive outside. . Like: architecture/symbolism of council chamber center. Classic form of democracy. Dislike: not large enough to accommodate City functions. . Like: connection of chamber to outside, location is convenient. Dislike: just about everything else, lack of street presence, low density, mean spaces for staff. . It has historic value. It is a comfortable, usable building, non-intimidating. It's affordable as-is and can easily be enlarged if needed. . I like it because it is central and easily accessible. I do not like the aesthetics of the architecture. . Old looking-needs paint. . Lack of direct sunlight entering building. Non-utilization of water feature. Waste of material on the exterior of the building. . (1) It is purposefully anti-monumental and symbolically communitarian. (2) It is one of our best examples of 1960s modern architecture. (3) It is one of the best and most important buildings by local architects. . Old City Hall-City functions should be in one place (planning, building, administration, mayor). Get cops out of downtown. . The style is hideous. The council chambers are awful for meeting. I have been in the seats as well as taken testimony. The meeting room for small meetings is not convenient for more than a few observers. The entire site does not meet the City's stated goal of compact urban development. CH's FAR is about .6: 1 when it should be at least, but really, more than 2: 1. . Like: The central council chamber's formal presence as per the physical orientation and infrastructural concept. Don't Like: The aesthetic quality of the total buildings presentation. Especially in its relation to the street. . It's fine as it is, if it were seismically updated. . City Council meeting room (McNutt) is too small. The rest of the building is O.K. . Separation from street (physically and visually). . Cool architecture. . Open, inviting environment. . I do not like design because it is an inefficient use of energy and space. . I like the Council chamber and bridge to the County building. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 2 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Too close proximity to police. . It feels oppressive due to police presence. . I don't like the movement to replace it-money is "short" and already misallocated, e.g. Whole Foods parking lot subsidy. . It is set up in a way that City Council is our government with City Council chambers being right in the center. I also like the water with the ducks that live there. . Energy is wasteful, fairly inaccessible, architecture is not inspiring, and there are poor working conditions for staff. . Just needs to be seismically retrofitted-move all police to neighborhood precincts (in fire stations)? . It's ugly. . It has no "presence." . It's paid for. . It has nice Council chamber and outdoor space. . It's downtown, without taking up much space. . Like its external appearance. . Concerned about the seismic problem. . I like the statement it makes about the relationship between the people and the government. . Inviting architectural space with the round Council Chamber. . Landscaping-I would change the design to be more native but. . . the Sister Cities are represented there. . Good idea, but outdated and ugly. . Lots of wasted space. . Accessibility is poor. . I like the late art deco nature of it. . It's a fortress. The open space is totally uninviting. Accessibility is uninviting, it is sprawling, it's energy inefficient, i.e. There's not much I like. . I like the location. I like the City Council chambers. . I do not like the lack of interaction between the streetscape and the interior space of the building. . Don't like water feature and wasted space in the layout. . Inefficient (i.e. office space, energy, and building layout). Structurally unsound (roof leaks, poor ventilation, poor lighting, and poor heating). . Hard to find things-better signage and design. . Bathrooms are locked-against public. . Like fountains and open courtyard. . Needs upgrading. . Needs to be energy efficient. . I was not aware that it was City Hall until someone told me. It seems like a fortress-you have to go inside the outer walls to get anywhere. . I like the open feeling, how spaces flow smoothly into another. . It doesn't meet any of my needs. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 3 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses Question #2-Would you like a tour of the Eugene City Hall building? Yes No 29 respondents would like to take a tour of City Hall. Question #3-What, if any, public amenities would you like to see in a City Hall Complex? (some examples include plazas, food or beverage service, public meeting space, information kiosks, etc.) . More public meeting space; natural landscaping. More workspace for City councilors, and better access for staff by City councilors. . Plaza and public meeting. . Plenty of capacity-yes, plazas and food, etc. . Definitely public meeting space. . Public meeting space. . Plazas, public meeting space, and information kiosks. Include access to mayor and councilors. . Information kiosks, public meeting space, a park presence. . Food or beverage service, public meeting space, information kiosks, greenspace, office space for social/environmental non-profits. . A plaza and public meeting space would be great. . Public meeting rooms of various sizes are needed in Eugene. City Hall should create some good public spaces too (i.e. courtyard). Other suggestions: (1) Lots of natural lighting-this is Eugene, we need more light. (2) Good ventilation system that automatically uses plenty of fresh air (important for crowded meeting rooms) (3) Plenty of FREE parking after 5 p.m. for public involvement. . I would like to see a soup kitchen to feed hungry people in downtown Eugene and having facilities for homeless families. . As much skylighting and green courtyard with food and beverage (small). Good safe (off/on) bus stop and bike lanes (secure, better bike parking). Perhaps skywalk between government buildings to avoid traffic. Solar panels. . Should be a green building. A rathskeller in the basement like the German tradition. How about farmer's market on top? . Just what is already there. . More food and beverage service. Expand the farmer's market. . (1) Plaza. (2) Great room, community hearth, gathering place. (3) Large public meeting room. . Plaza/garden space, art, public meeting space, food services should be outside-eat drink downtown. . Greater access to expandable meeting/open space. . Plaza, food service, more bathrooms, more public meeting rooms, accessibility, energy efficiency and use of renewables (solar), green building, use recycled and non-toxic materials, sustainability, plan for future uses and expansion. . All of the examples. . I'd like to see public areas connecting government functions. . Toilets. Not food->work! The JD White Company, Inc. Page 4 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Public meeting spaces, information kiosks. No poorly run, poorly attended cafes. Go patronize downtown cafes. . All departments, at least the main offices, housed there. . Plaza, information desk and friendly personnel. . All of the above and wheelchair accessibility to all corners of the City Hall, including restrooms. . Outdoor space, some flexible meeting/conference space. . Keep it to City Hall government functions. Let private sector benefit from doing business around City Hall. . Farmer's market. . Meeting space, food service of some sort, outdoor civic streets, and connections to downtown civic/public spaces. Separate police patrol building with patrol parking in some form within walking distance-Police Consolidation Option C. . Plaza, meeting space. . Free and large public meeting space, but it does not need to be part of City Hall at all; anywhere in central Eugene is fine. . Public meeting space (larger than Harris Hall). . Public meeting place with HOH/deaf accessibility in form of assistive listening devices. . Educational showcases of energy efficient design. . Public meeting space. . Move public open space and transit orientation, better places to congregate-integrate with Saturday Market. Muti-use sustainable. . Public meeting space, no food and beverage service, info center (not necessarily kiosk), a public plaza is not vital; there is one at the County building and the park blocks are very close. . (1) Formal public entrance, in correlation to and in combination with: a formal public aesthetic. (2) Retention of and reference to the current council chambers (3) Ample staff amenities. (4 ) Welcoming public interior amenities: plazas, food or beverage service, public meeting space, information kiosks; information staffing. . A park or greenway. . Unimportant-other than public rest rooms. . Yes-all of the above. Important to maximize public contact with City Hall as city government. . Open space that is inviting to the public. . Kiosk not necessary at the City Manager's office. . Clear directions to services. . A realization that the people are the government, such as the plaque states inside the City Council chambers. . Food would be nice, public meeting space is an excellent idea. Keep a place for the ducks. . Public seating areas, creation of a village green, and ambiance that allows for easy access to the business activities. . Bare bones, low cost, keep taxes down. . Encourage plazas, food, or beverage service to be just outside. . Meeting spaces. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 5 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Free public meeting space, public plazas, and civic art. . Public meeting spaces! . Plaza . Water feature . Public art . Well connected to public transit . Multicultural representation . Interesting design (visually) . No food and beverage service. . Use downtown businesses. . More people, helping public and less kiosks. . No, no, no private business in City Hall. Why can't government be government? . City Hall should concentrate on city services, not trendy food and beverage places. Open space is desirable, but should be elevated and planned to complement city service prOVISIon. . Meeting space, informational kiosks. City Hall should not be a place for commerce. . Office for City Councilors. . All those enumerated here sound good. . Greenery, quiet spaces, and water. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 6 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses Question #4- Do you have access to any newsletters, emaillists, electronic updates, websites, etc. that could share information about the City Hall Master Plan project? Group Fairmount Neighbors (partial list ) Eugene Tree Foundation Other cities BRING Recycling Linda Swiser, ABC FAN AlA Local Friendly area neighborhood association Customers Staff Customers Lane Independent Living Alliance City Newsletter SHHH Deaf e-mail group Eugene Permaculture Guild Several Yahoo! Groups: West University Neighbors (members only list serve) Lunch groups Whiteaker Community Council (maybe) Vision for Intact Ecosystems and Watersheds Opportunity Neighborhood association. Chair can get information into FNA newsletter. I can consolidate e-mail lists of neighbors Input on landscape, urban design interests Research their buildings-more successful and attractive examples. Quarterly newsletter Newsletter and electronic newsletter Monthly meeting Quarterly newsletters to 3,400 households Web site editorial by me Newsletter editorial by me Newsletter editorial by me E- mail list E- mail list Website Friends of Eugene NLC Laurel Hill Valley Citizens AFSCME Unitarian Universalist Church Email Email AFSCME 1724.org, newsletter website Website and chat list The JD White Company, Inc. April 2006 Page 7 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses Question #5- Can you suggest any groups that would be interested in a presentation on the Eugene City Hall Master Plan project? Group League of Women Voters Rotary Club ABC Grower's Market AlA Local FOE NLC ENI Eugene Bike Coalition Neighborhood Associations Friends of Eugene Citizens For Public Accountability Neighborhood committees Lane Independent Living Alliance Human Rights Program-Accessibility Committee Oregon section of American Society of Landscape Architects American Institute of Architects-Eugene Chapter SHHH High schools University of Oregon Lane Community College Latino community West University Neighbors general meeting first Thursday of every month 7pm @ The Parlour at Central Presbyterian Church 555 East 15th Avenue, Eugene Friends of Eugene League of Women Voters Landwatch Whiteaker Community Council Crest Drive Citizens Association Unitarian Universalist Church Question #6-00 you have any suggestions on how the forum process could be improved? . I wish you would not have begun the March 23 forum by emphasizing the negatives about the current City Hall's design. I feel it can be retrofitted, preserved, and be a source of community pride. . More publicity, so more of the public can be included. . Stay on time and task. . Folks in this group tend to be from south and close-in west Eugene. Better outreach to north and far west and northwest Eugene. The group's reaction to your comment of, "Some people feel more secure with police around vs. feeling more secure with less police." The overall reaction of the group was, "More secure with less police." This told The JD White Company, Inc. Page 8 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses me the group is of generally more singularly minded than Eugene as a whole. This group is not going to give you a cross section of Eugene. . Thank you for your presentation! . Seem to be working fine. . Fiscal responsibility is very important and money is needed in many areas (roads, etc.) and whether it is renovation or moving to an existing building-that would work. . Yes. I would have liked to have seen more of this consideration and congeniality extended to the citizens and taxpayers over the downtown developmental decisions such as the Whole Foods development and adjacent parking garage. . No, I am new to Eugene. . Not at this time. Stay tuned. . Cannot hear comments from public. Only speaker has microphone. . Increase diversity of participants. . More group discussions! Whole system thinking! . Do not schedule it during other neighborhood meetings (i.e. Walnut Station). . You need a better writer on staff. Questions are more ambiguous than necessary. . Preliminary education and decision to broaden education. Arrange government leaders to prevent chaos. All new buildings must be constructed to allow adding upper stories- growth cannot be stopped in the short-term so anticipate the need for expansion. We must build up not out. . Keep it limited to the groups who have positive vision of Eugene and keep in mind that the new building should serve the purpose of next generations and the building should reflect the picture of what Eugene is-display of outstanding art work by local artists- pottery, paintings, weaving (hand-woven pieces), wood carvings, etc. Future City Hall can look better than Jacobs Gallery. All entrances (street) should be wheelchair accessible and should have signs for the blind/visually impaired. Build the new City Hall maybe 6 floors high (like Key Bank in the downtown) with stable ground foundation and should create double square footage in comparison to what City services have as a whole. City should turn current City Hall into a convention center and open to public meetings from citizens (e.g. City Club). . Keep participants focused on the task. . Somehow, we need to reach to non-vocal, non-attendees that represent a broader group of citizens beyond those attending the sessions. Assign people to tables so that there is more balance around tables. . More facts and figures. More details, more public discussion as a larger group, or circulating the groups. Stop using generalities that can be interpreted differently by different people (such as the people at the forum may use the terms differently than the City government). . A more organic process that is more informative of the issue, which is primarily why we are here, it is a real necessary project to begin with. It would have been appropriate to have greater line information about process before meeting. Hopefully we will be more versed before the next meeting. . Yes, FM devices hooked into existing microphone system with receivers and neck loops, head sets. . Open discussion of ideas and values before we are made to choose those that are given. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 9 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Do not make the meetings so long. I like the pizza. P.S. I do not see much cultural diversity at this meeting-please make sure you invite other members of the community that may not be as vocal (Hispanic especially). . (1) Tell the City Council to get out of the way. (2) Take destruction of the existing City Hall off the table. (3) Then engage the public in a real process. . Better participants. I was shocked at the paranoia and immaturity of some of the participants. The Council's goals were so generic that they provided no direction for a rowdy group of people whose motives seem to be to disrupt rather than provide useful assistance. Our table thought that the bubbles designating City services should include the Department for the Development of Conspiracies or Paranoia Development. . Consider alternatives that include preservation of the current City Hall as is, upgrading for safety needs, and devote remaining funds to parks and greenways. . Remember to use gender neutral words-not "you guys." Rather, "you folks" or "you all." (First female used "you guys." Casey?) . Please do not call Annette "the lovely Annette." It's confusing and even disturbing, appears to be humorous but comes across as patronizing if not sexist-despite being said by a fellow woman. . O.K. . Explain all steps of the current meeting at beginning of the meeting. Ensure that ideas that come out of these sessions that may not mesh with pre-conceived ideas are given equal status in moving forward. . More discussion and information before questions-such as space and cost required by patrol cars. . When specific issues are raised, explain where in the process they will be addressed. . Allow and encourage open-ended questions, such as having us decide how this process runs, giving us the right to choose which options to rate. . Nobody cares except you. . Only organic food please and no white plates. . No Pepsi-fruit juice or similar. . Do one on Farmers Market (year round covered) and homeless shelter. . Give up this pipe dream of new construction. Hard times are ahead. . Recycle. Spending $1.2 million is a waste of tax dollars. Get a clue! . No plastic water bottles. Please use water and recycled paper cups. (No dump space left). . You delete the five alternatives. No new City Hall/Police Station. . Regarding our bad planning department-we've already met the limits of growth. We dumped millions of gallons of untreatable sewage into the river because there was too much rain last year. . The City Council needs to be clear about one thing-do not build a new City Hall/Police station with funds you requested from other funding pools. The public is outraged that you apparently have been pilfering and pooling our funds to do your deal just in case the public vehemently opposes it. We don't trust the planning department or City Manager. . I believe after the Whole Foods parking garage ordeal that the public process does not feel safe or even like it matters. Faith needs to be restored. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 1 0 April 2006 City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #1-Questionnaire Responses . Structure forums to better use the community's wisdom in the room beyond vote responses to canned information. Otherwise actual value of participating drops significantly. . Suggest simplifying forum agendas to create space to have dialogue. . Craft questions in a manner that permits a full spectrum of responses. . If you want to get responses from the public you need to allocate enough time for the public to provide them. . Fewer structural exercises and more open discussion amongst participants. . The meeting is not a good cross-section of my community or neighborhood or the people I work with. . Stop people from pontificating on personal issues and stick to the topic at hand. . Pretty good job. . I think the facilitators did a goodjob with an unruly group of Eugeneans. . I think the time to go down the individual values was not too useful. . I think it's important to start the interactive part of the evening a bit earlier in the process. At the same time, it is important to keep control and limit comments to the matter at hand. I am really not interested in a free-for-all discussion where folks are basically just using the air time to espouse their particular editorial comments. . Please discourage renegades who bring their own agendas that don't relate to the City Hall proj ect. . Better phrasing of questions. . Try to keep comments focused on issues at hand and refrain from political commentary. . More open discussion. . Best of luck. . Have an agenda, so people will know the flow, and not waste time. The JD White Company, Inc. Page 11 April 2006 A CONSOLIDATION OPTION OTHER CITY HALL FUNCTIONS NON-SECURE PARKING BUILDING ENVELOPE PUBLIC ~ w cc: :J U w (/) I \ \ , , ONE BUILDING FULL CONSOLIDATION , POLICE LOBBY POLICE ADMIN POLICE PATROL U1 m o C ;0 m SECURE PARKING I / , .....--------.... CITY OF EUGENE EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN :~~HMI~sECHT~cIKNEcRm B CONSOLIDATION OPTION CAMPUS MODEL POLICE FUN CTI 0 NS SEPARATE WI N G ~ r7 ~ PUBLIC # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ~ # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # , OTHER CITY HALL FUNCTIONS POLICE ADMIN MUNICIPAL COURTS w cc :J U w (/) NON-SECURE PARKING I \ \ , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , \ \ I I I I I POLICE PATROL (/) rrl n c :;0 rrl SECURE PARKING I / BUILDING ENVELOPE .....--------",.". , BUILDING ENVELOPE CITY OF EUGENE EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN :~~HMI~sECHT~cIKNEcRm C CONSOLIDATION OPTION OTH ER l.:~~ CITY HALL FUNCTIONS BUILDING ENVELOPE NON-SECURE PARKING PATROL FUNCTIONS SEPARATE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE ~ ~ PUBLIC , \ I I I I I \ I CITY OF EUGENE EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN :~~HMI~sECHT~cIKNEcRm ~ , , , , , , w 0.... o ---.J W > Z w (9 z o ---.J :J co ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ POLICE STOREFRONT POLICE LOBBY ,- I I I POLICE I ADMIN I \ ,------------; ,--------------, I (./) rrl n c ;0 rrl POLICE PATROL w cc :J U w (/) \ SECURE PARKING ,-------------; O CONSOLIDATION OPTION OTHER CITY HALL FUNCTIONS NON-SECURE PARKING BUILDING ENVELOPE PATROL FUNCTIONS REMOTE PUBLIC ~ # # # # # ~ \;/ POLICE STOREFRONT ~ ~ ~ POLICE LOBBY ,- I I I POLICE I ADMIN I \ ,------------; ~ ~ I w lY: :J U w (/) \;/ \;/ , \ I I I I I \ CITY OF EUGENE EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN :~~HMI~sECHT~cIKNEcRm ,--------------, w 0.... o --.J W > Z w (.9 z o --.J :J co (/) m n c ;:0 m POLICE PATROL SECURE PARKING \ I ,-------------; E CONSOLIDATION OPTION ALL POLICE FUNCTIONS SEPARATE PUBLIC OTH ER ':...... CITY HALL FUNCTIONS ':\ I I I I I NON-SECURE PARKING PUBLIC ~ . . w 0.... o ---.J W > Z w OJ C - r o Z C) m Z < m r o U m -------------, ,. I I I I I I I I w Ice :J IU w IV) \ POLICE ADMIN (.9 z o ---.J :J co SECURE PARKING \ I (/) 0' CI :;0 rrll I I I I I I I ,--------------------------, CITY OF EUGENE EUGENE CITY HALL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN :~~HMI~sECHT~cIKNEcRm Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Attachment C - Space Needs Study Space Needs Process and Projection Methodology The preliminary Staff and Space Needs Summary shows current and projected staff and space needs to the year 2030. Due to the difficulty in forecasting needs 25 years from now, the design team gathered detailed space needs information for the intermediate milestones of 2010, 2015, and 2025, and used a multiplier to assist in determining staff and space projections to the final milestone of 2030. For several divisions, the staff and/or space needs are currently under- served, resulting in higher average growth between early milestones (e.g. 2006 and 2010) than between later milestones (e.g. 2015 and 2025). The final milestone of 2030 was established by continuing the staff and space growth rates projected between 2015 and 2025. City of Eugene Staff and Space Needs Summary Annual Net Personnel Growth Net Square Feet Area Department I Division Rate Fa eto r 2006 2010 2015 2025 2030 2006.30 2006 2010 2015 2025 2030 2030 1 City Council/Mayor 13 13 13 15 16 0.6% 3,227 3,227 3,227 3,575 3,749 234 2 City M anag er 27 35 39 43 45 2.0% 7,812 8,492 9,216 9,600 9,792 218 3 Central Services 4 City Prosecutor 11 12 13 13 13 0.7% 2,584 2,772 2,963 2,977 2,984 230 5 Finance 32 32 32 32 32 0.0% 7,332 7,352 7,373 7,413 7,433 232 6 Human Resources and Risk Services 32 36 37 40 42 0.9% 8,644 9,124 9,365 9,835 10,070 240 7 Information Services 8 Technical & Application Services 53 56 62 66 68 0.9% 13,242 13,590 14,286 14,750 14,982 220 9 Document and Distribution Services 9 10 10 10 10 0.4% 5,217 5,466 5,466 5,466 5,466 547 10 Municipal Court 11 Court Administration 32 39 41 41 41 1.0% 5,350 6,051 6,233 6,258 6,270 153 12 Courtroom and Support 10,012 12,355 12,355 12,355 12,355 13 Fire and EM S 4 6 6 7 8 2.4% 520 538 538 538 538 67 14 Library, Recreation & Cultural Services 12 15 15 18 20 1.7% 2,637 3,009 3,009 3,380 3,565 178 15 Planning and D evelopm ent 16 Administration 3 3 3 3 3 0.0% 1,858 1,858 1,858 1,875 1,884 628 17 Building & Permit Services / PIC 69 69 70 77 81 0.5% 16,020 16,354 16,816 17,715 18,165 224 18 Community Development 14 15 16 18 19 1.1% 3,737 3,853 3,969 4,259 4,404 232 19 Planning 23 23 23 23 23 0.0% 5,269 5,269 5,269 5,269 5,269 229 20 Parking Services 13 14 15 17 18 1.1% 1,950 2,066 2,127 2,304 2,392 133 21 Public Works 22 Administration 18 21 23 24 25 1.2% 3,805 4,164 4,390 4,483 4,530 181 23 Engineering 87 94 104 122 131 1.4% 20,617 21,700 23,460 26,371 27,826 212 24 Total 452 493 522 569 595 1.0% 121,836 129,249 133,933 140,447 143,704 242 25 Common / Shared Support 2 2 2 2 19,829 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 26 Records Achive 4,400 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 27 Total Staff aud Net Square Feet. City Hall 452 495 524 571 597 1.0% 146,065 158,318 163,001 169,515 172,772 289 28 Building Gross Square Feet (Net-to-Gross = 80%) 182,581 197,897 203,752 211,894 215,965 Police Department 29 Office of the Chief 9 15 15 16 17 2.4% 4,380 4,400 4,679 4,819 283 30 Operations Support 9 9 12 14 15 1.9% 2,156 2,726 3,026 3,176 212 31 Technical Services 31 34 38 49 55 1.9% 6,563 6,988 7,695 8,049 146 32 Investigations Division 33 43 48 60 66 2.5% 10,961 11,461 12,396 12,864 195 33 Patrol Division 135 184 202 252 277 2.6% 12,705 12,898 13,953 14,481 52 34 Common / Shared Support 22,640 23,087 24,810 25,672 35 Total Staff and Net Square Feet - Police 217 285 315 391 430 2.5% 59,405 61,560 66,559 69,059 161 36 Building Gross Square Feet (Net-to-Gross = 78%) 76,168 78,819 84,968 88,043 37 Total Staff aud Net Square Feet 38 Building Gross Square Feet The SGS Group 1 Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Attachment C - Space Needs Study Comparative Benchmarking To aid in evaluating the appropriateness of the City Hall space needs program, a comparative analysis of other government agency space programs completed in recent years by the con- sultant team is summarized on the following table. Net Sq/Ft. per Private Office Project Square Staff Feet Person Percentage Culver City, CA 69,335 251 276 21% Sacramento County Permit Center, CA 87,354 362 241 15% Merced County/City of Los Banos, CA ~~,~~~ 324 297 20% Oakland, CA - Broadway Building 112,720 327 345 9% Los Angeles County - Fire 138,637 515 269 15% San Joaquin County, CA 145,265 553 262 24% Surprise, AZ 1aa Ann : 7A 222 18% . '~ Oakland, CA - Dalziel Building 166,865 644 259 10% Sacramento County Public Works, CA 216,395 1,038 208 16% Clark County, NV 299,741 1 ,435 209 12% Denver, CO 545,065 2,475 220 17% Average 185,812 788 255 16% Eugene City Hall 143,704 595 242 28% The overall net square feet per person for the City Hall space needs is 242. This is consistent with the other jurisdictions surveyed and close to the average of the eleven other cities and counties. Recent programming projects completed by the consultant team assigned private offices to be- tween 10% and 24% of the total staff, with an average of 16%. The jurisdictions surveyed gen- erally allocated private offices to division heads and above, with supervisors and professional staff generally in open workstations with the availability of small conference and meeting rooms for those instances where privacy and/or confidentiality were required. Preliminary requests for private offices total 28% of the total staff. This is higher than average, but normal as part of the Space Needs process. Generally for City of Eugene staff, private offices were requested for supervisor and higher positions, plus a significant number of profes- sional positions. To reduce the number of private offices, Executive Managers adopted a policy of providing private offices for Division Managers and above, with an approval process to man- age exceptions through the Executive Managers. It is anticipated that through this policy, the number of private offices will be reduced to an appropriate percentage (anticipated at between 15-20%) that will serve the operational and flexibility needs of the organization. The net effect of reducing private offices on the overall area is nominal because the sizes of workstations and private offices for supervisors and professional staff are very similar. 2