Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2009-02-10CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2009 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. on February 10, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Jordan, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, and Tierney. Councilor Johnson was excused. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Brant Williams, Director of Economic and Capital Projects; Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director 3. STUDY SESSION 3.1 Background Presentation Facilities/West End Building Mayor Hoffman observed that City facilities had not only physical capital for the community but also social and economic value as well. He noted that, while the Council has known for some time that these City facilities had difficulties, it has not focused on them until the last six to eight months. He explained that the Council was trying to get to a comprehensive understanding of the community's assets, including the West End Building (WEB). He reminded the Council members that they should not rush to a decision on this issue; it might take several study sessions to address it. Mr. McIntyre pointed out that an important factor was to acknowledge that this was a problem or opportunity that the City owned. Even though six of the Council members had nothing to do with the WEB purchase, this Council needed to decide what to do with it. He noted that the issue was complex, and involved a large amount of data. He described the information in the Council binder as the first major snapshot in time on where the City was with the WEB. He commented that he thought it remained to be seen whether the WEB was part of the problem or part of the solution to the other facility problems. He said that staff needed direction from the Council on whether to include the WEB in the entire facilities study. He described the presentation tonight as providing a foundation for the decision makers to use in giving staff direction on the next steps on how to move forward. • STAFF REPORT Mr. Williams gave a PowerPoint presentation of the information contained in The West End Building Decision Process Report (pp. 1-27) and Exhibit A (pp.1-8). He reviewed the history of the WEB, beginning with the City purchasing it from Safeco Insurance in 2006 for $20 million with the intent of using it as a multi -generational community center. He mentioned the Community Center Plan, developed by the 20 -member citizen steering committee in the summer of 2007, which the City immediately put on the shelf in order to deal with the November 2007 advisory vote on whether to keep the WEB, and with the May 2008 vote on paying for the building (which failed). He indicated that the Council adopted the WEB decision process as part of deciding what to do with the property within the context of other City facility needs. One question was whether the City could use the WEB to resolve other facility problems. He stated that the goal was to provide sufficient information to the Council to enable it to make an informed decision, which, ideally, the community could support (WEB Report, p.1). City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 10 February 10, 2009 He reviewed the major work plan reports and studies conducted by staff, beginning with the City Facilities Assessment (WEB Report, p.1-2). He explained that, since Solarc Architecture was already looking at the Maintenance Services Building, staff incorporated their report into the report that SERA Architects did on an additional nine significant City buildings, for a City facilities assessment of 10 buildings. The assessment looked at the physical condition and the current and future space deficiencies at the four fire stations, the indoor tennis facility, the Maintenance Services Building, the WEB, City Hall, the Library, and the Adult Community Center (ACC). He reviewed common problems found in the buildings (WEB Report, p.2). He emphasized that the seismic deficiencies were most critical with respect to the facilities that provided emergency services. He commented that the life span of most mechanical systems was 20 to 30 years, and, therefore, many of the mechanical systems on buildings built in the 1970s and 1980s needed replacement in the next few years. These buildings also pre -dated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, and needed upgrading. He identified City Hall, the Maintenance Services Building, and the South Shore Fire Station as the buildings with the most deficiencies (WEB Report, p.2). He described City Hall as the most critical facility in terms of health and safety issues and space needs. He noted that the West End Building Property Appraisal (WEB Report, p.2) appraised the building and property at $21.3 million in September 2008. However, with the change in the economy since then, staff asked CB Richard Ellis to conduct a real estate and office market analysis for City facilities (WEB Report, p.2-3). Their work assessed the current market values of City Hall at $4.1 million, the Library at $2.7 million, and the ACC at $4.7 million. Under current market conditions, they concluded that the WEB would likely sell for $8 to $9 million. He reviewed the recommendations made by the Urban Land Institute expert panel (WEB Report, p.3). He discussed the findings of the staff review of existing City policies (WEB Report, p.3-4). He described the various public outreach efforts (WEB Report, p.4-5). He explained that the public opinion research conducted by Davis, Hibbetts, & Midghall, Inc., looked to hear from the bell portion of the bell curve of Lake Oswego citizen opinion by using a large group study format (WEB Report, p.4). • QUESTIONS OF CONSULTANTS Mr. Williams invited Don Eggleston of SERA Architects, Mark Fitkin of CB Richard Ellis, and Adam Davis of Davis, Hibbetts & Midghall to the table to answer Council questions on their reports. Councilor Hennagin commented that he had been surprised that the CB Richard Ellis valuation of the ACC was higher than the valuations for City Hall or the Library. Mr. Fitkin confirmed that the amount of land at each site primarily drove the valuations. Mr. Williams pointed out that, if sold, both the Library and the ACC properties would likely return to single family residential: 13 lots on the 2.8 -acre ACC property and 8 lots on the 1.1 -acre Library property. Councilor Olson asked whether CB Richard Ellis would change its recommendation to keep the WEB for at least three years if it knew that the City has not paid for the building and was losing money every year that was kept. Mr. Fitkin explained that they based their valuations solely on the market conditions today: they did not use the acquisition price. He commented that they did consider the purchase price in concluding that this was not a good time to sell the building because, under current market conditions, the $8 to $9 million the City would likely get for the building would not recoup the City's $20 million investment. Mr. Fitkin indicated to Councilor Tierney that, given the fact that the commercial real estate market on the West Coast was virtually frozen at this time, it could take more than a year to sell the WEB for $8.5 million. He noted that the Farmers Insurance building sat on the market for 17 to 18 months before it sold. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 February 10, 2009 He concurred with Councilor Tierney that the excess land on the WEB property had value, which the City could partition off to provide additional uses. He confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the City could potentially realize less money selling the property as a whole than it would selling it in partitions. He explained that the challenge was that the demand for development was virtually non-existent right now. At Mayor Hoffman's request, Mr. Davis provided background information on his firm, which specialized in public policy and planning work. He mentioned that, with the increasing difficulty in obtaining opinions via telephone surveys, his firm was using other research techniques, such as focus groups, more and more. Councilor Tierney asked if the large group study sample truly represented the bell shaped curve. He wondered whether there would be any changes in the results if Mr. Davis conducted the study today. Mr. Davis indicated that they worked hard to make sure that the three large groups in this study were representative of the Lake Oswego community, including the young people. He stated that the Council could feel confident in what they learned through the study. He described the information learned as 'tough news.' A majority of citizens wanted the City to keep the building, and a majority of citizens did not want to pay for it. He commented that the situation has changed since they conducted the group study, and not for the better because of the economy. He mentioned seeing more anti -tax sentiment than ever in communities, and a need for communities to set priorities on their identified needs. He indicated that the item that trumped everything else in issues like this was maintenance. He described the message from the citizens as the Council needed to make sure to preserve the public investment in these buildings before asking for more money to expand existing facilities or build new ones. He emphasized that these were very tough times for the average Oregonian across the state. Councilor Hennagin commented that the lack of information provided to the study participants regarding the details of the health and safety issues in City Hall caused him to question the benefit of their responses to the Council in making a decision. Mr. Davis said that the information sheet provided to the participants did include information about the conditions in each of the several facilities under consideration during the three-hour study. He indicated that the skeptics in the group simply did not believe the information, while another contingent held that the City could take care of the mold problem, do basic maintenance, and get the building back into shape. He confirmed to Mr. Williams that he had not seen the cost information as critical because they were looking at policy direction. He explained that if they had given the participants the cost information, then they would have had to translate it into how it affected their pocketbooks. He indicated that they had wanted to get the participants' opinions based on the information that they brought in with them, since the study group was also representative of the different levels of awareness in the community. Councilor Jordan recalled that she had shared Councilor Hennagin's concerns with regard to the study. She commented that she had been amazed to realize that the background information provided to the participants apparently did not matter to them. She raised the question of whether it was a good investment of public money to spend money on a building that the more one poured into it, the less one got out of it. She asked how to translate that to a skeptical public that did not see any problems with the building. She described the situation as a 'Catch-22' because staff has done maintenance in keeping up appearances. Therefore, the public did not see the damage in City Hall. She observed that it was difficult explaining to the public why it would be cheaper to rebuild City Hall from the ground up than to retrofit the existing building. Mr. Davis recounted an anecdote of speaking before the Revenue Restructuring Task Force, which was thinking about implem nting a sales tax as a replacement tax for income and property taxes. He told the Task Force that the negativism and cynicism among the people at this time was City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 February 10, 2009 so great that even conducting 40,000 focus groups across the state would only give them a chance of convincing the public. Councilor Tierney asked if the information received from the public was sufficient at this stage. If so, how should the City best approach the issue in terms of public engagement and communication? Mr. Davis said that, in his opinion, a specific proposal developed by the City, which included the cost to the average taxpayer in Lake Oswego, would be worth doing additional research on. He indicated that simply asking general questions about how people felt about the WEB would yield no different information than the Council already had. He reiterated that any tax measure would have a tough go at this time. He encouraged the Council to think creatively about tax measures, including possible public-private partnerships. He cited an example of a wealthy individual in the North Clackamas Parks District who offered to put in $1 million if the taxpayers would commit to a given amount. He spoke of an extensive public outreach process, including building coalitions around specific issues, such as the Library. He indicated to Councilor Tierney that he would recommend taking out no more than three options to the community for discussion. Councilor Hennagin stated for the record that he had outside knowledge of single-family homes coated with the same EFIS building skin as used on City Hall, which had to be skinned down to their studs and re -done with new materials. Mr. Davis suggested framing the facilities question in terms of infrastructure, as the citizens were in the frame of infrastructure moving forward for the next couple of years. He pointed out that taxpayers tended to respond to opportunities for matching grants, as they did not want that money going somewhere else. Mr. Davis indicated to Mayor Hoffman that if his team picked another representative sample of Lake Oswego citizens and replicated the study, he was 100% confident that the numbers would be more or less the same. Mayor Hoffman mentioned that that was important to him in terms of the study findings being statistically significant. Mayor Hoffman noted that the classic public participation program had four steps: inform, listen, engage, and problem solve. He asked if there was a collaborative participation model that the Council could use to work with the community in arriving at a solution. Mr. Davis said that in order to do the problem solving and reach consensus, the City would have to provide the cost information to the public. He clarified that presenting the facilities cost information in isolation was problematic because the public was also thinking of all the other things that their tax dollars paid for. Taxpayers wanted to know what the cost meant relative to the impact on other City services. Without the cost information, the Council would not end up with the valid information that it was looking for. Mayor Hoffman observed that the buildings also had a social value attached to them, in addition to the physical value. Mayor Hoffman asked if the consultants have used methodologies other than the large focus groups to create a collaborative public engagement process that yielded a solution. Mr. Davis mentioned survey research techniques, such as the Delphi technique of holding several rounds of interviews to build consensus. He pointed out that the key to any technique was the recruiting and who came to the table. Councilor Moncrieff asked how the online survey results compared to the large group study results. Mr. Davis said that the patterns were similar, although there was more polarization in the online survey. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Eggleston, President of SERA Architects, to discuss their analysis of the cost to replace City Hall versus the cost to repair City Hall. Mr. Eggleston provided background information on his firm and his experience. He mentioned that he was also a resident of Lake City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 February 10, 2009 Oswego. Mayor Hoffman said that he could not remember whether SERA Architects was a client of his law firm. Mr. Eggleston recalled that the estimate his firm did two and a half years ago for City Hall looked at the building as an 'essential facility,' a facility that housed the first responder units of the police and the 9-1-1 call center. He explained that this meant upgrading the building to a standard 25% higher than the current seismic code for Zone 3 (the area had been zoned Zone 2 when City Hall was built). He reviewed the problems with City Hall, including mold, an overtaxed electrical system, an aging roof, failing windows, and the deteriorating EFIS building skin. He described the difficulties involved with renovating an occupied building. He explained that their analysis concluded that by the time all the needed work was done and systems replaced for the existing building, it would be cheaper and simpler to demolish the building and build a new one. Mr. Davis mentioned that they saw a real concern in the groups respecting seismic safety, especially as it related to the emergency responders. He stated that sustainability was another element that resonated with the public. Whatever the City did, it should commit to doing in a sustainable way. He recalled that one of the most powerful campaign themes for the recent Oregon Zoo bond was that the Zoo would do all the construction in a sustainable, green kind of way. Mr. Eggleston indicated to Councilor Olson that their estimate to build new included both a green building and the demolition costs. Councilor Olson asked how urgently were the repairs or replacement needed. Mr. Eggleston pointed out that, with the mechanical systems nearing the end of their lives, the building was near the end of its useful life too, unless the City made some major investments in it. He explained that 'major investment' meant replacing the systems, redoing the exterior—basically taking the building back down to the structure. He raised the question of how did one replace a mechanical system in a building with a mold problem. Mr. Eggleston confirmed to Councilor Jordan that, if the City relocated the police department and the 9-1-1 call center to somewhere other than a new City Hall or the WEB, then those two buildings would not have to meet the higher seismic safety standard required for buildings housing emergency and essential service providers. He confirmed to Councilor Olson that the seismic requirements for assembly space were in between the requirements for emergency responder services and regular office space. He mentioned that Safeco seismically upgraded the WEB following the Northridge earthquake. He explained that, not only have the code requirements for seismic safety changed since then, the earthquake zone for the building has changed from Zone 2 to Zone 3. Councilor Tierney asked how Mr. Eggleston would answer a skeptical citizen who asked how the City got into this situation with a 22 -year-old building. Mr. Eggleston reiterated that several of the systems were near the end of their life. He commented that, while he could not give the history of the exterior skin of the building, he knew that there were two-year-old townhouses just down the street tented for exterior work. Mr. Davis mentioned that they heard that question in the groups: there are 150 -year-old buildings on the East Coast and even older buildings in Europe, so why is this happening to a 22 -year-old building? Councilor Jordan observed that back then, they built with stone and not with EFIS. He clarified to Councilor Hennagin that the majority supported moving police and the 9-1-1 call center to the WEB, partly because of its central location. Mayor Hoffman noted that the Urban Land Institute had suggested that the WEB was not a good place for those services because of other land use and development issues. Mr. Williams stated that the large group participants had supported police/9-1-1 and additional library services as reasonable uses at the WEB. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 February 10, 2009 Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that CB Richard Ellis provided a cost estimate for a WEB remodel if the City moved its offices (not including emergency services) to the WEB. Mr. Eggleston indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that, since the WEB as already an office building, the City would only have to re -do the office space at the WEB to meet staff needs and to accommodate the assembly space. He said that there was localized water intrusion in different spots. He reiterated that the building has been seismically upgraded since it was built. Councilor Moncrieff asked if there was any assurance that the WEB was not at the end of its life cycle. Mr. Eggleston indicated that the City would need to take a serious look at upgrades needed for the building. He suggested taking advantage of whatever sustainable design upgrades it could in order to try to get the building to LEED Silver status, and obtain business energy tax credits. He confirmed that the WEB was in much better shape than City Hall. Mayor Hoffman asked what someone would see on a tour that would tell him/her that City Hall was at the end of its useful life and had all these problems. Mr. Eggleston said that City staff was doing a very good job of maintaining the interior and checking for air quality inside the building. He indicated that if one walked around the outside of the building, one would see windows failing. He emphasized that they did not want to open up the exterior wall because that was where the mold was. He referenced photos contained in their report on City Hall that showed the damage inside the exterior walls. He confirmed that if they removed the outside building skin to show the large group participants what was there, the participants would see mold. He said that he would take a tour group upstairs to show them the boiler and electrical closet and the substandard space for employees. He spoke of taking the group up on the roof to show its poor condition and the deteriorating mechanical systems, some of which they were having difficulty finding replacement parts for. Mr. Davis concurred that such a tour would undoubtedly have an impact on the participants, especially if one pointed out that the police and 9-1-1 were downstairs. He reiterated that the first thing the participants would ask was how the building got into this shape in only 22 years. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Olson that finding replacement parts for the mechanical systems depended on what type of system had been put in. There were systems at both the WEB and City Hall for which they could not find replacement parts because those systems were no longer made. Mr. Eggleston confirmed to Councilor Moncrieff that there were opportunities to upgrade the WEB to the LEED Silver standard. He mentioned a recent State requirement that 1.5% of the construction cost of any building intended for public use be spent for solar initiatives on the building, such as solar hot water, a passive solar system, or solar panels. Mr. Fitkin pointed out that if City Hall were a multi -tenant building, it would be tagged as tainted and next to impossible for his firm to lease on the open market. He observed that, in such a case, the dictates of the law were irrelevant: people simply would not use the space. Councilor Jordan referenced the history of City Hall. She commented that the City built the building for a price tag that it thought the people could accept; it did not necessarily build something for all time. She pointed out that when one bought something less expensive than something else was, one usually ended up paying for it many times during its lifetime. She concurred that citizens found it hard to believe that City Hall had all these problems because the City kept up the building's appearance, and most of the problems were hidden. Mr. Fitkin mentioned his credentials as Managing Director for CB Richard Ellis, an international commercial real estate services provider. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 8:05 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 February 10, 2009 • Facilities Assessment Report, (WEB Report, pp.9-27) Mr. Williams presented a PowerPoint presentation of the report detailing the assessments of six facilities: City Hall, Library, Maintenance Services Building, South Shore Fire Station, Adult Community Center (ACC), and West End Building (WEB). He explained that, for each facility, they looked at four elements: building conditions, space program needs, options (including estimated options costs), and public opinion. He reviewed the multiple and significant building and systems deficiencies in City Hall (WEB Report, p.8). He noted the need for more office space, especially for police and 9-1-1 dispatch (WEB Report, p.9). He explained that he derived the recommended City Hall square footage increase to 80,000 square feet based on an eventual Lake Oswego population of 50,000. He presented pictures illustrating the serious mold problem inside the walls, and the water leakage in the basement. He reviewed the main four options and associated costs for addressing the City Hall issues (WEB Report, pp.9-10). He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the $25 million cost for Option 1 including the purchase price of the WEB. He clarified to Councilor Olson that the $20 million purchase price of the WEB did not include the $3 to $4 million already spent by the City because those were 'sunk costs,' which the City could not recoup regardless of what decision the Council made. He indicated that staff could easily provide costs for the additional five options listed (WEB Report, p.10), including locating police and 9-1-1 at a location other than the WEB (although that would add a property purchase price to the building a new center cost). He clarified to Councilor Olson that he did not include a land purchase price in (2) (c) in Exhibit Q (building a new City Hall at another downtown location) because it should be mostly offset by selling the current site. He concurred with Councilor Jordan that the estimates did not include the cost of the additional land needed to expand the parking for any of these options. He indicated that he used $25,000 per stall in his cost estimate for a parking structure. He noted that SERA Architects' cost estimates for repairing City Hall versus rebuilding City Hall were two and a half years old. If the Council wanted to go in that direction, and, given the significance of the issue, he suggested taking the prudent step of getting another estimate by a different firm for a peer review of those numbers in today's market. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that he would provide him with more information about the pros and cons of transferring 9-1-1 dispatch to Clackamas County. He mentioned that he and Mr. McIntyre have discussed developing a decision process for the Council to use in working through these issues and deciding on which option to move forward on. He indicated that Mr. Eggleston concurred that getting a second opinion on the costs was the right thing to do. He indicated to Councilor Jordan that all the scenarios proposed keeping the courtroom with the City Hall functions, and not separating it out with a new police and 9-1-1 dispatch center. He commented that, in talking with the Police Chief, the Chief felt that the priority was to keep 9-1-1 dispatch with the police. Councilor Jordan mentioned that the municipal judge had told her that he was comfortable with separating the court facility from the police facility. Mr. Williams clarified to Councilor Olson that a new police station would include a bigger evidence storage area, but storage for large evidence (i.e., vehicles) would likely remain at the Maintenance Services yard. He reviewed the public opinion results for dealing with City Hall, noting that 71 % supported repairing the existing building (WEB Report, p. 10). He indicated that the participants knew that it would cost less to rebuild from the ground up than to repair the existing building (Exhibit K, p. 94). City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 February 10, 2009 Councilor Hennagin commented that he had interpreted that result as the participants thinking that the City could replace things over time, rather than incurring the cost all at once. Councilor Moncrieff concurred. Mr. Williams clarified that they did not do a study on how much more it would cost to do incremental improvements over time, but staff did think it was a safe assumption to say that it would cost more to do repairs incrementally than all at once, because that was an inefficient way of working. He clarified to Councilor Moncrieff that the participants did not have any financial information. The information sheet only said that the study found that it would cost more to repair City Hall than it would to replace it. Mayor Hoffman suggested asking Mr. Davis to come back for a more in-depth discussion of the public opinion research results. Mr. Williams reviewed the results for locating police and 9-1-1 dispatch (WEB Report, pp.10-11). He noted that the results would move these services out of City Hall (63%). He reviewed the funding priorities, noting that funding police and 9-1-1 had the highest priority (WEB Report, p.11). He confirmed to Councilor Olson that the participants were only given four options, and they had to rank all of them, whether or not they wanted a particular option. He mentioned that the online survey differed from the large group study, in that the online survey broke the tie between the City Hall and the community center, with the community center coming in fourth. Mr. Williams reviewed the Library building analysis (WEB Report, pp.12-14). He noted that, overall, the building was in decent shape. He indicated that its major problem was a need for more space for all functions, including parking. He said that the two independent studies done on the library recommended between 60,000 to 65,000 square feet for a new library building. He stated that including land costs in the estimate for building a new library in the downtown raised the $19.1 million cost given in the report to $24 million. Councilor Jordan mentioned that there was money from the County and the Friends of the Library available for library use. Mr. Williams pointed out that the community center project had looked at building a 50,000 square foot library and adding space on as necessary. He reviewed the public opinion research results for the library, noting that 65% of the large group study participants favored keeping the library at its present location, with or without additional library services located elsewhere. He pointed out that 82% thought that the City should find a way to provide expanded library services to meet demand; 65% favored the WEB, and 20% favored a downtown location. He indicated to Councilor Olson that the online survey results were consistent with the large group study results. He reviewed the Maintenance Services Building analysis (WEB Report, p.15-16). He discussed the various building condition problems, including health, safety, code, seismic, roof, and program space issues. He noted the $7 million cost to replace the building, unless they relocated it to address the seismic constraints with the maintenance yard (which would increase that number considerably). He mentioned that public opinion split between repairing the existing building or replacing it. He indicated to Councilor Tierney that contracting out maintenance work to Clackamas County was an option. He recalled that Councilor Johnson had suggested checking with the School District about consolidating yards. Councilor Jordan mentioned that the Lake Grove study looked at moving the School District bus barn out of the middle of Lake Grove, but found that it was a money issue because the District contracted for their bus services. She commented that finding a site large enough to house both facilities within Lake Oswego could be very costly. Mr. Williams reviewed the South Shore Fire Station building analysis (WEB Report, p.17-18). He explained that the fire department wanted to store a particular truck at this location but the vehicle bays were too short for the vehicle. He mentioned the inadequate space for a variety of uses. He noted the City's purchase of the residential property on the east of the fire station with the intent to City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 February 10, 2009 build a replacement station on that site. He indicated that the public opinion research found 53% wanting to keep and repair the building and 47% wanting to replace it. He indicated to Councilor Jordan that there were options for looking at expanding the existing fire station to accommodate larger bays without re -doing the entire station. He commented that doing so would be challenging, given that the cost of a new fire station was $2.6 million. Mr. Williams reviewed the Adult Community Center building analysis (WEB Report, p.19-20). He mentioned that the building had been put together piecemeal in the 30 years since it was built in 1975. He discussed the building condition deficiencies, but pointed out that, compared to the other buildings, it was in relatively decent shape. He indicated that it would cost $840,000 to fix the building problems, but that would not address the program space needs. The public opinion research found 73% wanting to keep the ACC on site and 27% wanting to move it to a new community center. Council r Hennagin asked why the ACC needed more space if there were a declining number of people using the programs and facility. Ms. Gilmer explained that the social service programs offered at the ACC were increasingly busy, but the recreational programs have leveled off because the facility was outdated and not able to offer the more active recreation, and health and wellness programs that the members wanted. She indicated that the average age of the facility users was 68 to 70. Mr. Williams reviewed the West End Building building analysis (WEB Report, p.21-26). He noted the financing for the WEB, and the average of $894,000 in annual interest and $250,000 a year in operational costs. He discussed the building condition deficiencies (pp.21-22). He pointed out that this was the only City facility currently underutilized. He mentioned the six potential public uses for the building (p.22), and listed several potential private uses, such as office and education. He reviewed the options and costs for different scenarios utilizing the WEB for various configurations of City Hall offices, a library, and police/9-1-1 dispatch. These included moving City Hall permanently to the WEB, using the WEB for a temporary City Hall while the City either built a new one in the downtown or repaired the current building, and either leasing or selling some or all of the WEB property. He pointed out that they could mix and match the individual elements in the scenarios however the Council wanted. He mentioned the suggestion from the Urban Land Institute to consider longer-term development strategies for an east end anchor for the Kruse Way corridor, and redeveloping the property to make a better connection between the Kruse Way and Lake Grove corridors. He reviewed the public opinion results on the various WEB options (p.26). He indicated that, while no one option received majority support, 30% would sell the building and the remaining 70% chose options in which the City kept the property. He mentioned that police/9-1-1 and a branch library received the most support as the types of services to move out to the WEB. He commented that, while staff identified several funding options for addressing facilities needs, they needed Council direction on the types of public uses involved before exploring funding options further. Councilor Jordan thanked Mr. Williams for the thoroughness of the report. The Council discussed scheduling another study session to discuss the next steps. Councilor Jordan suggested holding off on having Mr. Davis back until the Council has discussed the options and removed the obvious ones from the table. The Council agreed by consensus. Mr. Williams asked the Council to inform him of any other options that the members wanted to look at, so that staff could start gathering that information. Councilor Olson asked for an updated cost estimate for replacing City Hall versus repairing it. She indicated that she had options questions as well as the overall issue of making decisions on the facility management plan. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 February 10, 2009 Councilor Tierney spoke to holding off on refining cost estimates until after the Council has narrowed the decisions and options. Councilor Jordan expressed interest in the mix and match of various options. Councilor Jordan asked if the City had a property survey of the commercial properties around Lake Oswego of an appropriate size to accommodate what the City was doing, or parcels that could be put together. Mr. Williams commented that, while some of that information was undoubtedly available, he would like direction in terms of what types of facilities the Council wanted to move forward on before really studying that question. Councilor Hennagin commented that, following his tour of the Maintenance Services Building, he found it hard to believe that any repair or remodel of that building would make it viable. He noted that the South Shore Fire Station also had issues, but he did not know how pressing the need was to address those two buildings. He pointed out that the other four buildings interrelated with each other. He spoke to dealing with the interrelated facilities first, unless something had to be done on the first two facilities within a couple of years. Mayor Hoffman spoke to working with the options presented tonight, so as not to overload staff with too many additional options. Council members could bring up more options during the next steps discussion. He asked for a tour of the buildings, looking at them from a skeptic's perspective, before the next study session. Councilor Olson spoke to taking some steps at the study session, as opposed to simply discussing the matter further. Mr. Williams said that staff would lay out a strategy for looking at all the different options so that Council could decide what to take off or leave on the table. Mayor Hoffman confirmed that the Council would make some decisions at the next meeting. Mr. McIntyre asked those Council members with additional options they would like to consider to talk to Mr. Williams about them. He commented that Mr. Williams might have information on a given option that could clarify things for the Council member, or he might need to obtain hard data on the option. He spoke to making the next study session as productive as possible. The Council discussed the next study session, and scheduling it as soon as possible 4. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder D BY THE CITY COUNCIL: Hoffman, City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 February 10, 2009