Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2009-04-14 Specialco 0, LAKL CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2009 q[GON Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:57 p.m. on April 14, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, Tierney, Johnson (6:42) and Jordan. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director; Denny Egner, Assistant Planning Director; Brant Williams, Director of Economic and Capital Proj cts 3. COUNCIL BUSINESS 3.1 Findings, Conclusions and Order for NW Housing Alternatives Appeal (AP 09-02/LU 07-0031) - request to continue adoption to April 21 Mayor Hoffman noted that he was recused. Councilor Jordan moved to continue the adoption of the findings, conclusions, and order to April 21. Councilor Olson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, Tierney, and Jordan voting (aye.' (5-0) Mayor Hoffman mentioned that he, Councilor Jordan, and Mr. Powell have been consulting with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission on how to deal with the ethical issues arising from a lawyer in a law firm and the spouse of a lawyer in a law firm sitting on the City Council and making decisions on issues involving people representing businesses that have some sort of a relationship with the law firm(s). He indicated that they were making progress in sorting out the situation. 3.2 Award of a public improvement contract for the Lake Full Phase of the Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer (LOIS) Replacement Project Councilor Jordan declared a conflict of interest and recused herself from the vote. She explained that the winning bidder was a client of her husband's law firm. She stepped down from the dais. Mayor Hoffman noted that he had no potential or actual conflicts in this situation. Mr. Komarek presented the staff report recommending Council approval of a public improvement contract award to Advance American Construction in the amount of $26,158,373.00 for the construction of the lake full phase of the LOIS project. He directed the Council to the staff report for the lengthy discussion of the bidding and bid evaluation process used by staff in selecting the winning bidder (pp.1-3). He mentioned using a pre -qualification process and a competitive bidding process as allowed by the Oregon Revised Statutes. He noted the two primary criteria used in the bid evaluation process: responsiveness and bidder responsibility. He reported that Advanced American Construction was the low bidder; staff found their bid responsive and the company a responsible bidder. He noted that Dee Burch and Jeff Harper were present from Advanced American Construction. Mayor Hoffman mentioned that Jon Holland from Brown & Caldwell was also present. COUNCIL QUESTIONS At Councilor Moncrieff's request, Dee Burch, Advanced American Construction President, described his company's experience in doing this type of work and working on Oswego Lake. He City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 14 April 14, 2009 said that they have worked for the City and the Lake Corporation on 15 projects over the past seven years. He stated that they were a local marine heavy civil contractor that already owned most of the equipment necessary to do this job. He commented that while the LOIS project was unique, its various components were similar to other projects that his company has done in the past. He mentioned extensive work with the Corps of Engineers on fish improvement projects on Columbia and Snake River dams, as well as a significant amount of work in lakes around the area and the entire Northwest. He confirmed to Mr. Komarek that his company did the majority of the work on the East Bank Esplanade project in Portland. He mentioned recently completing a Corps of Engineers project to install a 2.5 million pound floating steel structure at the Lower Monumental Dam, which the National AGC recognized as one of the outstanding projects of the year. He stated that the LOIS project was well-suited to his company, personnel, and equipment. At Councilor Tierney's request, Mr. Komarek reviewed the members of the bid evaluation team. He confirmed that it was an engineers group. Councilor Tierney observed that a bid coming in significantly below the second responsible bidder always raised questions about whether a company made a low bid with the intent of making up the difference in change orders. He acknowledged that staff had confidence that this was not the situation here. Councilor Tierney asked for clarification on Advanced American Construction's comment to staff that they believed they will be treated fairly throughout the construction contract (#7, p. 3). Mr. Komarek explained that despite the best efforts and intentions on the part of both the City and the contractor, contract documents would never be perfect. He said that the unknowns inherent in an underwater project meant that situations would arise where it would take the team of the City Engineer and the contractor working together to achieve the common goal of completing the job as efficiently and economically as possible. He stated that they needed to treat each other fairly during such situations, and recognize that each party had interests that needed to be preserved. He described the City's interests as using the ratepayers' dollars wisely, efficiently, and not giving them away unnecessarily. He noted that the contractor's interests were trying to insure that their costs were covered and that they made a reasonable profit. Mayor Hoffman asked for further discussion on Mr. Komarek's follow up conversation with Mr. Burch in terms of the difference in Advanced American's bid and the other contractors' bids and the City engineer's estimate. Mr. Komarek indicated that the numbered points in the staff report (#1-7, p. 3) summarized his conversation with Mr. Burch. He mentioned that Mr. Burch had been part of the Barnard Team when the City was negotiating with that company for pre -construction services. Mr. Komarek explained that part of the risk for a contractor was the price of materials, fuel, and labor costs escalating during the course of the project. He recalled that materials and fuel prices had been at an all-time high during the Barnard negotiation period, and that bid had reflected higher contingencies in order to take into account the risk that those costs would continue to increase. He said that today they were in a completely different situation with much lower materials and fuel costs and high unemployment in the construction industry. He speculated that companies like Advanced American were thinking more long term. They wanted to submit competitive bids and keep their good employees so that they did not have to lay them off and then try to re -gather them once the economy recovered. He mentioned other factors considered in risk analysis. These included the better understanding that the City has gained of the project since last summer, and clear, unambiguous, and easily understood construction documents, such as Mr. Holland and his team have produced. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 14 April 14, 2009 Mr. Burch confirmed that they considered the factors mentioned by Mr. Komarek. He pointed out that his knowledge was based on the work his firm did to develop their estimate; he could not know what other companies were thinking. He commented that he found it mind-boggling that four reputable firms could come to such radically different conclusions regarding the project cost. He described the process that his firm went through in studying the project and talking with the City and Brown & Caldwell regarding the many difficult technical issues involved. He commented that if they had known that the bids would come in so differently, then they probably would not have bid that number. However, as a business, they looked at their costs and a fair market price for the work and allocation of risk. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that all his employees were union. Mr. Komarek confirmed that this was a prevailing wage contract. Councilor Hennagin asked if it was a standard practice in marine construction to put tethers down into the ground through the water. Mr. Burch indicated that while it was a very common way to put in structural members, this particular application was unique. He observed that this construction element was one of the biggest unknowns on the project. Therefore, there were methods within the contract and specifications to deal with unforeseen circumstances, such as the geotechnical information not being correct. The City structuring the contract to pay for problems only as they occurred allowed the company to reduce the contingency on the project. He reassured Councilor Hennagin that their construction and testing methods would verify that the tethers would be adequate to bear the structural load required, and not pull out of the lake. Councilor Olson wondered whether the higher bids came from other companies not having the same equipment available that Advanced American did. Mr. Burch reiterated that he could not speak for the other companies. He mentioned that his equipment was portable for use on lakes, while most other marine contractors had fixed equipment based in Seattle or the Bay area and not accessible for use in a lake. Councilor Johnson asked for discussion on how Advanced American would deal with the residential location of this project, and its impacts on the neighbors. Mr. Burch said that they were aware of the high profile nature of the project and the needed sensitivity to the surrounding neighbors. He reviewed the discussions they have had about mitigating noise and trying to make things as least disruptive as possible. He mentioned their purchase of a vibratory hammer to do the majority of the pile driving work. He explained that this hammer was pioneered in Europe around residential areas and historic buildings to minimize vibration and sound. He noted that they could not do much about the impact hammer noise, but it was of short duration spread out over time. He emphasized that his company had a lot of experience in working around many communities, and has won awards for partnering. He addressed the issue of change orders raised earlier. He mentioned that in the history of his company, they have had only one to two arbitrations. He emphasized that they worked to solve problems with the owner and to minimize litigation. Councilor Johnson moved to award the public improvement contract for the Lake Full phase of the LOIS project to Advanced American Construction in the amount of $26,158,373.00. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, Tierney, and Johnson voting `aye.' (6-0) Mr. Burch indicated to Mayor Hoffman that he did not know how many jobs this project would create (outside of his 40 fulltime employees) in the subcontractors and support industries, but it would have a significant impact. 4. STUDY SESSION 4.1 M tro Urban R s ry and Local A piration City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 14 April 14, 2009 Mr. Egner gave a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the objective for the evening was to get direction regarding a statement of local aspirations to submit to Metro, per Metro's request. He reviewed Metro's various planning initiatives in process at this time (p. 1). He noted that the Urban/Rural Reserves set the big 30 to 50 year framework, which would potentially guide the urban growth boundary decisions. He mentioned that the streetcar transit corridor from Portland to Lake Oswego was a given for study; therefore, Lake Oswego not submitting an aspiration statement did not hurt that project. He explained that the aspiration statements of communities, such as Beaverton and Tigard, helped Lake Oswego because their transit hopes involved transit corridors running through Lake Oswego. He emphasized the importance of Lake Oswego submitting an aspiration statement to Metro because Metro was beginning to look at community aspiration statements with respect to urban and rural reserves. He indicated that the aspiration statement drafted by staff touched on the key points required by Metro (p.2). He discussed the growth and development element as it related to housing. He noted that Lake Oswego's target capacity (as mandated by Metro) was constructing just over 4,000 dwelling units from 1998 to 2017. Since 1998, the community has seen 756 dwelling units built, for an average 80 per year. He indicated that Lake Oswego had room for around 3,000 additional dwelling units, which staff believed could locate near or at the edge of the city's existing town centers. He explained that the aspiration statement retained the target capacity but shifted the timeframe for achieve the target further out. He mentioned that Metro was looking for communities wanting to take more housing units within the current urban growth boundary, which would reduce pressure to expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). If the region did not expand the UGB, then it could use regional funds more efficiently by focusing them on projects inside the boundary, instead of on projects along the edge. He discussed town center development. He noted that the City has done much to implement the downtown redevelopment plan, including new residential development as part of a creating a mixed use walkable town center. He commented that the Lake Grove Village Center Plan would create a mixed use walkable town center that would look different than the Downtown. He indicated that the aspiration statement described those two processes as evidence of the City's commitment to town center development. He noted that the aspiration statement also discussed the Foothills area as an opportunity to place more of the target housing in the Downtown in a transit oriented environment. Councilor Jordan pointed out that the original 1998 analysis included Foothills as an industrial zone and areas in Lake Grove not yet zoned mixed use. She asked if the aspiration statement anticipated the residential land within the City's urban services boundary (USB) but outside the city eventually coming in as smaller parcels. Mr. Egner confirmed that the 1998 analysis included the USB residential lands in its capacity numbers. He explained that the location of housing units was shifting from those lands (which did not build out to their expected density upon annexation) to the mixed use developments in the town centers. He emphasized that this was not a shift in numbers, but rather a shift in location. Councilor Jordan pointed out that that pattern eased the pressure on existing neighborhoods for the time being. She noted that they still had the 1998 capacity because the City has not changed the zoning of the residential areas included in that analysis. Mr. Egner concurred that in theory, they had the capacity. However, the actual build out pattern has been to compromise those densities to some degree. He confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the aspiration statement was not saying that the community could take more density, but rather that its focus would be on developing density in mixed use areas and central cores of activity, as opposed to infill development in the neighborhoods. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 14 April 14, 2009 Mayor Hoffman described how the large one to two acre lots in Forest Highlands, although reduced upon annexation to R-7.5 from R-13 in the county, were not building out at that density. Thus, the city was losing housing units in some areas between the city limits and the USB. He emphasized that the capacity was strictly theoretical. He noted that other cities were wrestling with the question of accepting more density than they had agreed to in 1998. He indicated that Portland, Tigard, and Hillsboro have all said yes. Councilor Hennagin asked how Lake Oswego would be perceived if it said that it would not take more density. Mr. Egner said that he thought Metro would continue to look at Lake Oswego in a positive light because its successful downtown provided a model of good mixed use development. Mayor Hoffman concurred, noting that Metro was invested in the success of the streetcar, which, in turn, would trigger the Foothills development and more housing capacity. Councilor Tierney pointed out that the aspiration statement reflected where Lake Oswego was at today, but they should not make changes to it to satisfy a short timeframe without community participation. Mayor Hoffman concurred, and spoke of this issue as part of visioning. Mr. Egner agreed that this statement was vision light, which reflected staff's dilemma in stating community aspirations in advance of a possible new community vision and Comprehensive Plan amendments. Mr. Egner moved on to the transit element. He noted Lake Oswego's support of the Portland to Lake Oswego streetcar extension and better bus service to Lake Grove. He mentioned that Metro was thinking about light rail, instead of heavy commuter rail, on the Portland & Western railroad tracks; the concept would likely be studied in the next five years. He spoke of the various actions Lake Oswego has taken that showed its commitment to environmental quality and sustainability, including adoption of flood plain ordinances and a sustainability plan, compliance with Title 3/13 (in process), establishment of a Sustainability Advisory Board, and strong open space purchases in partnership with Metro. He discussed the Stafford Basin element. He stated that the City's current plan said that the City would not support urban development or serve urban development in Stafford. He noted the plan's anticipation of a rural enclave in the upper basin. He encouraged discussion of what would happen if Stafford was designated an urban reserve area. He mentioned the idea of pushing the development south and tying it to transit service, thus focusing traffic east and west, as opposed to north and south and up through downtown Lake Oswego along Hwy. 43. He spoke of Lake Oswego having some sort of a decision making role with respect to Stafford. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Jordan made an editing correction to the last paragraph under Stafford Basin. Mayor Hoffman said that the message that he and the others attending Metro meetings have heard is that if the region could accommodate 200,000 to 300,000 additional housing units in the next 20 years, then Metro would not have to move the UGB. He noted that Metro was currently emphasizing corridors for discussion as locations for possibly increasing density, such as Lake Oswego's Country Club and Boones Ferry corridors. He mentioned the discussion point of whether it would be feasible or politically acceptable to increase density along Country Club in 40 years. Councilor Jordan recalled earlier discussions of making sure that alternative transportation developed along the 1-205 corridor before any urban development occurred. She pointed out that housing developing there before a light rail system or additional bus transit meant that the traffic could feed right through Lake Oswego. She spoke to making a very strong statement about the need to develop regional transportation in that corridor before any urban development occurred. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Jordan about the need for concurrency in the transportation system and the urban development in the Stafford node area in order to avoid establishing traffic patterns going through Lake Oswego. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 14 April 14, 2009 Councilor Tierney asked to see more statements regarding Lake Oswego's commitment to environmental quality and sustainability, including an aspiration of walkability. He commented that the study of Stafford as both urban and rural reserves indicated an uncertainty about the area. He asked why the document anticipated urban reserves. Councilor Jordan agreed that they did not want to anticipate an urban reserves designation, but she reiterated that if higher density/urban development should occur or be planned, it had to be concurrent with transportation. Mr. Egner clarified that the idea behind the statement that "Lake Oswego anticipated that the transit will be in place if higher density is developed on 1-205" was to position Lake Oswego to develop a strategy to protect the upper basin, should the basin receive an urban reserves designation. He agreed that they needed to be careful in how they said this. Councilor Hennagin agreed with Councilor Tierney that staff should expand the environmental and sustainability statements. He wondered whether the statement should include something about an internal transportation system, such as the shuttle bus studied in the past. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that Lake Oswego probably had five out of the six attributes of great communities, which were part of Metro's materials. He recalled West Linn and Lake Oswego both talking about siting a rural enclave in the upper basin in order to keep the two communities separate. Councilor Jordan commented that the statement did not call out enhancing connectivity under a specific multimodal system. She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she thought Mr. Egner had sufficient information and suggestions to bring a new draft back next week for Council approval. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 7:40 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 7:49 p.m. 4.2 West End Building Decision Process Mr. Williams noted that this was the Council's third study session on this process. He recalled the Council's struggle to get through the decision trees presented at the last study session. He commented that it was apparent that it would be a real struggle to work through each facility individually. He mentioned Councilor Tierney's suggestion to look at guiding principles and to try to figure out a way to look at the bigger picture. He reported that staff worked with Councilors Olson and Moncrieff (who approached staff) to devise a broader strategy on how to move forward within the complexity of all the issues evident in the big picture. Councilor Olson thanked Mr. Williams and Mr. McIntyre for their invaluable aid in helping them to formulate their thoughts into the written word. Councilor Olson commented that she and Councilor Moncrieff have been polar opposites on the issue of the West End Building, with Councilor Moncrieff advocating for a community center, and herself advocating to sell the building. She explained that after acknowledging that their two positions were no longer viable, they decided to try to formulate a compromise position that might help move the process along. She emphasized that this document was a draft, a working document for Council discussion. She indicated that she did not think it would be responsible to sell the building for less than a reasonable amount of money, since that had the potential of hurting the City's financial stability by taking money out of the reserves. She stated that her job was to protect the interests of the citizens. She commented that if the City received a reasonable offer, she would sell the building tomorrow. Councilor Moncrieff concurred that they had thought that if they could come together from opposite ends, then they might get some traction. She stated that their primary goal was maintaining the financial strength of the City. She spoke of dealing with each facility but also having broad-based community support for the Council decision. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 14 April 14, 2009 Mayor Hoffman spoke in support of the need to maintain the City's financial strength and stability, and not going into the reserves. He recalled that the primary message he heard from the rating agencies was that they looked at how the City handled the reserves; they were not much concerned about the $20 million purchase of the West End Building, but they did want to know how the City would handle that financial situation. Councilor Tierney asked what the difference was between the guiding principles in the document and goals. Councilor Olson described the goals as the results that the Council wanted to get out of the process, while the guiding principles were more like the rules shaping the framework within which the Council would move forward. Councilor Jordan commented that she found it difficult to accept these as goals and guiding principles because of the redundancy. She expressed her appreciation from Councilor Olson's and Moncrieff's work in giving the Council a framework to work from. She indicated that her number one goal was to provide safe, adequate, and sustainable public facilities that reflected the community's quality of life, and that were sound and lasting investments for the citizens. She emphasized the importance of a public facility lasting over a prolonged period of time. She described this as the overarching purpose for why the Council was doing this. Councilor Olson acknowledged the point, but clarified that their goals were more goals for this process. Councilor Jordan explained that she had not wanted to start with the West End Building because she was not certain that it fit into the City's plan. She indicated that she did want to make a decision about it. She asked what the building would do for the City if the Council decided not to locate City services in the building. She asked how they should manage the building if the Council decided to locate City services in the building. She argued that the West End Building should not be the driving force for the Council's thought process. Councilor Johnson pointed out that creating a guiding principle that kept City Hall and the library in the downtown precluded locating those functions at the West End Building. She indicated that she was comfortable having this discussion as part of the overall process for dealing with the City facilities. Councilor Tierney stated that his goal was to resolve the West End Building. He acknowledged that it could not be accomplished independent of other necessary decision elements. Councilor Hennagin spoke of taking a step-by-step approach. He identified the first step as agreement by the Council that it would be irresponsible to sell the building in this market. Councilor Jordan indicated that she preferred a statement speaking of containing expenses on the West End property while maintaining and enhancing its value for future sale or use, as opposed to stating that the City would keep the building for a given time period. Councilor Olson concurred, noting that their mention of three years was not cast in stone. Mr. Williams commented that one reason for some sort of timeline was to give a potential lessee some level of confidence, if the Council chose to lease the building. He indicated that if the Council wanted to sell the property, then that was where staff's energy should be focused. Councilors Olson and Moncrieff reviewed the seven goals (Draft, p.1): • Develop a plan that will gain broad community support and community consensus with emphasis on bringing the community together over the West End Building issue. • Given the complexity of City facility issues and their associated costs, develop an implementation strategy that may be longer-term, including an agreed upon set of priorities for moving forward. • Address health and safety problems with existing facilities. • In general, retain facilities and public services in the vicinity of where residents have come to expect them. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 14 April 14, 2009 • Provide opportunities for civic services and additional development in Lake Grove Village. • Provide a long term strategy for strengthening the juncture of Lake Grove Village and the Meadows -Kruse Way office corridor. • Explore other long term options for a recreation center. With respect to the second goal, Councilor Moncrieff explained that their draft plan looked at all the facilities studied, and included a goal of having an implementation strategy for prioritizing Council actions. Councilor Olson mentioned the importance of the long term nature of the plan. With respect to the fifth goal, Councilor Olson pointed out that this tied in with the guiding principle of keeping City Hall and the library downtown, while providing a City presence in the Lake Grove area. With respect to the sixth goal, Councilor Moncrieff mentioned looking at the Boones Ferry/Kruse Way intersection as a whole, and planning the whole corridor area for the long term best use of the properties there. Mr. Williams recalled that the Urban Land Institute had recommended looking at the bigger picture in that corridor. With respect to the seventh goal, Councilor Moncrieff commented that while this was not the right time to go out for a bond to build a community center, there was sufficient public interest to plan for a swimming pool and additional tennis courts in the future. Councilor Tierney suggested including a financial goal as an overarching goal. He referenced the goal that Councilor Olson articulated in her opening remarks about maintaining the financial strength and stability of the City. Staff distributed copies of Councilor Jordan's goals. Councilor Jordan explained to Councilor Johnson that she combined some goals and reduced the redundancy between the goals and the guiding principles, while retaining the concepts. Mayor Hoffman asked if there were any objections to Goals 1 through 7. Councilor Tierney indicated that he found them all very good, although the wording of Goal 4 was awkward. He said that he was not certain what the phrase 'where residents have come to expect them' meant. Councilor Hennagin commented that retaining facilities where the people have come to expect them could conflict with what was the most financially beneficial for the residents in the long run. Councilor Moncrieff noted the phrase 'in general,' by which they meant the facilities in general. She spoke of keeping City Hall and the library in the downtown area and locating the police/LOCOM where it made the best sense citywide. Councilor Hennagin recalled that it would cost $10 million more to keep the library and City Hall in the downtown, as opposed to moving them to the West End Building. He spoke to examining that concept very carefully. Mr. Williams pointed out that the facilities analysis looked at the overall costs only, and not the revenue sources. He confirmed that the least cost option was to move City Hall and the library to the West End Building. He indicated that a key issue for the Council was to decide whether its goal was to find the least cost option or to decide if there were other public policy issues as well. Mayor Hoffman emphasized that the filter was the overall guiding principle of maintaining the City's financial strength and stability. He commented that he saw the cost issue as different from the financial stability issue. Councilor Johnson agreed that maintaining the City's financial strength and stability was a good overall guiding principle. Councilor Jordan spoke of the social cost that was part of the financial strategy. She commented that if developing a central core with new transit options and increased housing density, then retaining the main public facilities in that central core maintained a social draw to the area. Councilor Johnson spoke to providing new opportunities for civic services, wherever they might be located. Councilors Olson and Moncri ff reviewed the seven guiding principles: City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 14 April 14, 2009 1. Retain City Hall and the Library downtown. 2. Explore opportunities to enhance the Lake Grove area, including providing civic services. 3. Address public health and safety issues with existing City facilities. 4. Because of current economic conditions, retain the West End Building for at least three years; maximize the use of the building, including both public and private uses. 5. Enhance the use of the West End property to maximize future use or resale. 6. Forego the idea of a City -initiated community center in the West End Building. 7. Develop a public policy strategy for addressing recreation needs in the community. With respect to Principle #4, Councilors Olson and Moncrieff both spoke of using Councilor Jordan's wording. Councilor Olson noted that #6 and #7 went together, in that they should not lose sight of the community's recreational needs (especially an additional swimming pool), even if they were foregoing a community center. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilors Hennagin and Moncrieff that the Parks & Recreation Department could look at finding a location for a future community center/swimming pool as part of the Parks & Recreation Master planning process. He suggested, with respect to a central location, that the Council keep in mind the need to limit the location to land already owned by the City. Mayor Hoffman commented that he heard Councilors Olson and Moncrieff saying that there was a difference between a community center and a recreation center. Acknowledging that a community center concept was too big for the current economic reality, Councilor Moncrieff spoke to looking at what the community's specific recreational needs were. Councilor Jordan recalled that the idea of a swimming pool at the West End Building generated a lot of support in the Westlake area for the building. Given that the Mountain Park Homeowners Association has agreed to redo their swimming pool, she questioned asking the public to focus on a swimming pool in the same area where people were already paying for a new swimming pool. Councilor Jordan agreed that the community needed another swimming pool, but she held that that was something to explore as part of the City's future recreation planning. She mentioned the need for more community meeting spaces, which they could consider in making decisions about City Hall and the library. She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she supported developing a public policy strategy for addressing recreational needs. Mayor Hoffman commented that he considered that discussion as part of the Parks & Recreation master planning. Councilor Johnson spoke in support of a goal that addressed community functions in a decentralized form. She noted the current economic climate, which argued against a centralized community center at the West End Building, and the Council's interest in sustainability and walkable communities. She mentioned the two separate ends of the town, and the opportunity to spread civic services around. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Johnson. She referenced the second guiding principle, which suggested providing a civic presence in Lake Grove. She mentioned possibly siting the police/9-1-1 center there. She spoke of establishing a library presence in Lake Grove (not a branch library) but possibly a research center or a computer lab with a community room. Councilor Tierney observed that the Council's plate was full of other civic projects at this time. He described these draft goals and guiding principles as a way to keep the matter on the frontlines. He indicated that guiding principles 4 and 5 did not communicate anything to him. Councilor Olson discussed her interpretation of those principles. She said that her assumption was that the City would sell the West End Building, but it needed to wait for an economic recovery to receive an acceptable offer. She described the three years mentioned as their collective guess for economic recovery. She recalled staff pointing out that offering long term leases would be a way for the West End Building to earn money while waiting for the economic recovery. She City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 14 April 14, 2009 mentioned earlier discussions of rezoning the property and doing things to enhance the property value for an eventual sale or a public/private partnership. Councilor Moncrieff spoke of short term and long term goals. She said that in the immediate term, she was frustrated that the City was not able to maximize the value of the West End property because they did not know whether they were going to keep it or sell it. She indicated that she, like Councilor Olson, was open to selling the building any time an acceptable offer came in. She agreed that if they were not going to sell the building for several years, then they should consider leasing it in order to get some recovery on the investment while planning what the best long term use was that would benefit the Lake Grove/Kruse Way area. Councilor Tierney asked if both Councilors were saying that the guiding principle meant that the West End Building was not a long term asset that the City wished to keep. Councilor Olson said yes. Councilor Moncrieff clarified that she would not know that until after the City did a study on the long term uses for the building. Councilor Hennagin explained that an underlying assumption for him was that if the sites of City Hall and the library were developed into housing, and Foothills developed into mixed use residential, those developments would add residents to the area and contribute to the vitality of the East End and its retail businesses. He held that City Hall and the library were not as productive to that vitality. He reviewed the cost figures provided to the Council, which indicated that subtracting the revenue gained from the sale of the City Hall and library properties from the costs of the West End Building meant that moving City Hall and the library to the West End Building was the least cost option. He commented that he had a hard time not thinking that a centrally located civic center would be as beneficial to the city residents as keeping City Hall and the library in the downtown. He held that he was taking into account the social values. He pointed out that the revenue from a sale of the Adult Community Center property would help with the cost of expanding a swimming pool/community center on the Safeco property, which the City already owned. Councilor Johnson reiterated her interest in decentralizing City services, as opposed to centralizing them on the West End property instead of in the downtown. She indicated that she did not support moving City Hall and the library to the West End Building. Councilor Olson mentioned the financial stability of the downtown core and its businesses. She indicated that being uncertain about some of the staff estimates, she and Councilor Moncrieff had asked staff to develop a more refined estimate for the cost of repairing City Hall versus building a new City Hall. Councilor Hennagin commented that he did not know how rough those estimates were, given that engineers did the work. He did not want to pay again for work already done once. He indicated to Councilor Olson that he understood that the figures did not include using Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) funds. Mr. Williams indicated that he was comfortable that the estimates provided were in the ball park, if the City acted on them. However, these were forecasts more than estimates because staff did not do any preliminary engineering. They simply had experts look at the buildings and forecast based on their expert knowledge of the industry and markets. He pointed out that high quality repairs or replacements might cost substantially more than the forecast indicated. Councilor Hennagin speculated that a centralized civic center would be less expensive in the long run than a decentralized form, in that it would not require multiple services, such as janitorial services for multiple buildings. Councilor Johnson conceded the point, if they were talking about economy of size. She argued decentralized civic services enhanced sustainability and walkable communities, which outweighed the economy of size issue. Mayor Hoffman noted that Councilor Johnson was comfortable with guiding principles 1 and 2, while Councilor Hennagin was not. He concurred with Councilor Moncri ff in not knowing what to City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 14 April 14, 2009 do with the building in the long term, which was why he would like to see a pian along the lines of principles 4 and 5. Councilor Tierney argued that the Council would use different tactics if it intended to sell the building at an opportune time than it would if it said that it did not know what to do with it. He reiterated that the Council was not giving direction and making a decision. He acknowledged that the variables in the situation could change, but he held that the Council had to give direction to staff and the community one way or the other. He spoke to phrasing this guiding principle in a way that was associated with maximizing the value. Mayor Hoffman held that it was more complicated than the Councilor's assessment. He pointed out that selling at an opportune time meant that the City had to have a beneficial opportunity, which could include a financial arrangement with the private sector that was not actually a sale of the building. Councilor Tierney acknowledged the point but reiterated that this language pushed the decision off for a few years. Councilor Johnson concurred with Mayor Hoffman that they needed to leave their options open for dealing with the building, rather than stating that they would sell it. Councilor Olson understood Councilor Tierney's point as the Council stating that it had not use for the property now or in the future, which she held left open the door for a trade or other arrangements. Councilor Olson indicated that she also understood Councilor Tierney's point that citizens would not support the Council if they did not understand the Council's intent. Councilor Johnson agreed that they needed to give the statement more purpose. She spoke of keeping the building for three years in order to have leasing options. She noted the statement of foregoing the community center but argued for maintaining the option of doing something that was not providing a community center. Councilor Tierney reiterated that the Council needed to make a decision about what it wanted to do and say so. He framed the question as either the Council decided the building was an asset with long term value, or it decided that it was not an asset to keep. Councilor Jordan indicated that she was not ready to commit to leasing the building until she knew what the cost of tenant improvements would be, nor was she ready to commit to enhancing the building for sale. She mentioned her understanding that the purchasing Council bought the property as a long term investment because it recognized the need for placing civic facilities on the side of town where there was a growing population. She concurred with Councilor Johnson that they needed community options in places where people could get to them without too much trouble. She pointed out the lack of transit access to the West End Building, and noted that it was a long walk from many areas of the community. She stated that she had no personal investment in the property or an idea of what the best decision would be. The future might find that either option (keeping the property for City use or selling it into private hands) had worked well. She cautioned against putting a price tag or for sale sign on the building. She pointed out a commercial real estate investor would know that the property existed and would approach the City if interested. She indicated that the principles should reflect the Council's willingness to look at deals offered by the private sector. Mayor Hoffman commented that he saw the Council as hung up on principles 4 and 5. Mr. Williams indicated that he saw the Council as hung up on principles 1 and 6. He said out that there were three main uses for the West End Building that would make it a viable long term asset for the City: City Hall, the library, and/or a community center. If the Council decided to keep City Hall and the library in the downtown, and to forego a centralized community center in favor of a dispersed community center, then it eliminated any public purpose. He pointed out that a public/private partnership had to include a public purpose. If the Council could agree on 1 and 6, then 4 and 5 became easier decisions. Mayor Hoffman disagreed. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 14 April 14, 2009 Councilor Johnson contended that the property could have a long term value for the City unrelated to providing civic services. She referenced the goal of providing a long term strategy for strengthening the structure of the Lake Grove Village and the Kruse Way office corridor. Councilor Moncrieff concurred with Councilor Johnson and Mr. Williams. She indicated her belief that the property was purchased for the purpose of a community center, but that was not a viable option in today's economy. Councilor Hennagin observed that the Council agreed that it would be a mistake to put the building on the market today and sell it. Instead, the Council needed to find a use for it in the interim in order to create some income from it. He questioned whether the Council could make a decision about the long term use of the building in this market. He spoke of maximizing its productive value. Councilors Moncrieff and Olson read the implementation strategies and their bullet points (Draft, pp. 1-2): 1. Retain City Hall and the Library downtown. 2. Explore opportunities to enhance the Lake Grove area, including providing civic services. 3. Address health and public safety issues with existing City facilities. 4. Because of current economic conditions, retain the West End Building for an undetermined number of years (at least three years); maximize the use of the building including both public and private uses. 5. Enhance the value of the West End property and maximize future use or resale. 6. Forego the idea of a City -initiated community center at the West End Building. 7. Develop the protocols and strategy for addressing recreation needs in the future. Mr. McIntyre confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the City could use LORA funds to rebuild City Hall on its site, as it was part of the redevelopment district. Mayor Hoffman observed that the general priority for implementation strategies was about the same as the goals, except that number 1 was to develop a draft resolution. Councilor Olson confirmed that the strategies were listed in priority order. Councilor Jordan asked for language in the implementation strategies indicating that there might be other ways to address the situation; the list was not all inclusive. Councilor Tierney asked for further discussion of the use of LORA funds for City Hall, and whether that use was consistent with the typical use of LORA funds. Mr. Williams recalled that the idea that surfaced at the last study session was to use tax increment funds for public facilities in the urban redevelopment district as a way to minimize a general obligation bond measure. Mayor Hoffman recalled that Hillsboro used urban redevelopment money for its City Hall. Councilor Tierney suggested rephrasing the bullet point to read 'considering LORA funds.' Councilor Jordan commented that if they moved City Hall to the West End Building, without having an end strategy in mind to indicate that the move was temporary because they would rebuild or repair City Hall on its current site, then City Hall could end up simply staying at the West End Building. She indicated to Councilor Olson that the costs to lease vacant office space on Kruse Way were still high. She spoke to the need to consider whether it made sense as a long term strategy to move City Hall to the West End Building, if they intended to keep the City Hall functions at the current location. She commented that with the health and safety issues at City Hall, they might want to move dealing with that building up on the priority list. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Olson that while the existing air quality was fine in City Hall, there was the ongoing challenge of containing the contaminants within the walls while trying to get the maximum use out of the building. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 14 April 14, 2009 Councilor Hennagin stated that no one has convinced him that City Hall played any role in the economic vitality of the East End. He described coming to City Hall for permits or whatever as a single purpose trip with no side stops at retail businesses. He argued that if all the Council gave Lake Grove was a library presence or the police station, then it was continuing to treat Lake Grove as the 'ugly stepsister,' as opposed to an equal part of the city. Councilor Olson clarified that they suggested putting the police and 9-1-1 in Lake Grove because those departments have indicated a desire for a central location; they received many calls from Lake Grove and Mountain Park. Councilor Hennagin agreed that Lake Grove was the best location for a combined police/LOCOM center, along with the Municipal Court. Mr. McIntyre mentioned that the Police Department has expressed interest in keeping the Municipal Court close to them, as being able to page police officers working at their desks to come to court was a more efficient use of their time (less overtime) than officers having to wait around for their turn to testify. He indicated that the tradeoff was losing the space at City Hall. Councilor Johnson commented that they did not have to put City Hall and the library in the same building downtown, although there was an economy of scale element in combining them. She pointed out that they needed to know the costs of these various options. Th Council agreed to go through Councilor Jordan's goals, and then continue the discussion to the next night. Councilor Jordan explained that her idea had to do with safe, adequate, and sustainable public facilities that were a sound investment and that would last. She indicated that her idea incorporated the Council discussion regarding the value to the City financial status and strategies. She argued that given the controversy in the community, they could not answer the question about the West End Building until they have answered all the questions about their plans for City facilities. She spoke of needing to make a decision in advance of a future bond measure (#3). She explained that she combined Lake Grove redevelopment with #4 in combining the idea of dealing with the Meadows, Kruse Way, and Lake Grove area as a whole. She pointed out that Lake Grove Village did not want to be a downtown center; it was a narrow slice of commercial mixed use development, which neighbors did not want to see push mixed uses back into the neighborhoods. She commented that given that set up, people might get nervous about where the City would locate police/LOCOM in Lake Grove. She suggested modifying the language to say that the City would explore that option. She confirmed to Councilor Tierney that one implementation strategy could be to consider siting a police/LOCOM building in the area. Mayor Hoffman emphasized that the Council was working on a draft, and has not committed to anything discussed in terms of the concepts put forward by any of the Councilors. He suggested having a goal of developing a tentative resolution tomorrow night. He noted the Council consensus to have public input included in the process. Mr. McIntyre observed that the discussion tonight has swung between concepts and wordsmithing. He suggested that the Council not worry about wordsmithing right now, but rather come to a conclusion and let staff tidy it all up. He mentioned that a guiding principle on which the Council needed to agree was to move the process forward, even if there was not a unanimous vote on all points. He urged the Council to let staff help with the wordsmithing. He commented that he did not think the Council would come to a conclusion tomorrow, but it did need to get the big concepts down. At that point, staff would fine tune the language. He mentioned that he saw the Council stumbling over the financing question, which he described as a driving motivator in the decision making. He asked if the Council would be having this discussion if the bond had passed last May. He said that if the answer was no, then they were studying the wrong topic. He confirmed to Councilor Olson that the discussion would have City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 14 April 14, 2009 focused instead on the overall facility issues, as the West End Building financing would not have been a problem. He indicated that he had built a financing plan into the budget because he had to: the line of credit expired on July 7. He spoke of the need to finance the building through a permanent structure, and to decide whether it was a long term financial investment or not. He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the refinancing was semi-permanent, as he has received no instructions regarding permanent financing. He confirmed to Councilor Tierney that the building was not the asset against which the bank made the loan. He confirmed to Councilor Jordan that in the event of foreclosure, the bank would not take the building, it would take the City's money. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Tierney that he would clean up the documents and make the changes in time for tomorrow night's discussion. 4a Congregate Care Housing Councilor Hennagin recalled that the Council had agreed to send the congregate care housing ordinance back to the Planning Commission for revision. He indicated that he wanted to make sure that a resolution to do so got on an agenda. Mr. Powell clarified that the Council could decide by motion to direct the Planning Commission to review and revise the ordinance. He said that it was up to the Council to decide to do that when it adopted the appeal hearing findings or not. Councilor Olson and Mayor Hoffman asked for discussion first. 5. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON rch 16 10 Jack Hoffman, Ma City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 14 April 14, 2009