11/24/1981 - Minutes Wp
CIVIC CENTER SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
November 24, 1981
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM by Chairman Gary Fox.
Members present: Gary Fox, Gerry Edwards and Howard Duffy. Absent:
Steve Alexander and Yvonne Burgess. Non-voting members present: J.B.
Bishop and Floyd Bergman. Guests attending: Irene Ertell (City Librarian)
Linda Sargent and Bob Jean (City Staff) Dr. Samuels and Betsy Chick. Also
in attendance were Dennis Brun, Bob Moore and Jim Breithaupt from the
architectural firm chosen to do the footprint work on the center.
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as read.
The first item on the agenda concerned a contract between the City
of Tigard and the architectural firm of Brun, Moreland and Christopher.
Discussion centered on specific areas of service to be provided by this
contract. Bob Jean presented a list of items for consideration by the
subcommittee. Extensive discussion identified additional areas which
committee members felt ought to be included in the contract. Elements
to be included in the working scope of the contract are as follows:
1 . Architects are to review and make recommendations on space
needs, both present and future, for city services as well as potential
allocation of other space. (Basic information to be provided by city
staff, reviewed by architects, and referred to committee) .
2. Architects are to consider options of total building program
with possible lease-back of currently unneeded space as opposed to a
building plan accomplished in stages over a period of time.
3. Architects are to review a full range of costs and/or policy
options.
4. Architects will review physical sites as proposed, consider
merits of central as opposed to decentralized locations, and make their
recommendations to the subcommittee.
5. A detailed footprint of selected alternatives is to be provided.
6. Architects will provide information on financing alternatives
and make a recommendation on what they see as the optimum time frame for
obtaining funding.
7. Recommendations will be provided to assist the committee in
promoting a community image via this civic center.
8. The contract will specify a dollar amount to be spent on this
footprint work.
Since the scope of work to be provided is somewhat more extensive
than originally planned, it may be necessary to approach City Council for
additional authorization and funds.
Page 1
Bob Moore was asked to outline the procedure by which the City of
Salem achieved its current civic center following the defeat of two pre-
vious attempts. The successful proposal , as submitted to the voters,
offered two alternative .sites, each of which included sketches of a
building on that site as well as the costs involved. A special election
was called for this purpose. Subcommittee members also learned that only
six weeks elapsed between the time the two sites were selected and the
bond election was held.
Dr. Samuels suggested that before site recommendations were offered
to the architects, the committee should narrow site choices by making a
decision as to preference on downtown vs. out-of-core area, one site as
opposed to multi-site etc. However, Dennis Brun responded that the com-
mittee might overlook some important point to be considered such as how
a civic center would ultimately effect the growth of the city. In addition,
the architectural firm might be called upon to justify deletion of a par-
ticular site without ever having had the opportunity to review the property.
The decision was made to have the subcommittee review and note recommendations
on each site proposal . However, all proposals will be forwarded to the
architects for their consideration.
A motion was made by Howard Duffy that the subcommittee recommend
that the city enter into a contract with Brun, Moreland and Christopher to
begin Phase I of the professional services on a footprint of the project,
criteria for said footprint to include those items as appear on Page 1 of
this report. The motion was seconded and unamiously carried.
Bob Jean recommended that Phase I should be ready for presentation
to City Council by January 15, 1982. However, Mr. Brun said that time
frame was not feasible because of the level of work to be accomplished and
the coming holiday interruptions. It was resolved that February 1 , 1982,
was a more realistic target date. Final proposal to City Council could
then be made on March 8, 1982, which would allow placing measure on the
May 18th ballot if that timetable is followed. Architects will meet with
city staff on December 3, 1981 , to work out a contract which will then be
submitted to City Council December 14th . A separate hourly contract will
be drawn up to cover interim service provided by architects such as meeting
with the committee December 3rd to advise us on financing and strategy.
The next subcommittee meeting will be Tuesday, December 8, 1981 , at
8:00 PM immediately following the Urban renewal presentation. The meeting
will be at City Hall .
Meeting was adjourned at 10:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Betsy Chick
Secretary pro tem
Page 2