Loading...
01/19/1984 - Minutes MINUTES TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD - SPACE NEEDS III REVIEW COMMITTEE JANUARY 19, 1984 DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT HALL BOULEVARD & DURHAM ROAD Chairman, Walter Munhall, called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. Members present: Susan Mueller, Jane Miller, Peggy Ober (arrived at 7:10 P.M.) , Dorene Thomas, Madalyn Utz. Dick Bendixsen, excused (out of town). Munhall read the most recent appraisal on the Crow site, as reported by Harold F. Meyer and Associates, Inc. , dated July 27, 1981. The amount is $1,175,000.00. Munhall also quoted $130,000 as the appraised value for old City Hall on Main Street, and $25,000 for the City-owned Pinebrook lots. Munhall reviewed the City survey results which were published in January 1983, in which respondents replied 413 "yes", 1229 "no" to supporting a separate Library bond levy; 548 "yes", 1050 "no" to a separate Police levy; and 912 "yes", 819 "no" to a Civic Center bond levy. Munhall announced that the Committee would be narrowing its choices for recommendation to City Council in the categories of a rental/bond, new construction and remodel. Eric Johanson, from Foster & Marshall, reviewed the latest financial report, using Zaik's revised comparison costs and including the Ash/Burnham proposal which had come from the previous meeting. Johanson explained that a further change from the first report showed that the City would purchase the GTE site in year 6 with a 20-year bond which would essentially create a third phase. Several members of the audience questioned the figures which Zaik had presented and thereby questioned the validity of the financial report. Munhall pointed out the Zaik figures had been applied to each proposal so that a comparison could be gained, emphasizing that he, too, recognized the "weakness" in the figures. Munhall urged the proposal sponsors to have firm numbers available so that City Council would have that information when it studied the Committee's report. Munhall announced that the Committee would like to hear from sponsors of proposals as a recap and to furnish any new information. Munhall presented the Ash/Burnham proposal, showing a "footprint" with the Library and City Hall located on the Public Works site (with Public Works remaining) and the Police located on the Davis property on Burnham Street. This plan would require purchase of the lot on Ash Street between Public Works and the Police site and purchase of the Davis property for a total cost of $3,033,900. This would be in two phases. Discussion followed pertaining to the placement of the Library and Police. It was pointed out that placing the Police on the Davis site would fit well with a future fire station on the adjoining Tarkanian lot. Putting the Library on the Public Works site would take advantage of the park area as an aesthetic feature. There was also Minutes - Tigard Library Board - Space Needs III Review Committee - 1/19/84 Page - 2 - discussion regarding public works needs. Frank Currie, Director of Public Works, pointed out that the Public Works operations would probably be able to remain on the site for 5 years only. Miller suggested securing the Tarkanian lot for expansion of Public Works. Currie said he preferred a central operation and also questioned whether that was the best use of the land. Further discussion concerned parking which was designated on the Police site and the acquired Ash Street lot. A suggestion was to acquire some of the Crow property across Ash Street. One comment concerned the community's reaction to this use of designated park space. Hilary MacKenzie, representative for Sundeleaf, presented that proposal. She reviewed the plan to buy the Ash Street lot between Police and Public Works, using it and the Police site for parking. Police, City Administration and the Library would be built on the Public Works site, with Public Works remaining on the site initially. Discussion concerned how to treat Public Works relocation in 5 years. MacKenzie expressed the opinion that the 72nd site was too large for Public Works and that $700,000 was too expensive for that kind of operation. MacKenzie also reiterated that the true cost for her proposal was $45 a square foot which would reduce the cost of her proposal from those figures used by Zaik. Police Chief Adams pointed out that the average cost for a Police facility is higher. MacKenzie acknowledged that the cost for Police was higher and that $45 is an average. Bruce Clark, representative for R.A. Gray & Company, reviewed the proposal for the Air King site. He felt that in averaging the costs for the various sites that criteria had been overlooked. He reviewed the criteria and compared his proposal to those requirements, i.e. , location, accessibility, usability. He emphasized that the Air King proposal would offer a building that would last a hundred years, and would have low maintenance, noise control and expandability. He offered $3,002,740 as the firm price for two structures, totaling 45,200 square feet on three acres. In answer to a question by Mueller, Clark affirmed the $3,002,740 as a "firm price". In the discussion which followed, Clark pointed out that the buildings could be located "on the point" at Hall and Burnham, or further back and that further development in the area would be commercial/professional office space, whether or not the City "goes in". In discussing the noise from the railroad, Clark assured the Committee that the noise could be handled with a blank wall and appropriate landscaping. Gardner Williams, representing GTE, also expressed concern over the "numbers issue", feeling that it had "clouded the issue". He pointed out that the GTE building can be an interim proposal, as well as a firm proposal with a lease or a sale price, all negotiable. He emphasized thal' the GTE building would be appropriate for the Police for twenty years if the City chose to decentralize. He further stated that the building is available on 5, 10, 15 or 20 year lease options and that his client, GTE, was willing to accommodate the City. (The GTE building does not address Library space needs.) Discussion which ensued expressed approval of the building as an interim measure for City Administration and Police and a long term solution for Police or Administration. Other points discussed included whether or not Police would need all the space in GTE (as a sole occupant) and where would Public Works locate if Police and/or Administration were eventually moved to the Public Works site. One suggestion was to split Public Works administrative Minutes - Tigard Library Board - Space Needs III Review Committee - I/I9/84 Minutes - Tigard Library Board - Space Needs III Review Committee - 1/19/84 Page - 4 - million bond levy aiJ then go into a bid process to see what various bidders might offer for that sum. Maksym suggested that the Committee submit these alternatives to City Council. More discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of reducing footage, political climate, cost considerations and what will best suit the City needs. Frank Tepedino, audience, suggested cutting footage in order to "make an airplane" that will fly. He also urged the Committee to "call it as you see it", but to offer alternatives to the City Council. Discussion then followed on the subjective criteria for the various proposals. Munhall closed off audience comments and announced that the Committee would make its choices for the categories to be considered by City Council. He withdrew his proposal for the Ash/Burnham sites. For the rental/bond choice, the Committee designated the GTE rental for Police and City Administration and a bond to build the Library on the Davis site. As the remodel choice, the Committee designated the Crow proposal, to buy and finance with a bond. Choices for new construction to be financed by a bond were ranked in the following order: First - Sturgis; Second - Sundeleaf; Third - Air King. As a fourth choice, the Committee decided to indicate its choices for a straight build-to-suit lease. Sturgis was first choice and Air King was second. Prior to ranking the new construction proposals, members of the Committee discussed the pros and cons of each one in some detail. Location, cost, access, noise, revitalization of the area were all considered. Munhall then asked the Committee if it was ready to decide on one proposal as their prime recommendation to City Council. By consensus, the Committee declined to make one choice. Utz had commented that all proposals were well done and "in the same ball park" (financially) and so she would recommend sending only the categorized choices. Ober requested that persons in the audience inform others about the need for space and urged people to support Council's decision. Munhall announced that the Committee would meet one more time before presenting the report to the City Council on January 30. This meeting was announced for 6:30 P.M. at Fowler Junior High on January 30, 1984. Munhall expressed his thanks to members of the public, City staff and Committee members for all their input and participation. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 P.M. Irene E. Ertell IEE/pn(0210p)