HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/17/2006 Work Session
.
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17,2006
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225
Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, January 17, 2006 at 6:34 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Ballew, Lundberg, Fitch, Ralston, Woodrow, and
Pishioneri. Also present were Interim City Manager Cynthia Pappas, City Attorney Joe Leahy,
City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Proposed Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments. Article 23.
City Planner Gary Karp presented the staff report on this item. On November 1,2005 the
Planning Commission voted (5-0, with 2 absent) to recommend adoption of the amendments,
with revisions to the City Council. During the preparation of the Ordinance, staff had some
concerns regarding the proposal to require Type III Discretionary Use approval for Justice
Centers, fire stations, police stations including jails, and public transit facilities.
.
The staff report presented to the City Council on November 28, 2005 proposed an alternative to
the Planning Commission's recommendation. The City Council directed staff to take the matter
back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration. The City Council opened the
public hearing and continued it until January l7, 2006.
On January 4,2006 the Planning Commission held a work session and public hearing to
reconsider the level of review for fire stations, police stations, including jails, and public transit
facilities. The Planning Commission considered four review options: A) Retaining the Planning
Commission's original recommendation to the City Council (Type III Discretionary Use
approval), which utilizes the property owner/newspaper public hearing notice and allows for an
appeal of the decision to the City Council and eventually the Land Use Board of Appeals; B) The
original recommendation to the Planning Commission (a Type II Site Plan that the Development
Services Director could raise to a Type III review before the Planning Commission on a case-by
case basis); C) A modification of Option B that would require the Site Plan Review to be a Type
III review by the Planning Commission; and Option D) Allow the Justice Center to be listed as
an outright permitted use with no Site Plan Review or discretionary review by the Director or
Planning Commission and therefore there is no land use action to appeal. The Planning
Commission discussed Options A and D. The Planning Commission initially voted 4 to 3 against
Option D. The Planning Commission then voted 5 to 2 for Option A. The Planning Commission
motion approving Option A added the term "Justice Center" to the use list and changed the term
"police stations, including jail facilities" to "police satellite facilities". These two uses, as well
as fIre stations and public transit facilities, will be shown as "D" (Discretionary Use) on the use
list. The attached Ordinance has been amended accordingly.
.
Council noted the changes made. Staff would be bringing it forward for Council consideration
during the Regular Meeting.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 2
.
2. Justice Center Site Design Options.
Project Manager Carole Knapel presented the staff report on this item. In November 2005, the
City Council approved the Functional and Space Program for the Justice Center Project. The
design of the project is now underway. The architectural contract for the design ofthe facility
indicates that four options will be developed for the use of the site. The architect has now
developed these options for review by all the project stakeholders. The options include an
analysis ofthe pros and cons of each concept. In addition, the Project Team will present
comparative cost information on each option.
On January 17, the four options will be presented to the User Group and to other City staff. On
January 18, the options will be presented to the City's Executive Team and to the Community
Advisory Committee. In addition, the CAC will host a Public Forum in order to solicit input
from all interested community members.
On January 26, a Special Council Work Session has been scheduled. At that time, the four
options will be presented in detail to the City Council. Input from all the stakeholders and the
Public Forum will be presented to the Council as well.
3. Justice Center Consultant Contract.
.
Project Manager Carole Knape1 presented the staff report on this item. In November 2005, the
City Council approved the Functional and Space Program for the Justice Center Project. The
design of the project is now underway. As the design is being developed the constraints of the
site and the project budget limits will require adjustments to the Program. This proposed contract
provides for two work tasks. 1) The consultant staff will continue to participate on the project,
working with the architects throughout the design phase. Their task during this phase will be to
work with the design team and with the City staff to ensure that the design of the facility will
continue to incorporate the operational efficiencies required for this project. 2) When the Council
approved the Functional and Space Program, they also approved the establishment of a City Task
Force which would be assigned to discuss, evaluate and make recommendations to the Council
on a series of policy issues which were identified in the Program and which will affect the
operation of the new jail facility. The proposed contract with Liebert and Associates includes
work with the Task Force on this assignment. Funds for this contract are available through
savings from the negotiation of other project consultant contracts and funds allocated in the
project budget for consultants. Previous work performed by Liebert and Associates has been
completed early and at a savings of approximately $10,000.
This proposed contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney and has been found to be in
compliance with the Springfield Municipal Code with regard to selection of consultants (Section
2.708 (2)(e) as described in the attached Council Briefing Memo (Attachment A). This Code
section provides for the exemptions to the competitive selection process. As described in the
attached Memo, the selection of this consultant is based on the cost of the work, the expertise of
the consultant, references from completed projects, capacity to perform the work, educational
and professional record, availability to perform the work, and timeliness of delivery of services.
.
Ms. Knape1 said Council requested that if additional work by this consultant was necessary, a
new contract should be brought back to Council. This contract is therefore a new contract rather
than an amendment to the first contract. She noted the purpose of the contract and said it would
be brought back to Council during the regular meeting for consideration. She discussed the
benefit and importance of having the same consultant work on the next phase of the project as
the four options were considered. She noted that the site design options being considered might
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 17,2006
Page 3
.
require modifications in the approved Program. Also, because costs of construction were
increasing significantly, there may need to be some Program adjustments caused by budget
constraints. In addition, Mr. Liebert would support the work of the Council's Task Force.
Councilor Ballew asked how much the original contract was for.
Ms. Knape1 said the original contract was for $93,600.
Councilor Ballew said she would like some type of attachment which showed project contracts
and the total costs associated with the project to this point.
Ms. Knape1 said she could provide a monthly update on costs in the Communication Packet.
Councilor Lundberg said she would not be supportive of this. She discussed those already
involved, such as the architects, the consultant and the contract manager/general manager
(CM/GC). She did not support spending additional funds at this time. She said the CM/GC was
to move into the next phases. She did not want to pay more for the expertise around a jail when
it was still not certain a jail could be built.
Ms. Knapel said the focus on the Liebert contract was the operation and security of the Police
Department and Courts, as well as the Jail.
.
Councilor Pishioneri said he saw the importance of this contract. He noted a concern he had
with page ll, task D in the contract, regarding Standards Compliance. He asked if Mr. Liebert
would run the design on ACA certified standards because that was not required for this type for
facility.
Ms. Knape1 said she agreed. They would not be going through the accreditation process, but
would look to those standards for guidelines. Those areas that were critical could be covered.
Councilor Pishioneri further discussed those standards. He asked if the language was too
restrictive.
Ms. Knapel said the contract language could be modified to indicate that Mr. Liebert would
advise the City regarding how the design met ACA and Oregon standards.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:48 pm.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
.
Attest:
~kowo--
Amy Sow
City Recor. er