Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/1996, 1 - MULTI MODAL TRANSIT TRANSFER CENTER r council j acEnaa Rep= CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Michael McCluskey, Public Worcs Director7'� SUBJECT: Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center CAO RECOMMENDATION 1. Pursue the newly identified Amtrak Station location for the siting of the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center. 2. Develop a viable sub-center within the core of the City downtown which will provide excellent and convenient service to transit passengers to the Government Center and the downtown. 3. Discontinue pursuing the former Toyota property. 4. Adopt a resolution authorizing the CAO to execute a transfer agreement for an allocation of TCI funding for additional Amtrak Parlung facilities. DISCUSSION At the May 7, 1996 City Council meeting, an agenda item was brought forward to the Council for its consideration on the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center. Because the agenda item had not had sufficient time for interested citizens to review and become familiar with the issues, the Council asked that the item be continued until June 4, 1996. On May 13, SLOCOG staff met with SLORTA and City staff to discuss followup to the May 7 meeting. A SLOCOG deadline for decision making was particularly emphasized at this meeting (Attachment 1), and plans were made for a followup with the many interested parties. On May 17, 1996 a "stakeholders" meeting was held at the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments conference room. Representatives from the following organizations attended: Sierra Club, ECOSLO, San Luis Obispo County, Air Pollution Control District, the BIA, Downtown Concept Plan Committee, Mass Transportation Committee, Chamber of Commerce, SLORTA, SLOCOG, and the City. The group reviewed the results of previous studies conducted by consultants working on behalf of SLO Transit and SLORTA, and results of recent ridership surveys. The problems with acquiring the current Toyota site were discussed, as well as current bus routes of both the SLO Transit system and the SLORTA system. After much discussion, it was generally agreed that the primary need is to provide excellent service to the downtown for shoppers and commuters. With this in mind, moving the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center site to the Railroad property became less important than providing excellent service to the downtown. Thus, in general, the group agreed that the Railroad site would make a good Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center, but that additional work effort would be needed to assure that superior service was provided to the downtown. This would be accomplished via a "sub-center" which would clearly and unmistakenly be recognized as the Downtown Center. T Council Agenda Report - Multi Modal Page 2 The Railroad Site Two major questions were asked by the City Council on May 7, 1996 and again asked by the group of stakeholders at the meeting of May 17: 1) how would the site affect bus routing?, and 2) how would the site be physically developed? All current SLORTA bus routes which access the downtown currently pass by the Railroad site and thus no changes in routing would be necessary for the SLORTA system. All routes in the SLO Transit system pass by the Railroad site, except Route 3 which would require a minor deviation from its route along Broad Street to the Railroad site before continuing its southern direction along Broad Street. No services to the downtown would be deleted by locating the Transfer Center on the Railroad property. Three conceptual layout plans for the property's development as a Multi Modal Center were developed prior to the May 7 meeting. However they were not presented to the Council,because the Council wished the agenda item to be continued. These layouts are shown as attachments, Alternatives 1-3. At the meeting of May 17, it was emphasized that these were only preliminary layouts which were done to judge the feasibility of the site for potential use. These drawings show that the site is indeed a feasible site. Much more additional work would be necessary to totally refine and redesign the final Transfer Center, should it be successful. Additional ideas were raised by various stakeholders at the May 17 meeting, which will need to be looked at in terms of ultimate development of the site. As currently anticipated, no bus routes would be required to traverse the existing Amtrak or Railroad Square parking lots. Access would be provided via a new connection to Morro Street and a connection to High Street; signalization will most likely be required. Sufficient funding exists to cover all such anticipated costs. During the May 17 meeting, new information arose which further makes the Railroad site a better choice for a Multi Modal facility. SLOCOG staff informed the stakeholders that inter-city motor coach activity is projected to increase at the train station. SLOCOG is currently working with the Caltrans Rail Program and Amtrak to establish inter-city motor coach connection to trains in San Jose on the Capital Corridor. Four State supported trains currently operate between San Jose and Sacramento. Ideally, there will be an early morning bus departure available to passengers connecting to trains, and which would allow non-rail passengers boarding. An analysis of the cost is now underway. If the results of the analysis are available, service could begin as soon as October 1996. Thus, in addition to bus transfer between SLORTA and SLO Transit, bus passengers would be able to board Amtrak motor coach facilities for transport to San Jose even though they would be non-Amtrak rail passengers. The impact upon the potential Center of the pending Historic Railroad Area Master Plan, currently proposed by the Community Development Department was also discussed at the May 17 meeting. After some discussion, there was general agreement that the proposed Master Plan would be of benefit to the community and the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center in that any development by the Center would be in compliance with the historic nature of the area and would also likewise allow the area to be redeveloped in an acceptable manner that might not.otherwise occur for some time. The Railroad Area Master Plan is the subject of a separate agenda item also scheduled for June 4, 1996. �-ate Council Agenda Report - Multi Modal Page 3 The issue of what would happen to the existing old freight station was discussed at the May 17 meeting. Many ideas have been raised regarding the use of this building. They are as follows: a historical railroad museum, a model railroad club facility, a private/public partnership venture to service the needs of the transit users, or some other use which might be Railroad related. It was felt that in concert with the Railroad Master Plan, that numerous ideas could be further studied and that the need to service transit passengers should also be considered. Successfully implemented in other regions throughout the State, have been small shops (such as donut shops) selling newspapers, trinkets, bus passes, etc. and which provide restroom facilities for transit passengers have been successful. Only a portion of the existing facility would be necessary for this type of operation. In pursuit of more information regarding the feasibility of a private/public partnership in this area, SLOCOG staff is making application for a Section 18d government grant. If successful, a$5,000 grant (requiring a City match of$5,000) would be received and the entire $10,000 would be used by SLOCOG to study various altematives that could be put into place at the Railroad site. Simply because the site is available, does not necessarily mean that the site is acceptable. Because the property is owned by the Railroad, significant soils and contamination testing must be done and the results must be acceptable prior to purchase and development of the property. Significant soils contamination was one of the two major reasons why negotiations on the Toyota site could never fully progress. Therefore, it is vitally important that the staff be allowed to proceed with soils testing of the area to assure that the area can be developed as a Transfer Center. The Railroad site appears to offer the most advantages towards becoming a true Multi Modal Facility. This site would have the ability to integrate pedestrians, bicyclists, SLO Transit system users, SLORTA system users, Amtrak users, non-Amtrak bus users, as well as drop off and pick up location for taxi services. Currently $1.8 million is available for the purchase and construction of the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center and the sub-Center. In addition another $582,000 is available, which also requires Council action, and if received total funding would approach $2.4 million for the various improvements. In conclusion, the Railroad site offers the best opportunity for a true multi use facility, has the best opportunity for increased funding, has the opportunity to be developed and enhance an area of town in a historic and positive manner and provide the kind of facility that has long been envisioned by this community. Staff therefore recommends that the Council authorize staff to proceed with property investigation, including appraisals and soils contamination investigation and begin negotiations with the Railroad for purchase of the property should it be deemed an acceptable piece of property. All final decisions on purchase of the property will be the joint decision of the City Council and the SLOCOG Board of Directors. City staff is working as lead agency in this jointly developed project. Council Agenda Report- Multi Modal Page 4 Other Sites That Have Been Reviewed A total of 13 sites were studied by Wilbur Smith and Associates in November 1993 for possible location of a Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center. Nine sites were discussed for various reasons and four were brought forward as recommended for further action. The four consisted of two "on-street" sites (Osos Street and Palm Street) and two "off-street" sites (Spring Toyota and Kimball Motors). The Kimball site was purchased by the County and the Spring Toyota property was chosen for further pursuit. At the May 7, 1996 Council meeting a number of new sites and ones previously studied were mentioned for further review. Staff has pursued those ideas and as also arranged to have a representative of Wilbur Smith attend the June 4th meeting. At the May 7th Council meeting, Councilman Romero asked that we study the AT & T parking lot. The parking lot was reviewed by Harry Watson, Transit Manager, and was found to be too small for a ten bus facility. Additionally, the parking lot is not for sale. Removal of that parking lot would severely impact the ability of the existing businesses located in the building to operate. Mr. Romero asked that staff review the firestation 41 site. The Public Works Manager, Al Cablay, reviewed the site and found it to be too small to accommodate the busses and the needs of the transit system. Councilman Romero asked that the City study the vacant Arco site at the comer of Marsh St. and Osos St. This site is likewise too small to accommodate the ten bus system envisioned for the multi modal center. SLOCOG staff was asked to investigate using the remainder of the former Kimball Motor site which is currently occupied by a used car dealership. SLOCOG staff and SLORTA staff reviewed the site and found it to be too small to accommodate a multi modal center. In conclusion, besides the original thirteen sites studied by Wilbur Smith and Associates, these additional sites have been studied and, of all the sites studied, none appear to be feasible. UpcOminQ Impacts - The Cuesta Grade Project In addition to the ten bus facility recognized as being needed over the long-term, the short-term bus facility needs consist of an additional six busses which will be providing commuter bus service during the Cuesta Grade reconstruction project. SLORTA staff will be reviewing the use of the six busses and where the drop off points for those busses will occur. SLORTA staff will be available at the Council meeting of June 4th to answer questions regarding the use of these busses and how their use may be implemented to help effectuate long-term commuter patterns in the downtown. Downtown Sub-Center As mentioned earlier, the key focus of the stakeholders meeting was to provide exceptional service to the downtown and Goverment Center. As such, much discussion revolved around the locations available for such transfers to occur and whether or not those transfers should occur on public property or private property. Because an area large enough for ten buses to simultaneously Council Agenda Report - Multi Modal Page 5 meet, exchange passengers, and proceed on their routes would no longer be necessary (because they would now meet at the Railroad site) a much smaller area within the downtown core area could be developed to still provide the same level of service with a much higher recognition level so as to attract an increase in passenger service to the downtown. Three areas were primarily discussed: 1) Monterey Street, Santa Rosa to Osos; 2) Osos Street, Monterey to Palm; 3) Palm Street, Santa Rosa to Osos. In each case, no traffic disruption would occur as streets would remain open to existing traffic. Parking would be removed to allow for bus turn outs, but be created elsewhere where existing parking for buses was eliminated. Substantial improvements would be installed to enhance and identify the areas as major transit facilities within the downtown core. As mentioned above, all existing routes through the downtown would remain and service to the downtown would remain. The difference in service would result as a timed connection of all buses simultaneously now occur at the Railroad site. Passengers riding to the Transfer Center would have the opportunity to debark in the downtown, prior to the Transfer Center and passengers traveling northerly on SLORTA bus routes would experience approximately a five minute delay at the Railroad site prior to arriving in the downtown. Thus while all buses would continue serving the downtown, the times of arrival or departure of passengers in the downtown would be slightly different than now exists. Current ridership surveys taken on a Monday show approximately 71/o of ridership debarking for the downtown as its only destination. These passengers could continue to use the transit system to access the downtown. The transit managers for SLO Transit and SLORTA have prepared an exhibit showing bus routes through the downtown and the proposed transfer site and will be making a presentation at the June 4 Council meeting. The idea was raised of purchasing other downtown property, albeit much smaller, so as to provide a smaller offstreet facility for bus patronage. This idea and the three onstreet locations, as well as many other ideas, need further exploration in order to assure the kind of service levels expected by the stakeholders group, as well as the City Council. While all the stakeholders were in agreement that such a facility was needed, there were varying opinions as to the degree and type of such a facility. It was agreed that much further work needs to be done in order to clarify how this idea would indeed become a reality. Staff is therefore recommending that a separate work program be undertaken between the representatives of SLORTA and SLO Transit and the stakeholders group meeting to develop consensus on the best possible location and types of improvements needed to fully serve and provide exceptional service to the downtown and the Government Center. Toyota Transfer Center Site As recommended earlier in the May 7, 1996 staff report, staff is recommending the Council give direction to cease pursuit of this piece of property as the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center Site. A full description of the background and results of two years of negotiations is contained in the May 7 staff report (attached). ��S Council Agenda Report - Mu16 Modal Page 6 New Funding Available for Railroad Site The existing Amtrak Sae Diegan route has been very successful. As a result, a number of San Luis Obispo citizens leaving their parked cars in the area of the Amtrak station so as to use the San Diegan has created an Amtrak parking "problem". SLOCOG staff has identified $582,000 of TCI funds which are eligible to help reconstruct the Railroad site to provide for Amtrak parking to alleviate the Amtrak parking "problem". If these funds are successfully obtained, they can be combined with the existing Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center Site funds towards the full development of the entire site. A portion of the site would be used for Multi Modal facilities and a portion of the site would be used for Amtrak parking facilities. SLOCOG staff is preparing the paperwork that requests that the Department of Transportation and the California Transportation Commission approve the use of these funds to pay for the acquisition of the Multi Modal site and for environmental assessment and design of parking facilities. Staffs conversation with State transportation officials indicates that there appears to be support for reprogramming the $582,000 for City/SLOCOG use. In order for the City to access the funds once approved by the CTC, the City Council should authorize the City Administrative Officer to sign a Fund Transfer Agreement. The City may also ask the State for a Direct Allocation of funds at the beginning of the process to help pay for project activities such as preliminary engineering, environmental assessment, and land appraisals. Up to 10% of the total funds ($58,200) may be used for these activities. The attached Council resolution asks for a direct allocation of funds and authorizes the CAO to sign the Fund Transfer Agreement. Regardless of direction on the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center Site, staff feels that it is a wise and prudent course to apply for this funding. Should no Transfer Site be built, the funding could still be received and be used to provide the additional parking spaces to relieve the problem of success of the San Diegan run. Staff therefore recommends that the Council authorize the resolution requesting funding. Conclusion This staff report is significantly different than the one prepared for May 7, 1996. The items which remain the same are the recommendation to proceed towards purchase and development of the Railroad site for the Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center and the abandonment of the former Toyota property. Different from May 7 is the recommendation to proceed with an indepth study of new ways to serve the downtown in new areas accomplishing a major goal which is to service the downtown in an exemplary manner. Missing is the recommendation for strictly using a Monterey Street site. Additionally within the four weeks time from preparation of the May 7 agenda item to the preparation of this agenda item, a process for obtaining the $582,000 grant has become known and thus was also included in this agenda item. /"4 Council Agenda Report- Multi Modal Page 7 Staff is confident that with multiple agencies involved in cooperating together a successful Transfer facility and great service to the downtown can be accomplished. However all parties involved must understand that at the May 8 SLOCOG meeting, the SLOCOG Board of Directors voted to have definitive actions in place and firm recommendations to that Board by their meeting of August 7 or risk losing all funding. Shown on Attachment 1 is a letter from SLOCOG explaining the results of the May 8 SLOCOG meeting. It is crucial, therefore, that staff receive direction as to how to best implement the Council's wishes. Due to agenda deadlines, actions and decisions need to be known by the third week in July. Thus with six to seven weeks to proceed, firm and clear direction needs to be given. As noted in the SLOCOG. letter, staff is anticipating another meeting of stakeholders the week of June 10-14 to come to conclusion or to begin working towards conclusion of the best way of servicing the downtown with a Transfer facility or "bus meet" in the downtown. Staff feels that given the period available that the necessary work elements can be accomplished. CONCURRENCES The Community Development Department concurs with these recommendations. FISCAL ]MPACF As noted in the May 7, 1996 agenda item, approximately $1.8 million are at risk should this project not proceed. The chances of obtaining a $582,000 TCI grant are improved if the grant is tied to a Multi Modal facility,however, it could stand on its own in terms of providing Amtrak parking facilities. Should no decision be made, no funding would be available for enhanced facilities and as such the bus transfer points would remain as they are currently on Osos Street, between Mill and Monterey. Attachments: SLOCOG Letter Regarding Deadline Resolution Maps (3) May 7 Council Agenda Report NOTE: The Nelson-Nygaard and Wilbur Smith studies of Alternative Transit Transfer Center Sites have been previously distributed to Council and are available in the City Clerk's office for review. 6=Mn=W ATTACHIENT San Luis Obispo Council of governments Regional Transportation Planning Agency �'° �eero Metropolitan Planning Organization Pak o lc° Paso Robles Pismo h Congestion Management Agency san Luis Obeispo san ac Luis Obispo Counn May 17, 1996 Michael McCluskey Director of Public Works City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subj: Regional Multi-Modal Transit Transfer Center Dear Mike; At the May 8th SLOCOG meeting our Board discussed the status of the proposed Regional Multi- modal Transit Transfer Center within the City of San Luis Obispo. We provided a verbal report on the discussion at your Council's meeting the previous night when your staff was asked to meet and confer with various "stakeholders" in the city transportation system regarding the proposed focus on the "railroad site" for the project. . The SLOCOG Board expressed concern that: o The process of selecting and acquiring a site for this proposed project has taken an inordinately long time to develop and continued debate regarding viable options may be problematic; and o An appropriate site has not been selected yet and there are deadlines to meet regarding the use of the funds; and o . The need to consider reprogramming the dedicated funds for this projectto other member agencies if progress on the selection of a site is delayed beyond the SLOCOG meeting scheduled for August 7th. As you are aware there are substantial needs at all of our member jurisdictions for additional funding to supplement their resources in the development of various transportation projects. The funds programmed for the Multi-modal Center need,to be committed by January of 1999 and a delay in moving forward on the project could jeopardize SLOCOG's ability to see these monies applied to deserving local transportation projects. We will report to our Board at their August 7th meeting regarding the status .of the City's commitmentto a project following action by your Council in June, and the continued development of options that may emerge from meetings with the various partners and stakeholders. Today's RMWrCPW.MAY 11.5(1 Cknc St S1,itP ?(17. San T.vic nhiSnn_ CA 93401 ♦ Tel. (805) 751-4219 ♦ Fax. (805) 781-5703 meeting with representatives of the Business Improvement Association, Chamber of Commerce, Mass Transit Committee, Sierra Club, ECOSLO, APCD, County General Services, and the SLORTA, SLOCOG, and City staff, showed that there was consensus to proceed with evaluation of the railroad location. It was also clear that concerns regarding the"sub-center"require further delineation on the location and design of this component. I would like to schedule a meeting of this same group to further coordinate on the continued development of both the downtown element of the project as well as the railroad site issues during the week of June 10-14. This will allow quick follow up on any direction your Council may give and keep us"on track"toward a successful project Thanks for your continued attention to this issue. Ste en Devencenzi Senior Planner .: RMMTCPW.MAY - - ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. (1996 Sefies) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER TO EXECUTE A FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND REQUEST A DIRECT ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LAND AND FOR THE MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), in cooperation with the City of San Luis Obispo, submitted to the State of California Department of Transportation an allocation request for the acquisition of land and environmental and design services associated with the development of a multi-modal transportation center; and WHEREAS, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) has programmed $582,000 for the purposes stated above; and WHEREAS, the State of California Department of Transportation requires that the Fund Transfer Agreement be executed by an official of the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo desires that an allocation of funds be authorized by the State for the purposes of preliminary engineering, environmental assessment, land appraisals, land acquisition and construction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby resolves the following: SECTION 1. The City Council authorizes the City Administrative Officer to sign the Fund Transfer Agreement for the purchase of land and other related activities associated with the development of the Multi-Modal Transportation Center. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby requests that the Department of Transportation authorize a direct allocation of funds equalling 10% of the programmed funding ($58,200). SECTION 3: The City Council hereby accepts lead agency status in cooperation with SLOCOG as a partner in this project. Upon motion of ,seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1996. Page 2: Resolution No. (1996 Series) ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor Allen K Settle APPROVED AS TO FORM: *60Y ,:���PS3 jT! t •y` r' � �'1� Ia. y`� ` vw is �"� ,- e� ` -�_ 'x i• tom.,. - • -: :?!R ap 19 le 10 1 _ � yes, � .► -. r - s• y • 'g r' r t ..rlip ' •urs • - ' ,� � - -'ice'' `.. owl W Nj y� cna ve 2IS y 2 I Ir !Ilk ,.� ^�c 1 , r Ir tow - 1' A'•' 'ra '• � �`� �� `'-.• t�a , Imo' ��`w�: , WE + '.L,��r�t ��; '"r-],..rr� AAA ,•'4r i� _ �q, >,a->^ � '�' lop F T" • 1 - r ern'-a me. 3 . ( la \ n, }\ . �S• = � . � T:� a , „�� '- �4•�w�r 11 - � Mr• �' a � 1� •I _ t ti' � � • � ` S t \;1 a_ t{7 r _ ` `' i , .� ��.• '� - ♦y� 9• ..`•oma a •�-h''. � {A.�.1a�'^:. IF OF . y T,,".• - yri, � � � �I � ♦ - fid. +' yrs � •�+�~ � •�� - \i• '- �. - T r! .r-t�, •tee • 9 ATTACT•MNT MEETI O 0111 f W11 city op San Luis OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT F°"NUMB FROM: Michael McCluskey TcAllt Prepared by: Harry Watson SUBJECT: Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center CAO RECOMMENDATION: 1. Discontinue pursuing the former Toyota property. 2. Add and pursue a newly identified Amtrak Station location to the list of desirable Transfer Center sites. RFPORT W RRTFF The need for a Multi Modal Center was identified in the Short Range Transit Plan in 1991. A Multi Modal site Selection Study (1993) reviewed 12 downtown sites recommending four for further study.Focused site studies were then conducted on two of the locations to determine if they met long term transit needs for the downtown area. At this time it appears that the four sites are no longer viable options for various reasons. Grant funding was secured in the amount of $1,016,000 and could be at risk of being lost should there be no progress to develop the project on a suitable location. Because of recent operational changes by the partners, SLO Transit and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit there is an opportunity to allow for a facility to be located outside of the downtown core or at a smaller site in the downtown. In an effort to present as many reasonable options to the City Council as possible, four alternatives are presented for the City Council's consideration (see Exhibit A) which include . a new site near the existing Railroad Station. This available site is;large enough for transit's long term growth, and has the potential .of securing substantial additional funding (approximately $1,382,000). Staff is proposing that together with this site, a satellite facility at Monterey Street be made a part of this Multi Modal Center Project. DISCUSSION Background: The need for a Multi Modal (MM) Center was identified in the Short Range Transit Plan adopted by the City Council in 1991. Two multi-modal siting studies have been done, with the first starting in July 1991. The consulting firm of Nelson/Nygaard studied eight possible multi modal sites. In November 1993, twelve sites were studied by Wilbur Smith Associates and of those twelve, four were recommended for further study. The four recommended consist of two off-street sites and two on-street sites. The off-street sites were the former Mitsubishi Dealership on Monterey Street owned by Mr. Kimball, and the former Toyota Dealership on Higuera owned by Mr. Clinton. The two on- street sites were Palm Street between Santa Rosa Street and Osos and Monterey Street city of San L.IS S OBI Sp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Multi Modal Page Two between Santa Rosa Street and Osos. Both of these sites included the possibility of being linked into Osos should the transit system indicate the need. The Mitsubishi site became unavailable when the County purchased the site for an office expansion. The Palm .Street site is not being seriously considered since the County strongly opposed the use of this site due to access and building air quality concerns. The current Osos Street site was discouraged since it is deemed less than desirable. The Toyota Site The City Council and SLORTA Board directed staff to pursue the Toyota site in September 1994 after the Mitsubishi site sale. An appraisal was conducted to determine the property's value and was appraised at $1,300,000 if environmentally clean. The property owner, Mr. Clinton has stated his asking price is $1,650,000 "firm" and is offered in "as is" condition. A geotechnical investigation shows ground contamination at various locations on the subject property. An initial soils investigation was conducted by the property owner's consultant. Hydrocarbon contamination was discovered at three locations on the property. Subsequent investigation has also identified heavy metal contamination at no less than two locations on the property. At the present time, the property owner has chosen to use a natural bio-remediation cleanup process for the hydrocarbons which may take up to three years. To remediate, the Regional State Water Quality Board has indicated to Fire Department staff that it will not allow the use of this method and to date no remediation plan or time frame has been proposed to rehabilitate the site. San Luis Obispo Fire Department staff estimated the costs of clean up to range from $200,000 to $300,000 and the State's Clean Up Fund could pick up $100,000 or more of this cost. This estimate includes processing 250/300 cubic yards of soil at-S45 per cubic yard (hydrocarbons) at one site, and 1500 cubic yards at $100 per cubic yard (metals) at another site. Added to these costs may be "de-watering" costs at $20,000 to $30,000 and monitoring wells at $7500. Since September of 1994 staff has pursued negotiations on this property. After two years of such work, staff was directed by the City Council to again negotiate for six more months. The property owner was again contacted to ascertain what actions had been taken on the ground contamination clean up. Mr. Clinton had done nothing as he.was applying for California Super Funds to assist in the cost of the clean up. Mr. Clinton also remains firm on his asking price for the property. jN city of San L.,4IS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Multi Modal Page Three The environmental firm for the property owner, SECOR, was also contacted to determine what actions had taken place on the remediation. The consultant related that some further testing had been conducted resulting in a finding of additional contamination, and that to their knowledge no remedial action had been initiated. The Regional Water Quality Board (RWQB) was contacted and it is their position that the site must be cleaned up. According to San Luis Obispo Fire Department staff, RWQB's position includes the stipulation that the contamination must not be removed using the less expensive Bio Remedial method and that monitoring wells will also be required as an addi- tional condition for the clean up. Thus after nearly two years of pursuing acquisition of the Toyota property, staff is no closer to purchase than when first started. The future looks equally bleak for success. In addition the funding identified, Proposition 116, requires that the partnership show positive action in siting the facility or risk the loss of this funding source. SLOCOG has asked that a progress report be presented to them at their meeting of May 8, 1996. SLOCOG has also indicated that if no progress has been made they may re-program these funds to other jurisdictions in the County. In conclusion, staff recommends that pursuit of the Toyota site be abandoned. Where to from here? For the time being it appears that the Toyota site will be tied up for an undetermined amount of time for soil clean up and maybe further protracted as a result of an asking price well over the appraised value. It is reasonable at this juncture for the City Council to focus its effort on seeking the very best long term decision for the City (100 years out) which requires the City re-visit its options. Among the primary concerns are the visual and aesthetic appearance a Multi Modal Center presents and its affect on the long term economic health of the downtown. The Multi Modal Center must also work to enhance the transit operations of both SLO Transit and SLORTA. If it is assumed the Toyota Site is unobtainable, new sites must be found and prior sites re-examined. Two sites identified. Because the city realized that the funding for the site could not be held indefinitely, the firm of Wilbur Smith & Associates was again retained, in November 1995, to perform a quick "re-look" at their previous work reviewing the prior sites, all the while keeping in mind that both SLORTA and SLO Transit were no longer in an expansionary mode. As a result, the consultant recommended that the previously studied Monterey Street site, between Santa Rosa and Osos, be used as a Multi Modal Center, given the smaller operating requirements of the . two systems. Additionally,_in the course of this review, a new site, outside of the downtown core area, was identified. This site has been identified as the Railroad property between'High city of San L.-6 OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Multi Modal Page Four Street and the existing rail station parking lot (see attached map). It is currently available for sale. Staff has discussed this proposed location with appropriate SLORTA and SLOCOG staff as well a our service contractor and have received approval of this concept from SLOCOG's Technical Transportation Advisory Committee. Staff re-visited all of the issues of a Multi Modal Center to determine needs and location. There have been several changes that affect both the size of the project and the viable locations from a transit prospective. These changes which allow the new sites to be considered are as follows: 1. The economic outlook in the near term (5 to 1.5 years) for transit is much more modest than just 3 to 4 years ago. It now appears that both systems will remain if anything "status quo", except minor operational changes to correct elasticity problems related to both time and ridership. 2. The initial project concept also envisioned a need to stage a minimum 12 buses, plus a Dial-A-Ride van, trolley and space for taxi's. Today, that need is more accurately defined as no more than 10 buses utilizing a mixed use vehicle parking location. (Operationally, if off set pulses were to be employed, an 8 bus site would meet the needs of the two systems). 3. The Short Range Transit Plans of SLO Transit and SLORTA each propose route changes which now allow for buses to operationally meet at a site outside ah immediate downtown location. The logical common points for most of SLO Transit routes and the majority of SLORTA's routes are: a) the Downtown; b) Cal Poly; and c) the Amtrak station: There is not sufficient room in Cal Poly's master plan to accommodate a Transit Transfer center, leaving only the Railroad station as a possible site. The Railroad station area currently is served by all of SLO Transit's and the majority of SLORTA's routes. Monterey Street Site: This site was identified as not suited for the Transit Center when a larger program was originally envisioned. With a reduced scope, the site was then re-studied and later recommended. The development of this site would create significant changes both to the downtown traffic patterns; aesthetics of the famous Fremont Theater and probable opposition from Buona Tavola Restaurant. From a strictly transit viewpoint, the site would be permanently restricted to a fairly small transit system operation. While arguably, the best site for a downtown solution, in a broader sense this site has limited appeal and a uncertain project life span. l—/8' 1i11t11111411111 city of san L"IS OBISPO mamiam COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Multi Modal Page Five Railroad Site: Siting a Multi Modal Center at the Railroad station provides a convenient location for transfers between both routes and systems. It is important to point out that by moving a transfer center out of the downtown in no way relieves the requirement that both systems must continue to serve the downtown. The government center will always be an important destination for both commuters, those using the government services, the library and of course the hub shopping. The Government Center, or close thereto, will continue as an infomial transfer center much like SLO Transit currently operates at South Street/Higuera and at Madonna Plaza The Railroad site appears to mitigate all the negatives from the other options, with one caveat: it is not in the downtown area. Since Osos Street leads directly into Hwy. 101 and the Government Center on Monterey, and since most existing routes pass by the site, the.primary purpose of servicing the downtown can be fulfilled. This site is currently available and is large enough to accommodate a fully functional Transit Center and will have the side benefit of improving the area's appearance. Moving the transfer center out of the downtown in no way relieves the requirement that both systems must continue to serve the downtown. The Government Center will always be an important destination for both commuters, those using the governments services, the library and of course shopping. As stated earlier the Govern- ment Center, via Osos Street or Monterey Street stops,will continue as an infomial transfer center. Conclusion Of the four long term primary sites previously identified in the 1993 site study, only one seems viable (use on-street Osos Street). It does nothing more than make permanent the current arrangement. Taking no action will insure forever the loss of the Proposition 116 funding which, in turn, will make permanent the current arrangement. The current arrangement does not meet the intent of the Downtown Concept Plan, nor does it enhance the attractiveness of the Government Center. Thus in order to move off Osos Street, the City must take action to find and secure a new site. Two Multi Modal sites have been identified: one on-street site, Monterey Street,and the other an off-street site,'Railroad station. Although the Downtown Concept Plan calls for the Transit Center to be downtown, it is becoming rapidly apparent that achieving that goal any time soon is not likely. The primary funding source is time sensitive and SLOCOG has asked for substantive progress or face the loss of funding. 111111I111I11AIII , city of San L"IS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Multi Modal Page Six Regarding the Railroad site, existing Proposition 116 funding could be combined with existing Amtrak improvement funding to make the railroad site a true multi-modal center (trains, bike path, ped bridge, parking lot and taxis). Finally, this location would not take property off the tax roles downtown. The Railroad site fulfills all criteria, except location in the downtown area, and would make an excellent facility. The Monterey Street site could likewise be developed nicely as a "secondary" downtown drop off site without disrupting traffic patterns. Staff is recommending City Council direction to pursue the following: * Preliminary investigation of the Amtrak station site by obtaining a property description and an indication of the asking price from Southern Pacific. A preliminary investigation into potential soils contamination (records search) will be conducted. * Further research the cost of development of the Monterey Street site and firm up the position of the County and the affected merchants to the development of the site. FISCAL IMPACT: The partnership of the City and SLORTA have previously applied and been approved for $1,016,000 in Proposition 116 funds. If the rail connection is made with this project, Transit Capital Improvement (TCI) funding of $582,000 (1995/96) may be available as well as $800,000 ($300k 1995/96 and $500k 1996/97) in Surface Transportation Program (STP) for a total available of $2,398,000. Should additional funding be necessary, TCI funding of $240,000 (1997/98) is being programmed which would require a local match of $240,000. Without appraisals, it is difficult to know acquisition costs of the Railroad site, however since the site is relatively undeveloped, staff feels that the funding available should be sufficient to implement Alternative #1 (Railroad/Monterey Facility). Attachments: Exhibit A, Alternatives Map of proposed site MMS- V EXHIBIT A Summary of Alternatives Four alternatives are available for the project. 1. Railroad/Monlerey Combination Facility - STAFF RECOMMENDATION A combination On-Street/Off-Street solution. By combining the previously identified Monterey Street site with the newly identified Amtrak/Railroad Square site (see alternative 42), an efficient operating bus transfer network can be developed as follows: The main Multi Modal Transit Transfer Center Site would be located south of the existing railroad station, near the existing old freight house, allowing transfer from bicycling facilities at the City's railroad bike path, railroad passengers from the Amtrak facility, pedestrians from the nearby neighborhood, and regular bus patrons to occur. With expanded parking (a COG project), there is the potential of park and ride for both transit systems. A satellite to the major Multi Modal Site would be located on Monterey Street, between Santa Rosa and Osos Streets. Routes of SLO Transit and SLORTA would merge to pick up and drop off workers or shoppers to the downtown. The street would receive significant upgrading, but would remain open to traffic. Staff believes this combination is doable and will provide all the necessary services for the citizens of San Luis Obispo County. The Railroad property has been offered for sale and staff is currently in very preliminary stages of discussion with the Railroad. Staff has not done hazardous materials testing at the site, as that requires approval of the Railroad. However, the site was never used to our knowledge for any hazardous processes. Thus it is hoped that the City could purchase a clean site. 91. Pros The Railroad property is currently for sale and Monterey Street is owned by the City. By linking the project with rail facilities, additional funding sources are made available. By linking with rail, a third partner is created with the Council Of Governments (COG) effort to expand the current Amtrak parking facilities. By linking with rail, an established connection of transportation activity facilities is created. Transit Transfer Center facilities are currently located at Amtrak stations in Encinitas„ Emeryville, Irvine and Oceanside to name a few. There would be minimal impact on the adjoining neighborhoods by having the primary facility at the Railroad property. The Monterey Street satellite facility would guarantee the downtown connection and continued transit commitment to the downtown core. Currently under used and unattractive property may be made a part of this project. Exhibit A - Page Two #1 Cons Both the price and condition of the property at the Railroad are unknown. Additional off site improvements would be necessary such as signal lights at High and Upham Streets on Santa Barbara Street. A continuing maintenance effort to maintain the new infrastructure would be required. Because this is "Railroad" property, detailed and exhaustive research must be done to assure both the City and SLOCOG that the site is free of contamination. Although the site is located a significant distance from previous fueling facilities, the potential of contamination is still an issue and cannot be ignored. Staff believes that both sites mentioned above can be combined into a efficient operating bus transfer site. 2. Railroad Facility This facility would be solely located at the Railroad site. All Regional and SLO-Transit Routes would make productive.use of the site as described in Alternative 91. Service to the downtown will be provided via designated bus stops and no formal transfer point established. #2. Pros (Same as Alternative 91, with the exception that no formal satellite facility would be located downtown, although service to the downtown would still be permitted by multiple bus routes.) #2. Cons (Same as Alternative #1.) 3. Monterey Street Facility A new facility (downtown) on Monterey Street between Santa Rosa and Osos Streets. This alternative envisions the closing of the block to all traffic except buses. The street would be redesigned, trees would be either moved or replaced, extensive landscaping installed along with raised pedestrian islands. There would be extensive use of street furniture, shelters and portable flower and shrubbery planters. This option can provide for 10 buses which allows for a minimum of expansion over the existing levels of both systems. Exhibit A - Page Three #3. Pros The City owns the land. The Center remains in the downtown core and conforms to the spirit of the DownTown Concept Plan. The County has indicated it would support the Center at this location. The central focus of transit at the government center is maintained. A safe transfer center can be engineered that effectively removes the perceived need to cross a public street mid block. The site is central to downtown destinations. There are public relations benefits of keeping the transit focus downtown near the frequent destination of many riders and its proximity to downtown shopping. #3. Cons Traffic circulation to the core is limited by the loss of a cross street. Direct vehicular access to those businesses fronting onto the project is eliminated (a modified version could maintain limited access). This may result in business's opposition to the transfer center at this location. The potential of creating an "attractive nuisance" exists which could promote loitering by providing a more convenient and attractive facility centrally located to the downtown. The proposed facility would be more inviting then the two existing on street facilities. Additional turning movements, time delays and "wrong direction" orientation for exit of the buses is created for both transit systems. , 4. Maintain Status Ouo with Osos Street Facility Maintain the existing transit transfer locations with SLO Transit on Osos between Mill and Palm on both sides of thi street. Regional Transit's transfer location is on Osos between Palm and Monterey on the east side of the street. �'" Exhibit A - Page Four #4. Pros There is no additional expenditure necessary. With the City's having moved Regional Transit one block south on Osos, there has been a reduction in the numbers of unsafe pedestrian crossings between buses mid block (although they still do occur). #4 Cons There continues to be unsafe pedestrian street crossings from between buses mid block. SLO Transit continues to have transfers between it's routes separated by a vehicular street. The physical separation between SLO Transit and Regional Transit makes it quite difficult for the frail and disabled to traverse between the two systems. It. also causes delays while both systems wait for those transferring to get between the two locations (occasionally resulting in a missed connection when buses leave before the transfer can be made because the driver didn't know there was a transfer coming). Significant current funding would be lost. J'- "' RAILROAD SITE s ..:...:. 1� Mg5.1512•dl � _ -_ i �,� QIP �d� Q � � _ . �•_ { _ = =_ _0 pil)c fRL Sr.-71 •4I � � `'I�`_�•',.'-%. � __ -_ - -_ - _ - - == � ,- • ��` n OIf. AUTO SALES L07 Q• �'=}` _ _ _ U � � El C1 � �O 19o8-I0 UP'no••LTERI SriS Aoto C�D — '�qto cL h �'•': ::' i t r r r r — i AUTO � = r-'�:,;:: �^., ' -�— =!r ! + �r — • \"' A53-BS.AZC 85•GI nI :92V 1:7 A45. f•%.`=" 3.7d - � � U6b50 Ll El TL 0 El CARPET II w�'� :`�.-'.?%< ,_v"•'-. i i -� i i��' Lq . I UPHo"TERY :`q '•'S: dJC + - i i M sZ 1954 '•: a ., _ral�;{L� 'v'; �/�/ i ij T a•� ROOci146 AQ _ 7 PSC £."moo Y.1 CONTIV.CTOR C .`� +�rr� �5 v �T 7 iIiRDN4RE w ! '"yC.�a•:... N� o ARG'/7-33 iRae,.11 r .� � /J'...;..— S �m L� n58s-j65 ('A �.c,l•'35 „kms. �. '. �.. . aN �+ vd A2` H4':52 Yr L_A9t•2c'I C ARC4l-95fnI s a A•4•9? •SSC • �^, < -._r... ..... ...moi+ :- HIGH STREET r:: o V10ED 57 ARG 09-SO o r .� r t A92'3'3AAZ FLOORS O �s� 5 ■f ��11 r— �zt 9aTs ���� _