Loading...
08/30/1982City Council Minutes Monday, August 30, 1982 - 12:10 p.m. Page 2 drain. Records showing the location of the lateral of the sewer main were not available, hence the conflict was unavoidable. Based on the above excavations and survey data, it was discovered that the main was two feet higher than expected; and in order to pass under the storm drain at the proper slope, the best solution would be to require laying a parallel 6 inch sewerline from the lateral to the existing manhole . At the request of staff, the contractor submitted, in writing, a bid of $11,818.92 to accomplish the work and pay for work already done in the ' investigative process. Staff was recommending Council approve the change order in the amount of $11,818.92 with Fred Julien & Associates. After brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, to authorize change order in the amount of $11,818.92 with Fred Julien & Associates for construction of the sewer line in Foothill Blvd. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dunin, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: Councilwoman Dovey 1. DOWNTOWN PARKING PROGRAM Mayor Billig reviewed the format to be used this afternoon and explained the final decision on the parking program was expected on September 7. Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer, reviewed the three items in the packet for the Council: .1) An executive summary of the Wilbur Smith & Associates Downtown Parking Study; 2) a.question and answer report dealing with specific public comments on the CPAC proposal; and 3) a report from the Police Chief concerning the City's Parking Control Program. Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, reviewed 15 questions and answers that. were posed at the last parking public hearing (see file no. 554): 1) Contrast the advantages and disadvantages of centralized versus decen- tralized parking. He felt the primary advantage to centralized parking was that it requires less land. The primary advantage of decentralizing is spreading it out and land on the periphery would be less costly, approximately ;4 less costly; 2) What non - structural solutions were considered to help deal with parking shortages downtown? (a) Ride - sharing, (b) Restriping, (c) Lot restrictions, and (d) Shuttle buses; 3) Who would the garage serve? Primarily it would be available for short -term parkers; 4) What are the current shortages in the city and county facilities for parking? The city has a 51 -space parking lot located on the City Hall site. The city currently issues 42 permits for employee parking in this lot. The city also issues 53 permits to its employees and those who do business with the city on a regular basis for the lot across the street at Osos and Palm Streets; 5) Who will the surface lot serve? The surface lot is proposed to be a long term parking lot aimed at employees and employers; 6) Why was the surface lot location chosen to be at the corner of Broad and Marsh Streets. Wilbur Smith recommended this; they felt the two lots currently to be less desirable for a parking structure development because they only served one purpose. However, they also felt that within the downtown parking strategy, additional spaces were needed to the south of the commercial zone; 7) How many spaces does this lot gain for-the-city? 100 public spaces; 8) What does the CPAC project cost? The sale of $5.35 million in bonds; 9) What sources of revenue support each component? Parking garage financing is proposed to be raised through the sale of leased revenue bonds. The parking lot is to be financed through the sale of assessment district bonds; 10) What is the procedure for implementation of Certificates of Participation? They are-:a form of lease revenue bonds;. City must pass certain ordinances providing for.the sale of these debt instruments. When the project is ready for bid, the bonds are sold based upon the actual project and the project then proceeds; 11).What is the procedure City Council Minutes Monday, August 30, 1982 - 12:10 p.m. Page 3 for implementation a more complex way city establishes a ascribed; 12) What acquisition and re precisely. of an assessment district? An assessment district is to raise money. It is an old process whereby the district within which benefit to the project can be is the procedure for implementation of property location? State law outlines the procedure quite Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, explained that State law was quite liberal regarding relocation assistance, especially regarding the benefits to the property owner. Wayne Peterson added last time there was an assessment, people ended up actually making money on their relocation. 12:45 p.m. Councilman Griffin left the meeting. Wayne Peterson continued: 13) How much retail is included in the CPAC proposal and where would it go? It includes 3,000 square feet of floor space along the Morro Street side of the parking garage. Toby Ross, Community Development Director, responded to questions 14 and 15: 14) Is this an economical decision? Yes, the city was heavily dependant upon sales tax revenue for its financial health. By policy, the city has favored a strategy of reinforcing the downtown to maintain and expand sales tax revenue base. Without parking, the downtown will not be able to intensify and expand. Consequently, the tax base will not expand. 15) How would parking -in -lieu fees work? The question of parking -in -lieu fees was first raised in the city in 1976 when a parking standard for the downtown was proposed. Because many downtown sites could not physically meet the proposed parking requirements, payments in = lieu of actual parking were to be allowed. The parking requirement established at half the regular amount for equivalent uses in other districts, and the provisions for in -lieu participation in a parking program was made in the ordinance. At the time it was assumed that the 1 in -lieu participation would be equivalent to the full cost of providing the parking, but through some assessment mechanism, the payments would be distributed over a 10 to 20 year period. Cost figures cited at that time were between $3,000 and $5,000 per space. The intent at the time was that in -lieu fees would be applied.to new development and conver- sions of existing uses. It was not conceived of as being the same as a downtown assessment district, which would assess properties, whether or not they had existed prior to the parking requirement. To date, no program has been initiated to establish the fee or to create the mech- anism to collect it. Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer, questioned why CPAC proposal did not suggest building on lot No. 1. Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, stated it would cost approximately the same amount to build plus the purchase, $300,000 to $400,000, in right -of -way; however, the access point was a full block away from the downtown area. Upon question by Mayor Billig, Mr. Peterson explained that Park - and -Ride Programs had been studied by CPAC and were not considered likely to be successful. It would have cost approximately k million dollars a year to operate. He felt there may be a time for this in the future but not now. The present ridesharing program is beginning September 16. It will be kicked off by a proclamation by the Mayor, gifts. People should contact the ridesharing program office for permits to lots one and four. These will be given to anyone with a car -pool of three or more people. Mayor Billig reviewed Councilman Griffin's comments that he submitted before he left the meeting. He stated he believed in concentrated parking, i.e., a parking structure as a major component. Non - structural approaches needed further exploration where possible, concurrently with a structure. The parking structure should be self- supporting and separate. He would like to see a broader consensus by property owners and merchants downtown. If no consensus could be reached, the City Council Minutes Monday, August 30, 1982 - 12:10 p.m. Page 4 component, i.e., the Marsh Street parking lot, should proceed with a structural solution. Councilman Settle was anxious to proceed with the parking proposal. The city should have more retail space for sales tax revenues. The city must help stimulate commerce. He would favor a centralized parking approach, in that he would be supportive of a maximum type of system whereby the structural facilities be built and parking structure look at a maximum capacity. In terms of cost, we are looking at a period of up to 5 to 20 years. The structure should look at a enterprise approach in order to be self - supportive. The retail spacing of the CPAC proposal was good; he felt this would be more economical. He could support a surface parking facility at Broad and Marsh Streets. Some participation by the downtown merchants would be appropriate. We should still encourage others to participate, i.e.-, the county. With regard to timing, he would like to proceed with all due speed. He would also ask staff to keep in mind that some lots would be converted to retail space in the future.' Basically, he agreed with staff and comments made by Councilman Griffin. Financing was, of course, crucial but he felt the city was getting closer. Councilman Dunin stated there were several attitudes being expressed about the program. When the Downtown Association was first in exist- ence, it was concerned with the parking problem. Because of this exchange by the downtown and Council, Wilbur Smith had made a proposal and B.I.A. was created. The Wilbur Smith Report was strongly in support of a major downtown facility. Other action was pointed out to the Council, i.e., busing, restriping, ridesharing, etc. His recommendation was that they should be a part of the total parking program. He felt the park- and -ride program was premature but should not be dropped from consideration. He felt the main responsibility to the clients and customers-alike within the downtown core area was,the responsibility of the business community and its representative the B.I.A. Because of lack of accord in and among themselves. and because he felt their posi- tion was difficult to understand; he felt it would only be fair to respond to their position and divorce the surface lot on Marsh Street from the CPAC proposal and charge the B.I.A. to introduce their own program to resolve their own .problems. He felt this would remove a lot of the current objections for assessments; they could assess their own charges. Regarding the smaller lots, they should be considered but should be deferred until after the construction of the facility and after resolution of the B.I.A. of-their responsibilities to their customers'. He felt the structure now proposed was well conceived. He liked centralized parking. In order to relieve the City Council's burden regarding floating of the bond, they should consider retail and /or office program; and the program should be self- financing with no cost to the B.I.A. leaving it as a Council problem only. He suggested reopening negotiations with the county to help them and ourselves regarding a joint venture as far as the employee parking problem is concerned. The program proposed by CPAC -had received more input and consideration than any other program he had been involved with. He felt the facilities should be a part of total resolution of the viability of the downtown. CPAC is a representative of -the businesses in the downtown. CPAC has addressed all the problems that should be related to those that the B.I.A. pis concerned with.. :The B.I:A. should have a second look at the presentation in view of what has been brought out to date. When the City Council has the final public hearing regarding the parking program, the B.I.A. should make a clear statement as to how they really feel about a parking program. Mayor Billig stated she could support a centralized.parking concept. She felt it must be a balanced program, i.e., both a structure and a lot. She said this is the way the previous Councils, CPAC and Wilbur Smith had agreed to. She could also agree.with the other Council members that the B.I.A. be supportive for a balanced program both verbally and economically. She felt the structure location was appro- priate where it was proposed. She agreed with-the Council with trying to get a maximum use of the structure and retail space. Figures provided by staff would bear out that this would make good economical sense. City Council Minutes Monday, August 30, 1982 - 12:10 p.m. Page 5 She felt it should pay for itself. One goal was to provide additional needed retail space in terms of the lot that is the most difficult. She agreed with the location. The timing of what.happens to the lot was crucial because the Council's past decision over 2'k years ago, to.pursue that type of approach and evaluate it, was based on the concept that we have to provide some type of parking, both now and in the future. The lot was crucial to that.'.Regarding the financing, does the Council agree that the B.I.A. should help support it. Councilman Settle stated he was still open on this matter. Councilman Dunin felt that unless the B.I.A. revised its opinion, he would prefer to divorce the city and the B.I.A. and have the city do its own parking program and not ask anything from the B.I.A. Let them address the deficiencies themselves and finance their own program. Mayor Billig commented it would appear Councilman Griffin felt the lot assessment is the biggest problem with the B.I.A. and moving ahead on this should be deferred until the B.I.A. can determine what they want. She was open with regard to the lot, but if it is going to be such a stumbling block, then she could agree with operating the city components of the program and move ahead on a structure.until we resolve this with the B.I.A. The city should continue encouraging ridesharing, etc. She also felt the city needed to look at other alternative incentives to reduce employees parking in the core area, i.e., both short and long -term solutions. Council has been very supportive of the bus system and. perhaps should be looking.at a.neighborhood permit system on the peri- phery to discourage long -term parking by employees. Timing was impor- tant, now we could have cost savings and a more favorable bond market. Staff should be reviewing any possibility.of converting lots we don't think are being properly utilized for proper retail, etc. Maybe put them back on the market place and if there are more appropriate spots, to let the Council know. She would request staff to come back with this additional information for the September 7 Council meeting. Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer, recommended that staff put together a policy resolution referring to Council's views, problems and solutions and in the resolution address the various implementation steps needed to be taken, which would then come back at a future Council meeting with the actual implementation procedure. Councilman Dunin requested that a timetable be included. Staff should express their ideas insofar.as the inclusion of keeping the Marsh Street in or separating it out, or at lease give an idea of the consequences in general terms if the city-were to be divorced from its dealings with the B.I.A. Mayor Billig suggested that Rudy.Muravez put together a summary of the data that the Council already had plus any other that would reflect on the comments under action given today. She would request that staff as a whole when putting the package together for September 7, put together recommendations and alternatives depending on which they want, breaking it down into various components. There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Billig adjourned the meeting at 1:32 p.m. to Tuesday, August 31, 1982, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. amela Voges, 0 t5f Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 9121/82