HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/30/1982City 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