Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-22 City Council (10)TO: City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE:SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 CMR:355: 98 SUBJECT:STATUS OF DESIGN FOR THE PROPOSED DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES This is an informational report and no Council action is required. REPORT IN BRIEF On January 12, 1998, Council authorized agreements for architectural and engineering services that would provide for environmental analysis, and design of up to two parking structures inthe downtown area. The two potential parking structure sites (Attachment A) are Lots S and L (Bryant/Lytton) and Lot R (off University Avenue, between High and Alma). The agreements provided for environmenta! analysis of the sites as well as for the preparation of design and construction documents to 50 percent plan completion. After the approval of the 50 percent plans by Council, proceedings to form an assessment district will be held. If an assessment district is approved by downtown property owners, staff will retum to Council for approval of consultant contract amendments necessary to complete the construction documents. ’ .......... In addition to presenting information on the project’s schedule, construction cost updates, construction impact and public toilets, the use of the surplus area at the .comer of Bryant/Lytton is discussed, as well as information on an alternate design for Lot R. It is likely that certain of these items will require Council direction inthe furore, and an objective of this report is to provide Council with advance information on potential issues. BACKGROUND On January 12, 1998, Council approved proceeding with the design of two multi-level parking structures in the downtown area (CMR: 109:98). The two potential structures would be located at Lot R (off University Avenue, between High/Alma) and Lot S/L (Bryant!Lytton) these locations are shown on Attachment A. The design will proceed to the 50 percent completion stage, at which time it will be presented to Council for approval. Upon Council approval of the 50 percent documents, the proceedings to form an assessment district will be held. If an assessment district is approved by a majority of downtown CMR:355:98 Page 1 of 5 property owners, the design would be completed and the project advertised for construction bids. DISCUSSION Since the design contracts were approved by Council in January, meetings have been held with downtown property owners and tenants, as well as ongoing meetings with the Parking Study Group (PSG). The PSG is composed of representatives from business and community groups, and from the Public Arts Commission and Architectural Review Board (ARB). The design concepts, which were outlined in the January 16, 1997 Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study (Feasibility Study), have been refined based on these discussions. The design for the structural systems, interior layout, and exterior facade is progressing and will be reviewed by the Parking Study Group, Public Arts Commission, and the ARB prior to presentation to Council. In addition to the ongoing design efforts, an application has been submitted to the Planning Department for a zoning change. Both of the subject lots must be re-zoned from Public Facilities (PF) to a Planned Community (PC) designation in order to accommodate the floor area ratios and the property line setbacks required for parking structures. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) has been prepared for the project, and will be included as part of the PC zoning application package. The DEIR has been distributed for public and local agency review. The zoning application package will be reviewed by both the Planning Commission and the ARB. At the end of the zoning process, which is estimated to occur in May 1999, the PC zoning application and the environmental documents will be presented to Council for approval. Several items, which relate to the project cost or design of the structures, will be discussed in greater detail when the project is presented to Council at the end of the PC zoning process: Use of Surplus Area at Lot S&L The Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study identified approximately 2,400 square feet of Lot L that could not be used for parking. This space, which is at the comer of BryanffLytton, could be used for retail, a small mini-park, office, or as a place to relocate the Teen Center (which would be displaced by the new structure). If it is decided not to use the area for a mini-park, it would be possible to construct additional levels onto any office-type use, which would add another 2,400 square feet of space per floor. Financial advisor, Robert Goldman, has been retained to provide guidance on funding issues related to these (and other) construction scenarios. An assessment formula can be developed that would separate the surplus area from the remainder of the parking structure. The City would then, as owner of the surplus area, bear the sole responsibility for the improvement cost of the area. In order to identify whether the surplus area would be suitable for the Teen Center, the project architects, Watry Design Group, have met with Teen Center staff to develop an CMR:355:98 Page 2 of 5 architectural program, will outline minimum and optimal room and equipment space requirements for Teen Center staff and programs. The cost of the development of the program will be borne by the City and will not be passed on to other property owners within the assessment district, should one be formed. If it is determined that it is not appropriate to relocate the Teen Center adjacent to the parking structure, the results of the program can be used to identify an appropriate alternate property and space layout. Lot R Alternate Design The Feasibility Study identified a schematic design for Lot R, which required constructing the structure to the property line (Option 3b). This design allowed for the maximum number of spaces that could be accommodated within the narrow limits of Lot R. This structure would be approximately the same height as the nearest adjacent building, it would have solid concrete firewalls, and be mechanically ventilated. Access to the adjacent businesses to the north (e.g., Blockbuster Video) could be accommodated through a small convenience opening within the parking Structure. As part of the design process, meetings have been held with adjacent property owners and tenants. As a result of these meetings, Watry Design Group was directed to explore a design alternative that would allow greater access to the buildings adjacent to Lot R without reducing the number of available parking spaces. This subsequent alternative design (Attachment B) shows a property line setback that ranges from 10 feet on the northwest comer to 30 feet along the northeast property line. The setback would allow pedestrian access between Alma and High Streets as well as provide a landscaped area. Since the parking structure would be set back from the property line, an "open" architecture could be used instead of solid fire walls, and the need for mechanical ventilation would subsequently be reduced. This alternate structure would not require interior columns to support the structure. It would, however, require a design change from 45-degree angle parking to 90-degree parking. On the south side, the structure would still be constructed to the existing property line, as the parking structure will not have as severe an impact on the adjacent building’s access and lighting. This design will result in a loss of approximately 25 parking spaces to accommodate the 10-foot setback. To recover these spaces, it would be necessary to add an additional floor of 50 parking spaces which would add 25 additional spaces. This additional parking level would add less than $500,000 to the construction cost. The total cost per added stall would decrease from $33,700 (projected Year 2000 costs) from the Feasibility Study option to $31,700 for the alternative design. On July 20, 1998, this design alternative and costs were presented to the PSG. The PSG recommended that this alternative be proposed as a more desirable option than the original Feasibility Study design. The ARB will be asked to comment on the alternative design as part of the re-zoning process. CMR:355:98 Page 3 of 5 Public Restrooms Each of the structures will include public toilet facilities. Staff is in the process of comparing the cost of built-in toilets to the cost of renting and installing an Automatic Public Toilet (APT) from JCDecaux Company. Preliminary estimates indicate that, while the initial cost of constructing built-in facilities is low, the annual maintenance cost would likely exceed the cost of a JCDecaux rental. There are, however, installation and space constraints of the APTs which could render them infeasible at one or both of the proposed structures. Staff is currently negotiating an agreement with JCDecaux Company for the installation of two APTs in the downtown area at Lytton Plaza and at Lot D (Hamilton Avenue/Waverly). This agreement will be expanded to allow for the purchase of up to two additional APTs, in the event that it is determined that they are desirable to use at one or both of the parking structures. Construction Costs The Feasibility Study included preliminary construction costs that were based on the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), which was in effect at the time the estimates were prepared. Since then, a 1997 version of the UBC was issued and adopted by the State of California in 1998. Staff plans to ask Council to incorporate the 1997 UBC into the City’s Municipal Code in January 1999. The 1997 UBC contains more seismic requirements for structural stability than the 1994 UBC, resulting in somewhat higher construction costs estimated to be in the range of 10 percent. These increased costs will be identified as the design progresses. Construction Impacts: Staff, with the assistance of the PSG and the Chamber of Commerce Parking Advisory Group, is studying the impact of parking structure construction to the downtown parking supply. There are currently 71 parking spaces at Lot R and 139 spaces at Lot S/L. The greatest impact to downtown parking would occur if both garages were built simultaneously. In that case, there would be 210 existing parking spaces lost from the demolition of the two surface lots, as well as an increased parking demand from the construction crews and suppliers, including partial lane-closures for equipment access approximately 40 spaces per site (80 total).. Staff will determine the availability of both parking structures, rental costs for additional parking, and construction time-frames, and will return to Council with a recommendation. RESOURCE IMPACT The construction costs of the design issues outlined above will be detailed when the project is presented to Council at the end of the PC Zoning process. While no immediate resource impact is anticipated for the City, as a member of the potential assessment district, the City would ultimately share the cost of any improvements with other property owners in the assessment district. CMR:355:98 Page 4 of 5 TIMELINE The project is scheduled for presentation to the Planning Commission in Winter 98, as an application for a PC zoning change. As part of this process, which is estimated to last six months (Spring 1999), it will also be presented to the ARB. At the end of the zoning process, Council will be asked to approve the environmental assessment and the zoning change. Staffwill also request Council direction on the design-related issues outlined earlier in this report. The current preliminary project schedule (Attachment C) shows the 50 percent plans to be completed in Summer 1999. Upon Council approval of the plans, a proceeding to form the assessment district could be held as early as July 1999. If the formation of an assessment district is approved, construction of the first structure could begin in Spring 2000. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A focused EIR has been prepared and submitted to the Planning Department as part of the application for a Planned Community Zoning Change. The report will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and ARB and will be presented to Council for approval thereafter. ATTACHMENTS A - Location Lot R & S/L B - Lot R Feasibility Study and Alternate Designs C, Project Schedule PREPARED BY: Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer, Public Works DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: _/~ X. ~ GLENN S. RO)~RTS /~ffirector of~,.l~ Works CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:) / City Manager cc: Project Study Group Susan Frank, Chamber of Commerce CMR:355:98 Page 5 of 5 ’ATTACHMENT A. WAVERLEY FLORENCE -- LOT S/L Z BRYANT RAMONA EMERSON L, zO HIGH WAVERLEY zO BRYANT O RAMONA _--J ’ ------q -r- I EMERSON Z HIGH !DOWNTOWN -PARKING ,.STRUCTURES CIP 19530 ATTACHMENT B ~ Downtown Pa,’king Structure Feasibility Study Option 3b - No Setback at Property Lines One Level At-Grade, 3 Levels Above Grade I I Proposed Revision to Option 3b 10-30 Foot Pedestrian/Landscaped Setback at Northern Property Line One Level At-Grade, 4 Levels Above Grade l.IJ Z o ~ 0 ~ E v v v v v ATTACHMENT C