Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-09-17 City CouncilCity City of Palo Alto Manager’s Rep r TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION:FINANCE COMMITTEE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM:CITY MANAGER AGENDA DATES:SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CMR:377:96 INFRASTRUCTURE WORK PLAN RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the Finance Committee approve the Infrastructure Work Plan described below. BACKGROUND Over the past several years, Council has expressed considerable concern about the condition of the City’s infrastructure, the identification of a potential "backlog" of capital improvements, and the need for a long-term plan to both rehabilitate and maintain the City’s aging infrastructure. In Spring 1996, the Finance Committee met to discuss the Budget Issue Report, "Conceptual Framework for Consideration of 1996-98 Capital Improvement Program" (CMR: 165:96). This report provided information on the City’s substantial General Fund infrastructure needs and recommended that Council direct staff to explore supplemental, long-term fmancing options to meet those needs. It was anticipated that staff would deliver a comprehensive infrastructure plan with recommended financing mechanisms to the Finance Committee in the Fall of 1996. To develop a comprehensive plan, an Infrastructure Task Force consisting of staff from the Administrative Services, Public Works, Community Services, and Planning Departments was formed. Meeting since April, this group is in the process of identifying infrastructure needs, prioritizing those needs, determining the capital and maintenance costs associated with infrastructure improvements, and proposing financing options. Based on the quantity and CMR:377:96 Page 1 of 4 quality of information gathered by the Task Force to date, as well as the need to incorporate Planning Commission feedback, staff has developed a phased Infrastructure Work Plan for presenting infrastructure information to the Finance Committee. DISCUSSION Although it was originally envisioned that one comprehensive report covering all infrastructure elements could be prepared for Finance Committee review in Fall 1996, several factors cause staff to recommend a phased approach instead. First, phasing will enable the Comrnittee to focus on one manageable group of infrastructure elements at a time. Based upon recent Finance Committee review of a portion of the Traffic element, and staff’s review of the draft report on the Buildings/Facilities infrastructure category, staff believes the quantity of information required to fully evaluate each infrastructure element could be overwhelming, if presented for discussion all at one time. Second, phasing allows fully developed elements to be presented to the Committee when they are complete, while providing staff additional time to complete less developed elements such as open space needs. Third, phasing facilitates involvement of the Planning Commission in review of anticipated infrastructure improvements and provides for better coordination with the Comprehensive Plan process. Finally, a phased approach is congruent with funding options related to each infrastructure category. For example, debt financing through Certificates of Participation or the establishment of a sinking fund are appropriate options for building and facility infrastructure work, while creation of a Landscape and Lighting Benefit Assessment District may be applicable to Parks and Open Space improvements. Based on an evaluation of each infrastructure element, staff is proposing four modules which would be presented to the Committee starting in November 1996 as follows: Module 1: Buildings and Facilities November 1996 Module 2: Traffic and Transportation ¯Traffic ~ ¯Streets ,Sidewalks ,Bikeways ¯Pedestrian Facilities ¯Medians Spring 1997 CMR:377:96 Page 2 of 4 Module 3: Parks, Open Space and Technology ¯Parks ¯Open Spaces °Creeks and Riparian Habitat °Technology Summer 1997 Module 4: Miscellaneous °Bridges ¯Parking Lots °Public Art Summer 1998 Once the Finance Committee has discussed the first three modules, a review session will be held in Fall 1997 to compare and prioritize the infrastructure needs presented in each element. This schedule provides the Committee an opportunity to discuss the City’s infrastructure requirements and to give guidance to staff in preparing the next two-year budget (1998-2000). Module 4, consisting of elements which are not believed to be in critical condition, will be inventoried and assessed with consultant assistance in 1997-98 and be incorporated into the subsequent two-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Each infrastructure element report will provide information on the following topics: existing inventory description preventive/ongoing maintenance needs capital replacement/rehabilitation needs new or expanded infrastructure needs proposed rationale for prioritizing infrastructure projects funding options Staff intends to involve the Planning Commission (PC) in the review of each infrastructure module. As a first step, the Infrastructure Work Plan will be presented to the PC for discussion at its September 25, 1996 meeting. With the exception of Module 1, each infrastructure module will be brought to the PC prior to presentation to the Finance Committee. Input from the PC on how each module relates to the Comprehensive Plan can then be incorporated into Finance Committee discussions. As indicated above, Module 1 will cover Buildings/Facilities. This element has been developed with the assistance of a consultant over the last year, and will be ready to be presented to the Finance Committee on November 19, 1996. The final report will include an evaluation of the replacement needs for all City buildings and the consequences of deferring maintenance on these systems, as well as information on priorities and potential CMR:377:96 Page 3 of 4 funding options. To keep on track with the November 19 Finance Committee discussion, staff intends to invite PC representatives to the Finance Committee meeting for discussion of the report. Since Finance Committee review of all critical modules will not be completed until Fall 1997, the 1997-98 CIP will address the City’s most pressing infrastructure needs for traffic and transportation, parks and open spaces, streets and sidewalks, and technology and information systems, as well as incorporating information from the Building/Facilities module. As in past years, the proposed CIP will focus on crucial issues raised by the public and Council. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The development of an Infrastructure Management System and Workplan is consistent with Council direction. Each infrastructure element presented to the Finance Committee will be reviewed by staff for correlation with the policy and programs in the new Comprehensive Plan. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact of the City’s infrastructure needs will be provided as each infrastructure module is presented to the Finance Committee. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT As a feasibility and planning document, the infrastructure work program is statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. The required environmental analysis will be completed on a project-by-project basis, as part of the planning and design work of the project. PREPARED BY:George Bagdon, Assistant Director of Public Works Joe Saccio, Senior Financial Analyst DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CC:laJa Deputy City Manager, ~S Fleming Manager CMR:377:96 Page 4 of 4