HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-27 City Council (6)City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
DATE:NOVEMBER 27, 2000 CMR:428:00
SUBJECT:DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES - APPROVAL OF
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING, PARKING SPACE
ALLOCATION, CONCEPT OF DEFERRED TEEN CENTER
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION AND REVIEW OF FINANCING
ISSUES AND COSTS BEING DEVELOPED FOR THE FUTURE
PRELIMINARY ENGINEER’S REPORT
REPORT IN BRIEF
On February 7, 2000, Council approved a Planned Community (PC) zone ordinance that
established the size and design concepts for two multi-level parking structures, one at
Lots S and L (Bryant/Lytton/Florence) and the other at Lot R (between High/Alma
Streets). Since that time, the construction plans have been developed to the 50 percent
completion stage and a cost estimate and Preliminary Engineer’s Report is being prepared
for the assessment district.
Staff is requesting approval of simultaneous construction of both garages, which will
reduce the construction costs significantly. Simultaneous construction will also mean that
the full 716 additional new parking spaces would be available in approximately one and
one half years versus two and one half years if the garages were built sequentially.
A portion of the non-parking space which would be built at the comer of Bryant!Lytton
has been set aside for use as a new Teen Center. Community Services Department staff is
currently preparing a Youth Master Plan that will explore ways in which the teen
community can be better served, including an evaluation of facility locations. In order
not to expend design fees unnecessarily, a recommendation on whether the Teen Center
should be located downtown would be needed by September 1, 2001.
During the construction of the garages, the current 189 surface parking spaces will be
removed at Lots R and S!L. Staff is recommending that the old Palo Alto Medical
Foundation (PAMF) parking lot be used as one of the sites for parking displaced during
CMR:428:00 Page 1 of 15
the construction period. Use of the PAMF lot would defer starting construction of a City
park on the site until after the fall of 2003. Staff is also recommending that parts of the
Cowper/Webster garage be used for parking during construction. The upper levels of the
Cowper/Webster garage are currently held under private ownership. However staff is
pursuing an early transfer of parking rights to the City.
Staff is requesting that Council review financing issues and costs being developed for use
in a future Preliminary Engineer’s Report that will discuss the assessment formula and
project costs. The process required to form an assessment district includes a protest
hearing, at the end of the which ballots mailed to each property in the district are counted.
Proposition 218 requires the votes to be weighted based on the size of the assessment to
each property owner. If less than a majority of property owners within the assessment
district boundaries vote against the project, the Council may proceed with the project, in
which case the design would be completed and construction would likely begin in early
spring of 2002. Staff will return to Council in January 2001 for approval of the
Preliminary Engineer’s Report, and request authorization to proceed with the assessment
ballot proceeding.
The overall project schedule through March 2001 is as follows:
November 27, 2000 - Council Approves: construction sequencing; a goal for the
number of parking spaces; temporary parking during construction; and deferral ~f
detailed design on the interior portion of the Teen Center. Review project and
financing cost issues that are being developed for a future Preliminary Engineer’s
Report.
Mid-January 2001: Council adopts Preliminary Engineer’s Report; mail. ballots to
downtown property owners.
[]Late January to March 2001: Minimum 45-day voting period; conduct project
information workshops.
[]Mid-March 2001: Ballots due and counted; Council holds protest hearing, certifies
election results and approves Final Engineer’s Report.
CMR:428:00 Page 2 of 15
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Approve the simultaneous construction of two new parking garages.
Direct staff to set an initial goal that would designate forty (40) to sixty (60) percent of
the new garage parking spaces as public parking. This percentage is consistent with
the current overall public parking allocation in the downtown parking district.
Direct staff to defer detailed design on the interior portion of the Teen Center, located
in the commercial building at Bryant/Lytton, pending the recommendations of a
Community Services Department study on the preferred Teen Center location. If a
recommendation is delayed staff is proposing options which would have varying fiscal
impacts.
Authorize the use of the old Palo Alto Medical Foundation parking lot at Homer
Avenue/Waverly Street for vehicle parking during construction of the garages, and
defer construction of any City park on the site until construction of the garages is
complete. Direct staff to pursue acquisition of additional parking spaces on the upper
floors at the Cowper/Webster garage that would be used for parking during the
construction period.
BACKGROUND
On February 7, 2000, Council approved the PC zone Ordinance that established the size
and design concepts for two multi-level parking structures in the downtown area
(CMR:133 :00). The two structures would be located at Lot R (south of University
Avenue, between High/Alma Streets) and Lots S and L (Bryant!Lytton). Design,
construction, project administration and financing costs for the two garages is estimated
to be $47 million, which would be financed by downtown property owners if an
assessment district balloting procedure is successful.
A design concept was presented to Council for approval on December 20, 1999
(CMR:456:99). Since that time, and pursuant to Council direction, staff developed design
details with a working group in lieu of returning to full City review boards and
commissions. The working group is comprised of an artist (Sam Smidt), several local
architects (Tony Carrasco, Joe Bellomo, Richard Elmore, Tom Richman), Architectural
Review Board (Bob Peterson), Planning Commission (Kathy Schmidt), Public Art
Commission (Judith Wasserman), downtown property owner (Chop Keenan) and
Chamber of Commerce (Barbara Gross) representatives. The working group has helped
to expedite the design package while allowing the representatives of the various boards to
provide direction and input to the project architects and artists. The assessed costs that
CMR:428:00 Page 3 of 15
will be used in the Preliminary Engineer’s Report (PER) are based upon the design
developed by the working group.
The design has been developed to the 50 percent completion stage and provides for 213
spaces at the Lot R garage and 692 spaces at the Lot S/L garage, for a total of 905 spaces.
This is 716 new spaces beyond the 189 that are currently available at the existing surface
lots (74 on Lot R, 115 on Lot S/L). Each garage will have public plazas, art, restrooms
and electric vehicle hookups. Lot S will have one floor at-grade, four floors above-grade
and two basement levels. Lot L will have one level at-grade, three levels above-grade
and two basement levels. It will also have a commercial area at Bryant Street and Lytton
Avenue available for future City functions. Lot R will have one level at-grade and 4
levels above grade.
DISCUSSION
Assessment District Process
In order to finance the construction of the two parking garages, the City of Palo Alto must
form a new downtown parking assessment district and issue bonds. Detailed information
on the assessment district and financing will be presented to Council in mid-January
2001. At that time, Council will be asked to approve the Preliminary Engineer’s Report
(PER) which includes ’assessment formulas and detailed project costs. Upon Council’s
approval of the PER, mail ballot proceedings will be initiated shortly afterwards in order
to form an assessment district. Outreach meetings with property owners will be held and
informational brochures will be included in each ballot. The City will then hold a public
hearing a minimum of 45 days after ballots and the notices of public hearings are mailed
to district property owners. If less than a majority of property owners (with votes
weighted according the amount of each assessment) vote against the district, the Council
may proceed with the project, in which case the design of the garages would be
completed and the project would be advertised for construction bids in the winter of 2001.
Construction of the garages could then begin in the spring of 2002.
Construction Sequencing and Impact
Staff recommends that both. garages be built simultaneously. This would save
approximately $250,000 in construction costs resulting from a more efficient use of
materials and labor and $675,000 in inflationary costs (assuming Lot R was to be built
after the Lot S!L garage was completed). In addition to increased construction and
inflation costs, costs resulting from an additional bond sale could be avoided. A second
additional bond sale for Lot R, with additional financing costs, would be necessary since
the proceeds from the sale of tax-exempt bonds need to be expended within three years.
If the garages were built sequentially, disruption of the downtown area would extend for
approximately one year longer than if they were built simultaneously. Constructing both
garages simultaneously would provide all 716 additional parking spaces in approximately
one and one half years versus two and one half years after the start of construction.
CMR:428:00 Page 4 of 15
The primary traffic impacts during construction would be from trucks hauling excavated
soil or delivering concrete. The excavation for Lot S/L will be a continuous operation for
three months, with about 4 trucks per hour entering and leaving the site. For Lot R, there
is less excavation, which can be done with smaller trucks over a one month period.
Concrete pouring follows excavation and will consist of about one pour per week over a
10 month period for Lot S/L and over a six month period for Lot R. On the day concrete
is poured, an average of four trucks will arrive and depart each hour from each site.
During concrete pours, the lanes immediately fronting the sites will need to be closed to
accommodate the concrete truck staging and pumping operations. Existing peak-hour
levels of service (LOS) at nearby intersections are all LOS C (light congestion) or better
and the addition of construction traffic will not change the intersection LOS. Public
Works staff has already begun working with Transportation and Police staff in developing.
truck routes that would result in minimal disruption to downtown traffic and to ensure
that residential areas are not impacted.
Several other projects may be scheduled in the downtown area at or near the time of the
garage construction (Attachment A). The most significant of these is the potential Homer
Avenue Tunnel, which will consist of a pedestrian and bicycle tunnel that will connect
Homer Avenue (at Alma Street) to the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF). Work on
this project, if approved by Council for inclusion as a future Capital Improvement Project,
could occur at roughly the same time as the Lot R garage. It is not yet known what
portion, if any, of the excavation could be performed from the PAMF end of the tunnel,
or what portion of Alma might need to be closed during construction. A significant
portion of the funding secured to-date is time-sensitive and the tunnel project could not be
delayed without endangering or eliminating the funding source. Both the tunnel and
garage projects would be overseen by the Public Works Department, which should
improve coordination between the two projects.
Construction would span a holiday season and no stoppage for the holidays is planned, as
it would add significant costs to the project. The contractor would pass the salary costs of
idle workers to the assessment district, since it is difficult to reassign crews to other jobs
for such a short period of time, particularly in the winter months when work is
traditionally slow. Both garages will have been under construction for nearly nine
months at that time, and most traffic and pedestrians patterns would already have shifted
to accommodate construction, so no addition dis.ruption is anticipated. Construction
traffic would be segregated from other traffic by temporary fencing so as to reduce traffic
conflicts. The excavation and most of the concrete pouring would have been completed
by the holidays, so the sites would have less construction traffic than during the initial
months.
Replacement Parking During Construction
If the structures were to be built simultaneously, the result would be a short-term loss of
approximately 189 parking spaces (74 from Lot R, 115 from Lot S/L) in the downtown
CMR:428:00 Page 5 of 15
area for a period of approximately one a.nd one half years. The contractor will also
require parking areas for employees, subcontractors, equipment and material. Due to the.
shortage of parking in the downtown area, the Environmental Impact Report for the
project called this issue a "significant unavoidable impact", requiring the City to develop
a parking mitigation plan.
Staff has been actively pursuing replacement parking options for the construction period.
The top floors of the Cowper/Webster garage may be available for public or permit use.
The development agreement for the garage had stated that the top levels would be
privately operated until approximately 2006. Staff is currently in negotiations with the
leaseholder of the top levels of the garage regarding an early reversion to public
ownership. While the exact numbers of parking spaces that could be made available is
based in part upon rental negotiations with the adjacent building tenant, staff estimates
that over 100 spaces could be available for use during the construction period.
The parking lot area of the old Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) site at
Homer/Waverley was acquired by the City for a future park. Staff is recommending that
this site be used to provide approximately 120 parking spaces during construction of the
garages. Use of this site for parking during construction would mean that construction on
a new City park could not begin until the fall of 2003.
By using the top levels of the Cowper/Webster garage and the old PAMF parking lot,
estimated 220 parking spaces could be provided to replace the 189 spaces lost during
construction. Employees of the contractor will be directed to park in the 47-space
parking lot at E1 Camino Park (across from Stanford Shopping Center) during their
working hours.
Number of Public versus Permit Parking Spaces
Prior to holding the mail ballot proceedings to form an assessment district, the
distribution of public versus permit spaces needs to be determined so that property
owners will know how many new spaces will be provided. Significant issues related to
this decision, resulting from the impact of the proposed Residential Parking Permit
Program and the fiscal impacts, primarily to permit fees.
The current distribution of parking spaces in the downtown parking district is as follows
(see Attachment B for additional details):
Public Permit
Garages Only 29%71%
Lots & Garages 48%52%
Staff is recommending that the range of public parking allocated in the new garages be
from forty (40) to sixty (60) percent. The resulting mix of permit and public parking is
CMR:428:00 Page 6 of 15
shown in Attachment C. The target would maintain the overall downtown parking mix of
permit and public parking, while the goal of 40 to 60 percent will allow staff the
flexibility to respond to the following factors, which were used to determine the goal:
,The need to keep at least as many public spaces as currently exist on the surface lots.
[]The recommended goal of 40 to 60 percent public spaces is subject to design and/or
enforcement constraints. For example, full bays, sections or aisles would be assigned
as either public or permit parking, as opposed to allowing a handful of perm!t parking
on a floor otherwise filled with public parking.
[]Any acquisition of the floors of the Cowper/Webster garage would shift the
allocations of permit and public parking. Since the demand for permit parking is
greater near the Cowper/Webster garage than near either the Lot R or Lot S/L garages,
all of the new spaces acquired (assume a minimum of 100 additional spaces from the
upper floors) could be designated as permit. This would allow the new garages to
have a larger percentage of designated public parking.
[]Percentages in the new garages or other downtown parking garages or lots may be
adjusted to accommodate the needs of any Residential Parking Permit program.
Sufficient amounts of permit parking will be needed downtown in order to
accommodate increased downtown parking demands resulting from nonresident
parkers that would be displaced from residential neighborhoods.
The Police Department estimates that in the areas north and south of downtown, 70
percent of the parked vehicles belonged to nonresidents, which is 682 and 848 total
vehicles, respectively (CMR:403:99). The survey was conducted on April 27, 1999,
and the survey area was Palo Alto Avenue on the north, Kingsley Avenue on the
south and Alma and Byron Streets on the east and west (Lytton, University, Forest
and part of Hamilton Avenues were excluded).
The total estimated 1,530 nonresidential vehicles that could be displaced by a
Residential Permit Parking program is more than the new garages can accommodate.
The new garages will provide 716 spaces above what currently exists on Lots R and
SiL. If the City acquires the upper levels of the Cowper/Webster garage, 100 or more
spaces could be added to the City’s parking inventory. Any new Cowper/Webster
spaces could be designated as permit parking, since the Chamber of Commerce
Parking Subcommittee reports that demand for permit parking is greater there than in
the area of the Lot R and Lot S/L garages where there is a larger demand for public
parking.
The downtown parking deficit will remain at approximately 700 vehicles, even with
any additional parking spaces from the upper levels of the Cowper/Webster garage.
If a Residential Permit Parking program is implemented, it is possible that some of
CMR:428:00 Page 7 of 15
these drivers may chose to purchase a non-resident permit and continue parking in the
neighborhoods.
The revenue generated from the sale of parking permits is used to fund the maintenance
of the district parking lots and garages. If the number of parking spaces in the downtown
area designated as public parking is significantly increased at the expense of permit
spaces, permit fees would need to be raised in order to cover maintenance costs. The
number of permit spaces could also be increased in order to achieve a desirable permit
cost.
The current fee of $280 per year was established in 1997 and was projected to cover costs
through the end of 2002, at which time maintenance costs would be re-evaluated and
updated. Maintenance costs for the new garages (excluding any Teen Center costs) are
estimated to be $278,000 and would be added to the updated cost of maintaining the
existing downtown parking garages and surface lots. If the upper levels of the
Cowper/Webster garage are acquired by the City, the estimated cost to upgrade or repair
the structure would be an additional $40,000 per year (assuming the repairs are spread
over a ten-year period). If Council approves the staff recommendation that 40 to 60
percent of the spaces in the new garage be public, the maintenance costs for the parking
district would be passed to roughly 1,700 permit holders (which excludes any new permit
spaces that might be acquired at Cowper/Webster). The estimated annual fee would
increase from $280 per year to $400 or $500 per year. Any increase in permit fees could
be implemented in an incremental fashion over several years.
As some of the above issues de;celop over the coming year, the distribution of permit and
public parking in the downtown area may need to be adjusted in order to accommodate
the new demands. Staff will work with the Chamber of Commerce Parking
Subcommittee to determine the appropriate parking mix prior to opening the new garages
in the fall of 2003.
Permit Allocation Process, Pay-Parking and Commute Coordination
Staff intends to work closely with the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Merchants
on several issues in the next several months..Staff has had valuable feedback from the
Downtown Merchants Association regarding problems with the City’s current parking
allocation process. It appears that, some amendments to the current process could net
additional spaces and provide an opportunity to more effectively address the parking
needs of local businesses and residents. Valet parking, for example, could be
implemented on an existing lot or garage, and would not need to wait for the new garages
to be completed. Staff intends to work with the Chamber Parking Subcommittee on these
issues as well.
Lot S is currently used for attendant-parking which provides the public with parking for
longer periods of time than the usual 2 to 3 hours allowed in other downtown parking
CMR:428:00 Page 8 of 15
lots. The Police Department will work with the Chamber of Commerce Parking
Subcommittee to identify a satisfactory replacement lot for the attendant parking prior to
the start of construction.’ It is likely that the lot selected for attendant parking will remain
as paid-parking after the new garages are completed. The new parking structures would
be built on relatively small lots and there is no room available at the entrance for an
attendant booth.
The new garages will have conduit installed in such a way as to accommodate internal
gate-arms for card readers for any future pay or permit parking use. There is no room for
gate arms at the entrance of either garage. The Lot R garage would have room internally
for gate arms without the loss of any parking spaces due to its ramp configuration. The
Lot S/L garage has a different internal configuration, however. The addition of any
internal gates would result in the loss of approximately 10 parking spaces wherever gates
were installed. Although the gates themselves do not require much space, several parking
stalls on either side of the gate must be kept clear to allow cars to back out as other
vehicles queue at the gate.
The City is also addressing the downtown congestion and parking situation on the
demand side. A position was created in the Transportation Division for a Commute
Coordinator. The Commute Coordinator oversees Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) programs for the Downtown Business District. Programs include: TDM
consulting for any downtown business; sponsored Commute Fairs where employees can
register in carpool, vanpool or buspool programs or learn about public transit options; a
guaranteed ride home program for employees of employers who are registered in the
Downtown Commute program; the bike locker rental program and the Carpool Parking
Program.. The Commute Coordinator markets these programs through mailers,
advertisement in the local newspapers and through an e-mail distribution list. The
Commute Program offers alternatives to driving alone and assists employees with
determining the best option for them, this reduces employee demand on parking.
Teen Center Design Issues
The design for the Teen Center, which would be located at the corner of Bryant and
Lytton, is now 50 percent complete. The Teen Center would have frontage along Lytton
Avenue and have space on both the first and second floors of the build out, for a total of
roughly 4,400 square feet. The remaining 3,000 square foot portion of the building on
Bryant Street could be leased for commercial uses in order to recover the construction
costs for the Teen Center building or used for another City function.
The City is currently developing a Youth Master Plan (Plan). This Plan is examining
whether a single site is optimal or whether another structure for delivering teen services is
viable. This process is expected to unfold over the next year, so it is important to
maintain flexibility for use of the non-parking space. To preserve its options, the City
will incur additional costs. Whereas a Teen Center would have been exempt from being
CMR:428:00 page 9 of 15
charged parking assessment costs, uncertainty about its future requires the City to cover
the full share of parking assessment costs. Options for non-parking space, which could
include a Teen Center, retail and office space, or space for City employees (who would
otherwise need rental space downtown) need further discussion.
In order to not delay the design or construction of the garages, the following schedule
must be met:
September 2001: To date, $48,300 has been spent on the preliminary design of the
Teen Center. This cost is borne by the City, and not by the assessment district as a
whole. A decision against constructing a new Teen Center downtown would be
needed by September in order tonot expend the roughly $75,000 needed to complete
the design of the Teen Center. If no recommendation has been made, staff would
proceed with the design of the interior spaces (at a design cost of roughly $75,000) in
order to meet design deadlines for the overall project.
January 2002: If no recommendation has been made by this date, staff will bid the
Teen Center portion as a "Bid Alternate". Bid Alternates are portions of construction
items that the City can, at its discretion decide to award to the contractor. Prices
received from this method are competitive.
March 2002: The Teen Center Bid Alternate can be awarded along with the rest of the
project construction if a decision has been reached by the end of the bidding period.
June 2003: If a decision to build is reached before this date, the Teen Center would be
built using a Construction Change Order (CCO). A CCO is the most costly option, as
the contractor may ask for up to 25 percent above the price that may have been given
in the Bid Alternate. This premium compensates the contractor for the extra work
necessary to re-mobilize crews and subcontractors and reflects the sole-source, non-
competitive nature of the contracted work. A decision by June 2003 would allow
construction of the Teen Center to be completed by the end of construction for the
garages.
RESOURCE IMPACT
The City has advanced $1,409,400 in funding for the design effort from the feasibility
study to the present 50 percent design completion stage. The Parking In-Lieu Fund
(approximately $798,000) was used to pay for design services and the remainder of the
fee has come from the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve.
Construction of the parking structures and a non-parking element of the SiL structure will
have the following fiscal impacts on the City.
CMR:428:00 Page 10 of 15
Under Proposition 218, the City will be assessed as a benefiting property owner for
the Civic Center, Senior Center and the Lot S/L non-parking element. Final
assessed costs will be included with the PER in January 2001.
The General Fund will also be responsible for financing the costs associated with
the Lot S/L structure non-parking element. In the first financing stage, the General
Fund must pay approximately $.4 million in design and other costs for the non-
parking element. Initially, the City will have to draw on the Budget Stabilization
Reserve (BSR) for the $.4 million.
In the second financing stage, the City would finance the $2.2 million construction
cost of the build out as well as the $.4 million in design costs incurred in the first
stage financing. By financing the $.4 million, the BSR will be made whole and the
full costs of the non-parking element will be reflected. Depending upon the mix of
private and public use of the non-parking element, annual debt service can range
from $265,000 (tax exempt financing) to $347,000 (taxable financing).
The City’s ability to offset its expenses for the non-parking space depends upon the
amount of space it is willing to lease for retail and office use. Assuming a Teen Center
would occupy approximately 4,400 of the 8,100 square feet available, the City could
realize anywhere from $134,000 to $148,000 annually in lease revenue for the remaining
space. This rent, based on an initial rate of $4.00 per square foot, would be adjusted
annually and cover higher portions of the debt service expense over time. Should the City
decide to rent the entire 8100 square feet for private use, it could realize up to $389,000
annually. Increasing use of the available non-parking space for private purposes,
however, could result in higher debt service expense if the City were required to issue
taxable bonds (interest rates are higher for taxable bonds compared to tax exempt bonds)
as the amount of private use space reached certain thresholds.
The University Avenue Assessment District has two outstanding debt issues, the 1977
and 1989 University Avenue Assessment Bonds, which have a combined total of $3.43
million in outstanding principal. Based on current interest rates, it is estimated that the
Assessment District will realize $100,000 in economic savings or 4.3 percentage savings
from refunding existing bonds. ’It will also be possible to make the old and new
assessments consistent, streamlining administration of the downtown parking assessment
district.
To finance the design and construction of the two new parking structures, the City will be
issuing bonds under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. This financing will occur after
property owners have voted on formation of an assessment district. Property owners are
expected to vote during January, February and March on the new district. If a successful
vote is achieved, it is staff’s recommendation to issue bonds in two stages.
CMR:428:00 Page 11 of 15
The first stage is to issue bonds to reimburse $.61 million to the General Fund and $.8
million to the Parking In-Lieu fund. These reimbursements are for monies already spent
to bring design work to 50 percent completion. The first stage would also generate funds
for the remaining 50 percent of design work necessary prior to construction as well as
bond issuance, easement and other costs. This stage will also refinance the outstanding
University Avenue assessment bonds discussed above. This stage, known as "soft-cost
financing," allows the Assessment District to carry the additional design costs.
The second stage of financing, the "hard-cost. financing," will occur just before
construction on the S/L and R lots, now projected to begin in March or April of 2002. It
will include construction, contingency, bond issuance, inflation and other costs. Based on
a conservative interest rate of 7 percent and an amortization period of 30 years, it is
estimated that the rate of assessment for building the new parking structures (and the first
stage financing) will be approximately $1.70 per square foot per year.
The second stage will also include financing for a non-parking element in the S/L garage.
Because that element will be used for purposes other than parking, the Parking
Assessment District cannot finance its costs. Instead, through a separate financing, the
City’s General Fund will finance the 8,100 square feet for a potential teen center and/or
retail space.
Staffing Impacts
A contract engineering firm will be retained during the final design and construction
period to supplement Public Works staff. Even with contract engineers, however, staff
will .spend significant amounts of time on the project, particularly during construction.
Staff would oversee final design, construction activities, coordinate with other City
services or departments and serve as a liaison between the downtown merchants and the
contractor. It is estimated that an average 0.50 full-time equivalent (FTE) Senior
Engineer and 1.00 FTE Engineer would be needed from the final design through the end
of construction. Another 0.50 FTE employee would be needed near the end of final
design and through construction, to assist engineers with non-technical logistical issues
such as identifying delivery truck staging areas, monitoring dust and traffic controls, etc.
Staff would also serve as a liaison between merchants, citizens and the contractor during
construction and relay information on project updates to merchants and the public.
In order to backfill the staff engineers who will monitor the overall progress of the work
$758,000 has been budgeted into the project costs. These funds would be used to hire a
firm or individual to oversee other infrastructure projects that staff would not have time to
supervise due to its involvement in the construction of the parking structures.
In addition to Public Works Eiigineering Division staffing impacts during design and
construction, the Facilities Division estimates an additional 0.25 full time equivalent
employee to assist in maintenance and repair of the garages, restrooms and Teen Center.
CMR:428:00 Page 12 of 15
Public Works Operations Division, Police (parking enforcement) and the Parks Division
will also require some increase in staff or contractor funding. Since the assessment
district can only finance items related to the design and construction of facilities, and not
fund on-going maintenance, staff will include incremental staffing in future budget
proposals.
Maintenance Costs
Adding two garages will increase maintenance costs, which are recovered from revenues
generated from parking permit fees. The current permit fee, which was last increased in
1997, is $280 per year. The fee was intended to be sufficient to cover inflation and other
maintenance costs during the period from 1997 through 2002. Staff will re-evaluate the
fee prior to 2003 in order to incorporate costs associated with any new garages as well as
any acquisition of additional parking floors at the Cowper/Webster garage. These costs
would be added to future City budget proposals once the parking garage are completed.
The following costs are the estimated annual costs associated with maintenance for both
garages:
Downtown Parking Structures
Estimated Annual Maintenance Costs
Description
Security Patrols
Landscape Maintenance
Janitorial S~rvices for built-in restrooms
Maintenance and repair of elevators and
lighting, power washing and vandalism
repair
Janitorial services for Teen Center
Total Annual Cost:
Estimated Annual Cost
$ 70,000
$18,000
$ 65,000
$125,000
$ 41,000
$319,000
Public Works Engineering currently administers the annual assessment roll for the
existing downtown parking assessment district. Upon approval of a new assessment
district, however, the existing downtown parking assessment district would be merged
with the newly formed district. The cost saving from refinancing the existing bonds will
cover the costs of hiring a consultant to administer the annual assessment district. A
CMR:428:00 Page 13 of 15
change in assessment methodology to a "fixed lien" will also eliminate the need for the
annual occupancy survey. This will significantly reduce the annual administration cost.
Although the districts will still require staff oversight, it will free some additional time for
Public Works staff to work on other priorities.
TIMELINE
The project schedule
November 27
Mid-January 2001
January -
March 2001
is as follows:
Council reviews financing issues and construction related-issues
Council approves Preliminary Engineers Report and directs staff to
proceed with mailing ballots for assessment district proceedings.
City staff and consultants hold information outreach workshop(s)
with property owners
Mid-March
May 2001
Council holds a meeting at least 45 days after ballots are mailed to
conduct a public hearing on the proposed assessment. Ballots to be
tabulated after close of public hearing either on night of public
hearing or in subsequent Council meeting.
If upon tabulation of ballots, there is affirmative approval by a
majority based on dollars assessed, council adopts a Resolution
Adopting Engineer’s Report, Confirming the Assessment, Ordering
the Work and Directing Actions with Respect Thereto.
City issues first in series of bonds to reimburse project costs already
spent, fund additional design costs, and refinance existing
Downtown Assessment District bonds.
May - December
January 2002
April 2002
Design work completed
Construction bids solicited
Construction begins. Bonds for construction costs issued
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
An Environmental Impact Report was prepared as part of the PC zoning application and
was certified by Council on December 20, 1999, by adoption of Resolution No. 7917.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Future Downtown Construction Projects
Attachment B: Distribution of Existing Public and Permit Parking Spaces
CMR:428:00 Page 14 of 15
Attachment C: Distribution of Parking Using Recommended Target Percentages
PREPARED BY:Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer, Public Works
Joe Saccio, Manage~ of Investment & Debt, Administrative Services
DEPARTMENT HEAD :/~__~-,-~ /~" ~~.
GLENN S. ROBERTS
Director of Public Works
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ......
E~;~ILY’~~ oN -
Assistant City Manager
Chamber of Commerce
Chop Keenan
Roxy Rapp
Warren Thoits
Jim Baer
CMR:428:00 Page 15 of 15
VE::J:B~TERO E
.~ C’~WPER ST l
!001 UTILITY Vrl#K
2001! ILUI g/LI
j FALL 8003)
:,
LYTTrlN PI_~ ~!_
RECONSTRUCTION (200a)
ATTACH MENT A
2002 UTILII~Y VORK
IAN/-BI6Y6LE---TUNNEL--TOH~NF
2002-FALL 2003)
DE]WNTQWN CBNSTRUCTIBN PRBJECTS~ 2001-8003
ATTACHMENT B
o
&
0 mww~m
Ill>
F-O
ATTACHMENT C
ALLOCATION OF EXISTING & PROPOSED PARKING SPACES DOWNTOWN
CURRENT
Pa~
Lo~- ~ St./Alma
~e
JAil Other Facilities
Total
Number of
Permit
37
0
304
803
1144
Parking Spaces
Public
37
115
112
827
1091
Total
74
115
416
1630
2235
% Public
Spaces
50%
100%
27%
51%
49%
Parking Facility
High St./Alma Parking Str
Bryant/Florence Parking Str
Cowper/Webster Garage
All Other Facilities
Total
PROPOSED
Number of Parking
Permit
127
384
404
803
1718
Public
86
308
112
827
1333
Spaces
Total
213
692
516
1630
3051
% Public
Spaces
4O%
45%
22%
51%
44%
CHANGE
Parkin~
~~ Str
~~tr
~arag_e
JAil Other Facilities
Total
Number of Parking
Permit
9O
384
100
0
574
Public
49
193
0
0
242
Spaces
Total
139
577
100
0
816
% Public
Spaces
35%
33%
0%
0%
30%