HomeMy WebLinkAbout0369.094'\
11
July 1. 1994
KOhlORMLIo! CITY COUNCIL
lla lo Alto~ California
Comprehensive Plan Update ProcesB Response to City Council
~¢qt for Informat.ion OD Status of Budget
Ketf;.bers ot the COUJlcil:
"ntis report report responds to a request from Council for addition
al information regarding the status of the COf(~pl:ehensive Plan
budget, lnfol-mation (jbout expenditures to dat.e is provided, as
",'ell a8 a discussion of the need for the additional $105,000
appl'oved by Council on June 20. 1994 with the Fiscal Year 1994-1995
0pcl:ating Budget.
No action io requested from the Council on this item.
In October of 1992~ the COllor.-,il approved a budget of $507,000 for
~he update of the Comprehensive Plan. Twenty-five percent of this
amount {$126. '150) was funded from Entel.-pt-ise Funds, with the
remaining .amount ($380. ~SO) provided by the General Fund. In
Nove1l:'ber of 1993, at the request of' the Comprehensive Plan Advisory
CorrlJ~ittee( the Council approved an increase to the budget of
$185,000 (l00 percent from 'General Fund) for the preparation of
Community Character and Governance Elements and to <J.llow thl-ee
-cOmMunit.y design workshops and one trcmeportation workshop_
Several other minor additions totalling $14,30$ ($11,120 from the
City Manager's contingency fund and $3~ 188 from the planning
Division operating budget) had brought the total apprDved budget
amount to $106,)08.
Based on an analysis of expenditures to date and estimates of funds
needed for the rcmain~er of the update process; staff had requested
an additional $80 1 000 for Comprehensive Plan funding in the fiscal
year 1994,-1995 operating budg':-< to complete Phase III of the update
process. An additional $25,1}(-l ft-om CDBG funds was proposed to be
CNR:)69~94
.'.
o ,':)
used to i1ire a consultant to complete the housing element. These
request8 were approved by Council on June 20, 1994. bringing the
total budget-for the Comprehensive Pian update to a total of
$611,308.
More information regarding this analysis ie presented below.
IllSCQSSIQH
Attached is a detailed status ~:epo:k"t of the Comprehensi~e Plan
budget exper:diturcs ao of May 31. 1.g94~ which does not include the
Phase 'II! funding just approved by Council on .. nine 20. ,page 1 of
the attachment is an DVOIVic'W B\HM',~ry; pages 2 and 3 provide
details of f~lnda co;n.'l1itted to consultallt contractu; and pages 4 and
S pX'ovido dotails of funds expended .h:om all other accounts.
The additional $.105~OOO funding is to cover six specific arp'(js
identified by staff .10 hl;lvin!.l in;,>.;dcqu3te btldget to complete Phase
III of "the lipd'l;-te process. A bt"ief description of each follows~
Original Budg~t A!"!'<oul1t:
8xpenditm:eB as of r·la.y 31, 199"-;
Additional Amount Requested:
S 20,000
2'3, ~)25
lO,aCO
As of Ma~' 31. 1994~ this accotlJ1t is overoaxpended b~' $3,525. 1'his
can be att.ributed to sevttra 1 factol's:
o The Com\tlunity FO:t:utr; se):-ieo. ilnd the-.(ldvertising necessary
to in(o:rm people of the events, Wil9 not anticipated in
the ol'iginal btHIg:(>t;
• Moxe rrlccU,ngs are required to be fully noticed than .... 'as
plann~d fpr;
• The sudden clos\l).·c -of t.he Tirr.es 'frib'Jne required t.hat a
series of CPAC meeting ad ... ~ert ioe-menta be placed in the
r~ercury' Ne'WB, at ai,gnificant coat.
Staff has made Bornt:? adju8tm~nts in order to control advertising
costa. Fir6t~ the Palo Alto Weekly is now used to publish all
notices. Second. we have developed if; cal.cmdar-type notice format
that allows us toO publish just one main advertisement. each month,
Staff believes the addit.ional SlO,OOO will bt:? adequate to cover
advertising costs fo:t' PhaGe 1 fI . The current $).525 overcxpendi
ture will be covered by the Planning DiVision 1993-94 operating
budget. Addit_ionallYj there will be fewer meetings and events
requiring public noticing in Phase III, because a oignificant
amount of tilne will be-devoted to preparation of the actual plan.
OIR0369:94 7/7/9'
Page 2'
,
I ;,.
t
i
, ,
~blicatiQn of the CQmprehen~ivc Plan DoclImpnt
Origin.al Budget Amount:
Expenditures a6 of May 31, 1994:
Additional Amount Requested:
$: 15~OOO
o
20,000
In researching our publication needs, 'We find th~t otaff's initial
budget estimate misjudged publication coata. The original $lS~OOO
estimate suggested by the Conprchenaive Plan work pro~Il·-am W.lB
partially based on publication costs of the Nountain View pl.m.
However, staff recently discovered that this cost did lwt account
for publication of a Dl"aft. Nountain View's $1S,000 was used only
to publish 1. 000 copl~8 of a final plan, \\.'ith black 'and white
graphics.
Our estimate of incI'eased costs would allo\{ tOL' publ icat ion of
1,000 copies of ,,) draft and 1 1 000 copies of the final" It .11so
accounts for some extra e><pense to include pull-o\lt maps on .Ux17
pages. This is necessary because the shape and size of the Cit.y
boundaries does not allow the production of clear mapa in a ~mall
page fo:tlnat" Our total pl"ice estimate of $.lS .. 000 is ba~p.d on
quotes fl,"om two print shops, and '''''Quld include black and ""hite
graphics" Some of these costs can be recovered by charging a
document fee for copies of the final plan.
publica..tj~Qf. the Environmental_ Impj!.Qt_--,-~"~Lt
original Amount' B'..ldgeted:
Expenditures as of ~!ay 31, 1994:
Additional Amount Requested:
Not specified
$ 0
$15~OOO
None of the four firms which responded to the RFP to prepare the
EIR for the Comprehensive Plan included publication costs in their
bids. stating that the budget simply was not adequate to cover U10
work ,required to produce a legally adequate EIR and als'o j:n:ilit it.
Printing costs of $15,000 are est.imated based all $:!5 per copy for
300 qraft and 300 final copies.
Editing of the Comorchensive Plan OOcument,
or,iginal Budget Amount:
Expenditures as of May 31, 199~:
Additional Amount Requested:
$ 0
o
25~OOO
Funding of $25,000 for professional editing of the Comprehensiv~
plan document is necessary, based on experience with the last
Compl"ehenaive Plan update and the Downtown Urban DeSign Plan.
Staff believes it is crucial to hav~ a professional editor involved
in order to produce a clear and concise document bas~d mostly on
the work of committees. The editing cost for Mountain View' 8
recently adopted Comprehensive plan was $30,000.
7/7/94
Page )
,-:;
Suppliea and M~~
Original Budget Amount:
Expenditures as of May :n. 1994:
Additional Amoont Requested:
$ 41,145
38,350
10,000
These funds are used to support the CPAC and Technical Advisory
Group "rAG). Nhen the original budget was approved, support (or a
citizens committee of only half the size eventually appointed was
envisioned. Commun:tty participation, requests fOl-information, and
iht~re8t are far beyond projections. The four contmunity workshops
put an adqitional strain on this budget category.
The largest expense for this category is the printing of packet
materials for CPAC and TAG members, approximately $21 .. 700 to date.
The remainder of expenees are for audio visual equipm'ent "'ll1d
aervices (not originally projected}, food and beverage::>, office and
art/graphic supplies, delivery services and purchase of publica
tions (see page 4 of the attached "Comprehensive Plan Budget
Statuo n 1 '
I~hilc an average of $20, 000 has been expended fOl:' each of the first
two pha,ges, staff believes $10,000 will be adequate to cover Phase
III. We antieipate fe ..... ex CPAC meetings, The community wOl."kshops
are completed r and fewer meetings will result in cutbacks on
videot3ping, providing food and beverages for volunteers and
reproduction of packet materials.
Bousing Element
When the original Comprehensive plan Nork program was devp."loped,
the Planning Division housing staff WRS going to prepal.-e the
required housing element, However, stat f has det",ermined tnat it
would be more effective to hire a consultant to prepare the housing
element. Since the housing element is mandated by the state and
requires approval by the Department of Housing and Community
Development, hiring someone with a successful track recQrd in
prep~ring approved housing elements should significantly shorten
the total time needed for this effort. Additionally, this would
free up mo:ce of the housing staff's time to focus on completion of
the Barker Hotel projPrct.. facilitating acquisition of Arastradero
Park by the Hou'sing Corporation and completion of Ute' 1995 HUD
required Comprehensive Housing Assist.ance Strategy (CHhH)
Funding of $25, 000 for the housing element consultant is to come
from the CDBG program. Pr~paration of a housing element is an
eligible activity under the administration category of CDBG
funding. The City Council has allocated approximately $180,000 to
the Planning Division for [.)rogram administration and project
delivery costs for the 1994/95 program year (the maximum amount
allowed under the 20% administrative cap), Additionally, there is
L
7/7/9'
Pag~ 4
\:
" .I{
V<
,
.'
\"
approximately $30,000 left of an original $43,000 in funding for
project delivery costs allocated in 1991/92 (funds which are not
counted towards the 20% administrative cap. because they relate to
a specific project}. Of that amount j $25,000 would be used for the
hOIJsing element consultant.
Ai.W.Ullp-tiollS Regru--dinq Additional plan-~~CQ§.1&
Staff has been aaked whether the funds added to the Comprehensive
Plan budget will be adequate to complete the Plan Update process.
The 1994-95 budget funding request is regarded by staff as
reasonable but without contingency. At this time. staff sees thl'ee
possible deci8ion~ that could result in the need for more funding.
1. The C'.u:'l"cnt budget is based on the approved work program,
which anti~ipateo ~ompletion of Phase II (initial review and
approval of Draft Policies and Programs) in November 1994 and
adoption of a new plan in late fall/early winter of 1995. If
for some reason the Council extends the process by adding more
CPAC meetings and/or addi tional round (s) of Board and Commis
sion and Council review. the budget would need to be supple
rr.onted f.or at least supplies and materials, advertising, and
especially consult.ant rrleeting attendance.
2. 1'he publishing costs are based on a Plan document of about 72
pages, which is similar to the 19'16 and 1980 documents. Given
the range and complexity of the subject matter, there may be
p:res8ure to have a longer document, which would increase
publishing and editing costs.
3. The budget assumes that any detailed ar.ea plans (e.g .• EI
Camino Real. Midtown). update of the Zoning regulations <"'TId
othet' implementation ef.forts will be undel·taken separately
from and after the Comprehensive Plan. For example, a.ddition
of one or more area plans into the Plan process and document
would have significant budget implications. The Planning
Commission Ilas discussed the likely need for more detailed
area plans. and this discussion led Commiss.i,oners to comment
on the need fOl' additional but undetermined budget resources
at the May 19, 1994 Finance Committee meeting (see attached
5/12/94 memo from the Planning Commission to the Finance
Committee) . Staff helieves that the Planning Commission is
raiSing an important issue. The essence of the problem is
that for some commercial areas. and especially those close to
single family neighbol"hoods (e .g .• Midtown, significant pa;;ts
of El Camino Real strip}, the planning and zoning actions of
the City in the 19705 and 19808 resulted"in a relatively lml
redevelopment potential"and effective incentives to retain
older and often unattractive buildings that the community
raises concerns about. To bring about significant physical
upgrade in these areas, th.~ C:.:.ty probably has to inc::t"ease the
CMR:369:94 7/7/94
Page 5
\
.,.
o
development (j,. e q zoning) potential. However, nearby
residents concern~d about the potential negative impacts of
redevelopment are likely to oppose a general increase in
development potential an<1 may often oppose piecenleal increases
I'll denaity~ in part out of fear of what one act ion might mean
for other parcels. A solution to t.his problem~ that, Borne
co."l'.rr,tmit iea are using. is the preparat ion of detailed develop
ment regulat ions (e.9. I Precise Plans. Specific Plana) in
close cooperation with residential .,nd comme:t.·cial interests.
If interested part.ies can have assurance that some of the
llegatlve impacts of red.evelopment will either not occur or be
adequately mit.lgatad and that De..,,' development will be physi
cally attractive iind integrated into tho community, then there
is a good chance f01: COI'r.muili ty acceptance of increased
density. Achieving thllt reeult requires significant urban
design. meeting fac.~ilitati<Hl, and poasibly other ~pecializ.ed
~6sources.
The budget for the C~,pl"eheIlQivc Plan update, following the June
20, 1994 approv<11 by council of 'Hl additional $105,000, is now a
total of $811,308. Of this an)~,unt, $611,420 has been expended or
11., com;;,itted to consultant cont:ri1ct.s as of Hay 31, 1994. Staff
bel ie-ves the :t:e~.alnin9 amOl.mt of appl'oximately $200,000 should be
<'lidequat~ to co::'plete Pil21f;e ] r 1 of the update process, and to
produce the !inal document.
Re8~ctfully submitted,
NA!~~!tt~
Chief Planning Official
J~~
Ci'ty Mana.ger
~AfJdtu4
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER )1
Director of Planning and
Community Envil."cnment
ATT~CIf1'.ENT~ 5/12/94 Planning Corr,mi.'l:slon Memo
Comprehensive Plan Budget Status, as of May 31, 1994
cc: CPI\C
Planning C~~~is6ion
CMR:369:94 7/7/94
Page 6
'·.· .. L··'··· .. -"
To: Finance COllulIlt1ee
PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
From: Planning Commission
Dale: May 12, 1994
REPORT IN BRIEF
A Report From the
PLAl'.'NING COl\IMISSION
The Planning Commission requests thaI the Finance CommiHcc anticipale (hc need for
additional funds above the currenl PI;lnlling Dcparlm~nt trt..ldget fo fin~nce a specific
plan, or some olher similar pl,nning 1001, ., a follow-up I,) a,e CPnC workshops held
this April and May. AI Ihis lime Iho Planning Commission is nOI prep. red \()
recommend which planning 1001 mighl be mosl ef{""lire or which Olle or more of Ihe
CPAC study are<ls should be selec'.ed for slud)': h()we"er, ir is an[icil'.1[e,1 thaI one
neighborhood will be appropriale fot study in [he comIng budget cycle. The Planning
CommissLon expects (0 re\'iew the options aJld rerum-to Cuuncir with a recommended
planning efror! and ils cost within the coming year. Costs for such a plan rna)'
ul[imalely be parlially paid by Ihe properly owners wililin Ihe planning are..
BACKGROUND
CPAC has identified several neighborhoods in the process of change and [he Cily as ~
whole is experiencing a loss of revenue from some of meso same neighborhoods.
Neighbors, businesse, and the Cily have a siak. in the dC\'clopmen[ of vi bran I,
friendly, and economically viable communily centers. A planning process, with more
detail than general zoning, and which integrales Ihe public and privale spaces, seems
appropriate and polen[i.iI)' necessary 10 accomplish our goals.
The Planning Department budget docs not inelud, adequale funds 10 de,'elop such
plans .. the planning staff will not be able 10 in[egrale an area srudy of Ihis type into
its current workload. In some communities currently u.sing specinc plans, Ihe co" of
the plan is paid through fces paid by lhe landowners/del'elopers a[ the time the)'
develop a project. There is no guarantee [hal ao), or ali coslS will be recuperated,
and, al any rale,lhe money must be paid beforehand alld,ecouped a[ a laler dalc .
. ~ '."
. ,,', ~~"
....
I
. (.'
,e .....
"J.
.,. ~ ..
Reasons to proceed in this budget cycle include;
o
• CPAC process has initialed the preparation of a plan for three neighborhoods as
part of its testing for the Comprehensive Plan. The CPAC preparation will
result in some efflctency in lime and thus cost.
• Residents have been dem~nding opportunities for earlier input into the
development in their neighborhoods.
The iirst plait will act as a model for a process to be used in oU, er
neighborhood5.
• Improvement in the retail ponion of the neighborhood will improve the cit)' lax
base.
The Planning Commission is wilting to review various plann!ng tools, Iheir ("o.5[s and
appropriateness for Palo Alto. We will make a recommendation to the Cily Council
for an appropriate planning tool, the expected cost and OIlC or more neighborhoods 10
be studied.
SUTOOlarv
fuLdqet Available
COMPReHENSIVE PLAN BUOGET STATUS
May 31, 1994
Original Budget, Council Approved October 1992
AdditIons from Manager's Contingency (for extra CPAC
meet1ng, Phase I, and graphics aSSistance)
Carryover from PJanning Operating Budg.t (Uoi se)
Ph". II, Council Approved November )993
TOTAL BUDGET TO DATE
funds E)(peoded at' Conmj tted
Consultant Contracts
Contract C(Jntingencies
Other Facilitation SBrvice, (I~edia)
Mapping and GIS (inciuding consultant contracts)
Advertising and Publishing
Secretarial
Mailing
Graphics
Supplies and Materials
TOTAL EXPENSES TO DATE
BALANCE
hlance Held_irLJruerve For PhaseJll
Contract Contingencies (uncommitted to a specific
consultant contract, but antiCipated to be needed for fiR)
GIS/Happing (eQUipment, materials, consultant, data entry)
Secretarial
Hailing
Supplies and Materials
Publication of Hewsletter '3
Comprehensive Plan Printing
• .-Over expended by $3,525,
PrOjected to be nea.'ly depleted by June 30, 1994
,",
$ 507,000
11,120
3,188
~rul
$ 706,308
$ 418,357
23,~89
5,229
60,000
23,525-
28,410
8,843
5,000
_3.l\...lQ~
$ 611,419
$ 94,889
$ 15,600
20,400
31,590
lf 157 **
2,180""""
5,000
J.hQrul
S 91,527
"-.'. i--' .< •
. ~ \ " ... '~.~_·_·c~
','I
~. -,"
r\ fJ
OETAllSOF FUNDS COHHI~O FROM ACCOUNT 3102. Consultan~ontracts
(Contract fdentlflcatlon letters correspond to Table on the followin9 oages)
A. Hoar •. IC'(i09.~~~Ltiffiio, Heetlng Facilitation
01'f91n.1 Contract Amount:
th.nge ardor, Ph.,e I:
th.ng. Ord." for Phase !l:
$ 99,950
4,794
-'-Wl~~ $127,719
74,950
15,000
10,000
4,794
_-tt.27J.
SIl7,719
(Extr. CPAC Heeting)
Phase I, F.ci! itatfon
Phase I, Community Survey
Ph ... I, Hewsl.tte,'s
Hanager's Contingent ([xtra Heetfng)
Phase II, Facllftatfon
B, aa<!LjrutAltQ.tl~li~, OR and Technical EI ements
Contract A~unt~
funding Sources:
C()ntract Amount:
fundln9 Source"
COOT! NG ENey
$ 95, ISO
$ 25,000
1,500
10,000
49,462
_hIM
$ 95, ISO
$115,000
$ 20,000
10,000
20,OO'l
-~QQQ
$115,000
j....5QQ
123,500
Phase I, I~oi S€
Phase I, floi se
Phase I, Seismic
Phase I, ElR
Carryo,er from FY 92-93
Phase I, Transpol'tal;on
Phase II, Technfcal
Phase II, Workshop
Transp. Division Oper, Budget
Phase ,I , Contingency
O. C~JthQrp~~~, Design, Gov~rnance and [canomies
Contract I Amount:
Contract 2 Amount:
Fundfng Sources:
COHHNGEIICY
I 17,000
_m~J!.3..§'
$ 141,036
$ 25,000
96,300
20,536
I 141,836
_~Z§
$ 157,025
2
Phase I, [conomlc
Phase II, O.sign
Phase H, GovE-rnance
Phase II, Contingency
t
" E. tI.@.9HJl.blu, H,p~ii.~ (conto'act closed)
Cont"act ",,"unt:
Funding Sourc.s:
F. ~.h.rles Eitle!, Happing
Contract MOUl,t:
Funding ~ourc.s:
I ~4,l4S
S 13,110
J..!...ill
$ 24,NS
S 24,COD
S 21,390
....1..§.La
I 24,000
Phase I, Happing
Oper.ting, tolS [qul~ent
Ph.,. I, Happing
Phase I, GIS Equl~,ent (n.ed to BCR)
G. £hil~~~~, Happing/Graphics (contr.ct ~Ios.d)
Contract Amount!
funding Sources:
I 18,100
S 13,~OO
__ '.,!!9_Q
SIB,IOO
Phue la "tlpplng
Hanager's (ontingenty
I;' ~Y~.11!LHl!L'Lex, Sochl Sec, ie» Report (contract closed)
Funding Sources:
C~ntract A~ount:
funding Sour,."
1,500
S J,IOO
S 2.113
2.11)
Ph". I. CO~lunlty f.cjlitles
P/j". I, Urb,n O"lgn
J .. laura 19'~, Videot.p. [dltlng (contract closed)
Contr&ct Amount;
Funding Sources:
S 1,200
S 1.100 Ph.s~ I, facllit,tion
K. Hld·Penlnsula Access Corp~. Videotape Editing
Contract Amount:
funding Sources:
l. liDce larkin. Videotaping
Contract ~~ount;
funding Sources:
S 2,500
S 2,500
S 1,250
S 1,250
Ph"e I, f.<lllt,tion
Ph,se I. f,cillt.tion
3
\' .. ,
."J
\
~ 3 DHAILS OF FWIDS EXPEI)ott> FROM OTHER ACCOUNTS ',,-,
3110 Adverti"!1. and PublislJ.ing
Original Budget:
FY 92·93 Expenditures:
FY93-94 Expenditures:
FY 93-94 Encumbl'ances:
Rema i n ing Budget
$20,000
11,730
10,615
-L.ill.
($ 3,525)
We are trying to cover this o't'erag~ with Oivision o,ptlrating r .. mds.
3121 Contract Agency Servi~es (Secr~tarial)
Original Budget:
FY 92-93 Expenditures:
FY 93-94 Expenditures:
Remaining Budget
$60,000
9,900
.J"~
$31,590
Balance is projected to cover the time p!!riod rr,~3!nin9 in t~c pr.:lCeB,
at average expense of $1,680 per !';1,onth for J9 r:ont,.,s
3210 and 3~
OriginAl Budget:
FY 92-93 Expenditures:
FY 93-94 Expenditures:
Remaining Budget
$32,400
290
..ll...11ll
120,400
329.9 Other SupJ!lieulliLHate.rJals
Original Budget:
Added, Kgr. Conting.:
S40,OGO
1,146
FY 92-93 Expenditures:
FY 93-94 ['p,nditures:
FY 93-94 Encumbr.nces:
B,518 In-house prlntln9
5,295 Other expenses
13,143 In-house printing
]0,783 Other e~penses -----.m Medi a Associates (Video Editing)
Rema i n i n9 Budget S 2,780
In·hous. printing is for packets and other '"pport ",.terial< «(PAC, lAG
and others). Breakdown for "Ot~er fxpenses Q ~f appt~ximate'y $16,ODD
Is:
Audio/Visual Rel~ted:
f aod/Bever.ge/Supp lie s:
Office/CPAC Supplies:
Art/Photo/Gl'.phics :
Andres Ouany Training Session:
fedetal ExpressjOelive!"y:
Miscellaneous Rei~bursements:
'.' .'
4
1 4,100
3,900
2,400
1,950
1.000
900
650
\.
.'
J
i
i : I"
",
•
.. ~
~~,: :-' Publlcati"ns/Ooc~ents:
Room Rental:
3902 Maillng_Ser~ices
Original Budget:
FY 92-93 Expenditures:
FY 93-94 Expenditures:
Remaining Budget
S10,000
1,143
7,700
$ 1,157
\
.:: .. ';,;......,~ ..... ;,;.:i:,;..~ __ .~,:;.:.,,'
400
300
June 30, 1994 b,lal1ce expected to be approximately $400.
3904 Print S~rv1c~s
Original Budget:
Expenditures :
R~maining Budget
S15,000
----..!l
$15,000
These funds held for printing of the Comprehensivp. Phn document.
5