HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - April 12, 1995OF
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
°4t�Fot��v
AGENDA TITLE: Approve Alternative Catalyst Project for Central City Revitalization Program
and Approve Selection of Bond Counsel and Engineering Team to Begin
Formation of the Assessment District
MEETING DATE: April 12, 1995
PREPARED BY: City Manager
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council approve the alternative Catalyst Project as
presented by Michael Freedman to include the Entrance
Gateway, enhanced School Street improvements, and kiosks for Downtown (Exhibit A) and
consider lighting and other improvements on Pine and Oak streets; and, that the City Council
authorize staff to pursue hiring bond counsel and an engineering team to begin forming the
Assessment District.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City Council in December 1994, adopted the Concept
Development Phase of the Centeral City Revitalization Project;
minus the Post Office Square Catalyst Project. The Council directed staff to work with the firm
of Freedman, Tung, and Bottomley to create an alternative Catalyst Project for the Downtown
portion of the project. Michael Freedman conducted another public workshop and presented
the Entrance Gateway project, enhanced School Street Improvements, and kiosks as the
alternative project to the Post Office Square.
During the workshop, Mr. Freedman received comments and suggestions regarding the
Entrance Gateway and kiosks and has since modified the renderings consistent with the public
input. Additionally, comments were made regarding the installation of trees and decorative
pedestrian lighting on both Pine and Oak streets between Church and Sacramento streets
which were not originally a part of the alternative Catalyst Project.
Michael Freeman will present the renderings and the budget for the alternative Catalyst Project
which is approximately $380,000 under the $3.05 million capital project for the Downtown
element of the Revitalization program. Additional elements evaluated include lighting and
pedestrian improvements on Pine Street between Sacramento Street and Church Street and
Oak Street between Sacramento Street and the public parking lots west of School Street.
These would add $253,000 and $250,000 receptively to the project budget. Additional
pedestrian improvements to the alley between the Penny's and Woolworth buildings would add
$50,000.
APPROVED; t�a
THOMAS A. PETERSON recycled paper
City Manager
CC -1
tap JXWCOUNCIVEDREVIDOC
In addition to the Catalyst Project, the City Council is requested to select bond counsel and an
engineering team to begin forming the Assessment District for both Downtown and Cherokee
Lane. Agreements for professional services will be brought back to the Council for approval.
Bond counsel must be retained as the City Attorney is prohibited from participating in the
formation of Assessment Districts. Staff recommends that Tim Hackman of Stockton be
retained since he has prior and specific experience with the City of Lodi in creating Assessment
Districts.
The engineering team must be created to handle much of the assessment work and to develop
construction drawings. Staff recommends that the team be a compilation of experienced
professionals led by Freedman, Tung, and Bottomley. The main members of the team would
be as follows:
• Baumbach & Piazza (Lodi)
• Cella Barr Associates (Sacramento) and
• Kleinfelder & Associates (Stockton)
In addition, some specialty work such as structural engineering on the Gateway would be
subcontracted. The team is a good mix of local firms who have excellent knowledge of local
conditions and can provide timely, efficient service, and other firms with experience in this type
of special project.
FUNDING: Assessment District and Capital Outlay Fund
Respectfully submitted,
Prepared by: Janet S. Keeter
Economic Development Coordinator
Attachment
Thomas A. Peterson
City Manager
tap JACWCOUNCIUEDREV 1.DOC
IREEOMAN
T U N G 4
B01T0MIEY
Urban Design & Planning
District Revitalization
Street & Plaza Design
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 5, 1995
TO: Ms. Janet Keeter, Economic Development Coordinator
City of Lodi
FROM: Michael Freedman
RE: Central City Revitalization - Alternative Catalyst Project Recommendation
The purpose of this memorandum is to focus on the aspect of the Council -approved Central
City Revitalization Program labelled "Catalyst Project #1:' As you know, the Program is a fairly
detailed action plan designed to stimulate short-term physical and economic revitalization in
the historic center of Lodi. Although most of the program can be implemented exactly as
outlined in the Program document approved by the City Council, we have recommended
that Council consider changing the Catalyst Project #1 element. Although the first Catalyst
Project is only one element of the Program, nothing will likely happen without it. The
Catalyst Project provides the dramatic kick-off needed for the Downtown renaissance. It is
how the City Council will physically and visibly display their commitment to the district's
improvement. And it puts the City out there as the Central City's first investor, while
physically setting the stage for the new private investment that the incentive programs are
targeted to stimulate.
Since the Cherokee Lane Improvements were approved as part of the overall Central City
Revitalization Program document, and since corresponding construction costs have likewise
been reviewed and approved, we will limit this discussion to Downtown Catalyst Project #1.
That is the only element in the original Program that we recommend changing.
Post Office Square
Based on the final meeting with and subsequent response to our proposals by Post Office
officials, we recommend that we drop our efforts to build Post Office Square as the
centerpiece of the Program. As many participants in the project have pointed out, we could
47 Kearny Street
Suite 500
San Francisco, CA
94108-5522
415.291.9455
Central City Revitalization - Alternative Catalyst Project Recommendation► - Page #2
still pursue a reversal of our regional official's decision. Indeed, we might even be successful.
However, based on our experience with large bureaucratic organizations of this type, we do
not believe this to be the most productive course. We believe that such an effort - - successful
or not - - would delay the kick-off of the Downtown program too long, and would exhaust
the community. We fear that such a loss of momentum would put the program's likelihood
of full implementation in grave jeopardy. Notwithstanding the attractiveness of Post Office
Square, we recommend its abandonment. There are other ways to achieve our objectives, to
which we now turn.
School Street Improvements
What We Recommend and Why. As we stated in the Central City Revitalization Program
document, the primary catalyst project will produce short-term revitalization by
concentrating highly visible public investment in an area that contains the greatest likelihood
of success. This means School Street - the location of Downtown's best concentration of
visible businesses and well maintained building stock. School Street also contains the best
current locations for new private investment - the Woolworth, J.C. Penny, and Toggery
buildings. We must invest our first dollars in front of those buildings, and do so in a way
that creates a place that people will find attractive to stroll and to linger. Downtown does not
have such a place at present. Since we do not feel it is any longer practical to create our new
pedestrian haven at Post Office Square, we propose to make School Street itself the
community's primary public space and the centerpiece of the revitalization effort.
The creation of a linear outdoor "living room" for public activity is not a new idea; it is
simply a somewhat forgotten one. At the center of the traditional American town one could
always count on finding what was once referred to as "Main Street." Over the past 30 years,
Main Street has largely been replaced by commercial strips, malls and business parks.
Throughout the country there has been a growing awareness that something is missing in
this pattern of development - - that although these locations do contain all the necessary
shops and services, they have failed to reproduce the community settings that they have
served to destroy. The general yearning for our disappearing Main Streets can be seen in the
amazing success of repackaged main street theme parks such as Disneyland's Main Street
USA and Citywalk at Universal City. Cities such as Pasadena, Mountain View, Hanford,
Pleasanton and Santa Monica have deliberately and skillfully begun to reverse the process of
downtown disinvestment by focusing investment along their historic main streets. Given the
memorable character of the historic building stock and the concentration of public facilities in
Downtown Lodi, this is a viable strategy for its revitalization as well.
In order to transform School Street into a more exciting public space, we must first improve
the proportions of the space itself. The space between the buildings feels too wide. The view
from the center of the street is dominated by asphalt. We propose to remedy this by planting
tall deciduous trees closer to the street's centerline - - placing them in the parking zones. This
will create a more intimately scaled volume of space in the street itself, while creating a more
generously -proportioned pedestrian space between the new trees and the shops. To
Central City Revitalization - Alternative Catalyst Project Recommendation - Page N3
emphasize this effort at night, we propose to uplight the street trees. Since nighttime use will
initially be our most promising niche, these uplights are crucial to the street design's success.
Finally, to decrease crossing distances, we propose to extend corner sidewalk areas out to the
edge of the parking zones. This will require the elimination of the round planters currently
located at the corners.
Once the proportions of the street have been improved, we must make the space itself more
exciting by adding the lively color and detail always found in the best pedestrian spaces.
Thus, decorative street lights in rich colors, benches (wood and metal), decorative planters
with floral accents, decorative paving and dramatic decorative kiosks are all proposed. These
features have a functional as well as visual aspect: enhanced lighting (brightness and color),
pedestrian comfort, and more visible and coordinated advertising of Downtown shops and
special events.
Perhaps the best opportunity that comes with the replacement of Post Office Square is the
freeing up of resources to make Downtown as a whole more visible to passing motorists.
Throughout the community workshops, a recurring theme was the problem that motorists
passing by School Street on Lodi Avenue remain unaware of the location of Downtown. We
propose to remedy this situation by placing a dramatic Downtown Gate at the intersection of
School Street and Lodi Avenue. The Gate will not only advertise the presence of Downtown,
it will make it very difficult for motorists not to enter the district. And it will create the most
visible message possible that a renaissance is happening in Downtown Lodi. They key to
designing such a prominent landmark is to make the Gate a lasting image of quality, and one
that epitomizes the unique character of the City.
If all this sounds like hype, it is - - in part. The business of Downtown revitalization - - just
like the business of property development — is to generate interest and build a momentum
for continuous new investment in a newly changing area. Public improvements combined
with incentive programs, improved land use regulations, a streamlined approval process and
highly visible City support for revitalization have the power to convince private investors
that now is the time and Downtown is the place to invest. Once this begins, the investment
makes it true. Thus, the public improvements must not be seen as a stand-alone project, but
as the leading edge of a program. Then the reality supporting the hype will have some real
muscle. That, anyway, has been our secret to success.
The Community's Response. Our recommendations for a new Catalyst Project #1 were
presented to the community in a public workshop on February 8. It was held in the City
Council Chambers, was very well attended (standing room only) and locally broadcast. The
response to the design recommendations was overwhelmingly positive. The idea of new
street trees (including removing the old ones) in the parking zone, the uplights, the new
streetlights, and corner bow -outs all received strong, though not unanimous, support. The
Public Works director sounded a wary note regarding maintenance costs - which is entirely
correct. The redesigned street will cost significantly more to maintain. There was also a
Central City Revitalization - Alternative Catalyst Project Recommendation - Page #4
gentleman who was extremely unhappy that initial public expenditures were not being made
along Sacramento Street instead.
The community workshop participants strongly recommended one significant addition to the
area covered by the design. The recommendation was to extend decorative street lighting
along Pine Street for one block on either side of School Street. We felt that this was a good
idea if funding would allow its implementation. Other add-on locations discussed included
Oak Street between School Street and the new transit center, and beautification of the alley
between the Woolworth and J.C. Penny buildings. These improvements would also support
the revitalization effort, and we were subsequently directed by City Staff to prepare cost
analyses for all of these potential add-on areas for City Council review.
Designs for the Downtown Gate and for the matching kiosks were presented separately.
Discussion on the Gate design dominated the evening. The message was clearly that the
overall concept of two monumental arches - finished in orange/gold brick and designed to
reflect Downtown's more memorable buildings - supporting a trellis embellished by grape
vines was a good one. The discussion was quite lively, however, regarding specific
modifications to the trellis aspect. Everyone agreed that the trellis was not strong enough in
the initial design. Some felt that the trellis should bear the name "Lodi" or Downtown Lodi",
although the majority seemed to feel that this was not necessary. Suggestions for
modification ranged from adding two more domes (along the trellis itself) to modifying the
form of the grapevines. Overall, there was clearly sufficient workshop support for the basic
design as well as sufficient input as to detail modifications to the Gate, to take the final
design proposal directly to the City Council for review. Over the past month and a half, we
have prepared design modifications that are consistent with the workshop input (We have
also prepared cost analyses - see below).
Construction Cost. The construction budget for initial Downtown improvements established by
the City Council in the Central City Revitalization Program document is $3.05 million (bid
price). Subsequent to positive response to our design by City Staff, task force members, and
community workshop participants, we prepared a cost analysis of the design proposal. The
cost to implement our proposed design is estimated at $2,908,000. In addition to this figure,
we have prepared, at City Staffs direction, construction cost estimates corresponding to
potential add-on elements originating in the community workshop. Our estimate of the
construction costs for these add-on options would be as follows:
Pine Street - Sacramento to Church
(lights, benches, trash receptacles and corner bow -outs): $253,000
Oak Street - Transit Center to School Street: $250,000
Alley Improvements (between J.C. Penny & Woolworth bldgs): $ 50,000
Central City Revitalization - alternative catalyst Project Recommendation - Page /s
Timing. At this point, we feel the crucial issue is speed. With the Central City Revitalization
Program approved, the public side of the funding in place, and the private side of the funding
in the works, it is crucial to move as quickly as possible to create visible change in the
district. We recommend that once a final decision is approved by the city Council, that the
City work toward completing Catalyst Project #1 (along with the Cherokee Lane
Improvements) within a year. In the meantime, the remainder of the Program can be put in
place and the marketing effort begun.
Pine Street Construction Cost
Item Description Estimated
(Pine Street 600 If x 2 =1,200 9) Quantity
Benches (@ 150'+/-) 0
Trash Receotacles 0 150' +/-1 4
Units Unit Cost Total Cost
ea $0.00
$0
ea $300.00
$22,500
�r.r. .....
��r - - ........
...
...�...g.........:..........::. �:w!SSt:{•:: <t2::-::yy : •:'::':':':': $..2 {f.'{.:C.,-:ia4in:;.;:.:•:�:.t.R1'
..................:..:. i:..:. rv,:.L:
ea $100,000.00
$100,000
ea:
$25,000
............................................$5,000.00........".........
i';i'::v%:^;%;:
".i4Rx:.:oyri>;>,:.,.;:.:'::.;:'.:'::>:;c';,''i1iRY
d
•v:: �yyyy
- :. ....:...:..:::.
X.X.Y.
.per. ';r•;{::4:v::;::i::'ry:::i2
i':::.�.:::::4i:-•-YYtf
...a ... ..4.:.:.....
,:.>...:.::::.::x::::.;':.;
sf $8.00
$396,000
ea $550,000.00
$550,000
.��^ isY3r.isi::v:3:R:h:^::'::iiiiv:::.^.,:;.: .vryi •:S'i:::;
...� Cin' : n. �'f: is <r :Y is %:i::'(8S}::•:
Total Construction Cost
$2,223,700
Total Incl. 20% Contingency
$2,668,440
Cost Estimate per Revit Program -
$3,050,000
Units Unit Cost
Total Cost
v.::��b.
::'::�;.vv�}?itii?:.--:-5: ,- •3f1fM.i'�iR':.. ''�:\. ��
ea $1,500.00
$0
ea $1,200.00
$4 800
:c:»:.4.:4;^: ;?:.;•:::::,::Y2:;xux'::.x.:ttco:;:4>.:..,.::a:xa::o>::z:.•:q:o::,w:;ao:.r..t:..:.y;..;v.:;:;•ti•:io..•.»:�.s:•4::::.:r�:4x?4:.,:
•;s'a+' o?Si v.4:u4:4.�.,:a:•J }}��((y;//yy
Total Construction Cost
$210,800
Total Incl. 20% Contingency
$252,960
Oak Street Construction Cost
Item Description Estimated
Units Unit Cost
Total Cost
(Oak Street -1 block; 300 If x 2 = 600 lf) Quantity
:: n:;v}}v.}>: }>:^} v..: is ♦':.. vi:4.:.....:::.>i:Y::-n:v:.}•:.,..�..
.........................r................................n:Slr....�.�..............::.r..:::.L..3.4.4v,:..........r:..................:.:..:n. ,.: ::::•.: .. .:....
y��,,]�,,,i{}� }�y�
:i�:�VSFi�':iiii: r::�i : ij:.::�:j .. ......j �Y i
-'•'.Y.:Y•Y�M�i�n::::�;.S�:i��:ii'+`��iiii}sniiY:nu:i.
r.... r....... .:............ � f.....::.:::.......:.
.'� �. �: �F;!
:v:.::...........
....:.{+.'i:i:•:t[4±•} v.:.. y,i., .... :. .. :•: ::::•.... .. n. ..v: i4t40: ::•f .... ....::.......:: {rv:4:vi}:iiiii:ttr40.C.•r.... .............
�[��(., �T {���pp�� 1/.41 - -
'1fYiM[{', i:.Y.�reet::�i:�i�ii�:- 0-::f`}•. . �':" �v:i.'n�:Q:^::
...............g•..................................... n.n..:. .n...........................,..x^•`:4L^'�:.................::.:v: •v: x:.v.v.v.v.:.x....................:::::::::: r:::::::::
............:::::: y: w:.::::::3>:,..... -v:'.}>:....:.:::
......... .
3:::•>1»i>:::.^43>>:4•::t•:<ntrk:: •i Jf/�4
':�,•.::� � �� �tYM.e/��=i:i
i:T.al!-L Ori:
:::..:.............:.............v.v.........nnY:.: ::t•}. ... ............ n.:itiffisv%.v.:.v.::J:C::r::5.4t4t;'rti?:.}>}. ... r. 'Y,..........:
36" box tree, uplighting, curbed well, patching, etc.) 0
ea $0.00
$0
Misc. Demolition/Patching/Removal of Existing Trees 30
ea $300.00
$9,000
Benches..i@.1.50'.+t-.)............................................................................................................... Q .....................................
ea.............................................. $1.,.500.00IT
.......................................................
,
: }•. :..,:>:.: :.< ::.:.:.::.:<:......,.:!:.::..:•...:.....::•i...:.�:.:",:-:4':.,.d:%i.!.:.}:.•`:�<•:r•>::::}}}:3:>').'+::tY;:i;:;:?i2\,;;::':,<;::,:::,;,::,:;::..,;4::::<::2;;;;:}::<::;;:::,,:,;;::;::C:<:::Jt:::.}::Y:.:�;:i:;:2;;;::Y::<i;::.<;:::,:Y;:::;:;::;::::::2::;:: ":: ., .
Total Construction Cost
$208,000
Total Incl. 20% Contingency $249,600
Cherokee Lane Construction Cost
Item Description Estimated
Units Unit Cost
Total Cost
(Cherokee Lane 13,150 LF X 2 s 26,300 LF) Ouantity
ii�� Qom':.,...,.,.:.4.:.:'i.<>.^}:Sa4•ii.i:4.Y;3;t _;;:•}>..} ::%>:k?i:^:<:i':: <.'4 ::::::::::: ::: 7.. .. -
M i n
.:...':.
>, 4. .:.1..:.,.:.:};•
::
:::...•.v: y}: iti: •F.;n.� .....:: :::: t!...::• .... .:viv.,e,..:.
• 'v
' .: }: .::::w:.w: '
:i.` A:: .\:v.•�4 - v.v.vvn:•:u. 3}t:3:4r::.v...-..l �Y.:t•n:'i: :4.•Y�v:.v'.
............... '........:v:..................:.:...:...............:iAi•.v.:....;v:}YYv n::4i3.:n:.,Y9:4.iY>:•ii:;..: 4... .:.:.:.. ............. ::.
uixiran.. AM1�l.:.{.k,AYA�i•7/�::if'.: .....::..t•.v .......".:...»...tiiii'i'y4ryi.
:.................n..... TI . ..'...:.:{.i .":.
j'j::::ti:}: +4V?Y`iY
.. ......v :.v. r.r
.:.• ::.: ....... ..4. ... i' �, ..4.Ois........S? ).^..'�......
Median Treatment - Turf, DG, Bollards (allow) 49,500
sf $2.50
$123,750
Existing Median Upgrades 1
ea $20,000.00
$20,000
........................
Stt..�.>:>:<:i:
......:
v:writ}:!y4443YYiY:4t":•.>::::::::5; ..: v.{3•Y:v.J; :v:} r.:: v:}%:>{;:N::::: J v::::•n.:i•:4i}}}}>'^.:t:v:::}:n�:-::'4:i:v.:r}i.?i:K:•}•:SC;:::::.>'rinn.n.:n.:}:
J�i� -
- a.a.
�1:31CL3tSi ' :����./.�li: -:�'. �.v:S :;}ji?+fti itiiri: ::Y i'.'��+:i%.:�:::ti:::,ri$.i�4�:�::i:::ie�" :jlC::vii���::jniiiw F:S :� {:j�:'J:J••.•-�>r'v 'nY �9�
........ ...... ..... .�............. �...... i:t:�::in:::C•�: is:?::�:ini4:!{:!v'. ...:. ....-......:..:. .. ... ..... .................. ..... .......ri..
- : •:SY
0:4..
.......... ....:.. ...:... .:........::..!IST:v,v
Line not Used 0
ea $0.00
$0
Subtotal all Projects $4,076,825
Design Contingency (20%) $815,365
Total Cost All Projects $4,892,190
Total Budget Est per Revit Program $4,800,000
Net Budget Minus Cost ($92,190)
School St and Cherokee Lane Only $4,369,630
DOWNTOWN
REVITALIZATION
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
Wednesday April 12. 1995 7:00 p.m.
Carnegie Forum
Tonics
Michael Freedman of Freedman, Tung & Bottomley Design Firm, will present the final Catalyst Project to the City Council which
will conclude the Concept Development Phase of the Central City Revitalization Program. The Catalyst Project will include the
Gateway at School Street and Lodi Avenue, enhanced School Street Improvements, and the optional lighting and trees on both Oak
and Pine Streets. In addition to Michael Freedman's presentation, City staff will also request the City Council approve retaining the
services of bond counsel and an engineering team to begin the Assessment District formation.
Gateway Arch Concept
SCHOOL STREET DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS
Any questions regarding this meeting should be directed to Janet Keeter or Michael Quiaoit (333-6700)