City of San Ramon City Council Minutes





	MINUTES OF THE CITY OF SAN RAMON – COUNCIL MEETING May 22, 2001 A special meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was called to order on May 22, 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the Fountain Room, San Ramon Community Center, 12501 Alcosta Blvd., Mayor Hudson presiding. PRESENT: Councilmembers Kinney, Raab, Tatarka, Wilson and Mayor Hudson ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Herb Moniz, City Attorney Bob Saxe, Police Chief Brian Lindblom, Administrative Services Director Jim Randall, Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Eorio, Planning Director Phil Wong, City Engineer Joye Fukuda, Transportation Director John Dillon, Economic Development Manager April Gray, and Deputy City Clerk Susan Gibbs. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Hudson led Council, staff and those present in the audience in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * It was the consensus of the Council to move Item 4.1 Resolution No. 2001-61 Adoption of Resolution of Necessity to acquire interest, real property (APN’s 208-260-22, 024) needed for the widening of Deerwood Road, to the closed session at the end of the meeting. * * * * CITY CENTER The Planning Director said on September 29, 2000, the City PROJECT Council directed staff and the consultant team to proceed with the programming phase for the City Center, refinement of the retail work and a feasibility study for the Children’s Museum. The consultant team has finalized the operations planning and data gathering associated with the separate components of the City Center site and defined detailed square footage and technical (quantitative) as well qualitative requirements for each space. The consultant team in their presentation will provide the Council with an understanding of the essential versus enhanced spaces associated with each component; each space will be designated as "core" or "optional." The following presentation was made by Doug Dworsky, Cannon Dworsky, Pamela Anderson Brule and Sam McBane, Anderson Brule & Associates. *Agenda* Agenda Review / Intended Results Review September 28, 2000 City Council Meeting Results Decisions to Be Made Tonight Next Steps Review Considerations and Recommendations Review Summary Cost Model Review Financing Strategy Review Conceptual Site Options Public Comment Q & A / Recorded Discussion Council Direction The Vision* Vital and Exciting Focal Point for the Community Gathering Place Civic Functions City Offices and Council Chamber Community Meeting Rooms Performing Arts & Cultural Activities Theatre Library Visual Arts Gallery Recreational Activities Small Scale Services Access and Circulation City Center Task Force - City Center Vision – September 1998 Changes that Affect the Vision Addition of New Site (South Side of Bollinger Canyon Road) Consideration of a Children’s Museum Consideration of a Teen Center Further Study of Retail Options Decision Summary – September, 2000* Library to be included in City Center Theatre (450 – 800 Seats) to be included in City Center Study Children's Museum Feasibility Study Joint-Use Black Box / Council Chamber Explore Retail at Various Scales Additional Items (After Council Presentation) Teen Center Feasibility *Decisions for Tonight* Children’s Museum as Part of the City Center Youth Service Center in Existing Library or Teen Center Attached to New Library Community Meeting Rooms Centralized or Distributed Visual Arts Centralized or Distributed Decisions for Tonight City Council Chamber Shared-Use or Dedicated City Offices to Accommodate Future Services and Growth Strategies Library to Accommodate Future Service Role and Enhanced Services Center for the Arts with Community Oriented Sub-regional Focus *Decisions for Tonight* Retail as Complementary Small Scale or Anchored/Themed Medium or Large Scale Site Configuration / Land Use Direction Approval to Proceed to Next Steps *Next Steps – Phase 2 Master Planning* Conceptual Building Design Open Space Program and Conceptual Design Conceptual Level Cost Estimating Refinement of Financing Strategy Phasing Strategy Develop Public/Private Retail Strategy Develop Operational Costs *Process Overview* City Council Chamber and City Offices - City Council Members, Public (City Council Working Session), Core Team, and City Staff Benchmarking Tour Visioning Sessions Operational Plan Growth Strategy Program Community Meeting Rooms - Parks Commission and Advisory Committees, Core Team and City Staff Conceptual Strategy Program Library - Focus Groups, Library Staff and Public, Library Advisory Committee and Teen Advisory Council Library Service Master Plan for San Ramon – Review Operational Plan Service Delivery Options Program Teen Center - Teen Advisory Council , Parks and Community Services Commission Recommendations Operational Plan for City Center Site Program and Teen Center Children’s Museum - Area Educators, Government Officials, Youth Serving Agencies, Business Leaders and Valley Children Museum Organization Market Analysis/Market Area Demographics Survey of Existing Museums (Bay Area) Operational Plan Conceptual Program Implementation Recommendations Center for the Arts - City Council Members, Parks and Community Services Commission, Arts Advisory Committee and Core Team Background Research Benchmarking Visioning Session Program Visual Arts Gallery - Parks and Community Services Commission, Arts Advisory Committee Conceptual Strategy Program Retail - Planning Staff, Core Team Small, Medium and Large Conceptual Program Parking Requirements Recommendation *Considerations/Recommendations* City Council Chamber and City Offices - Community Meeting Rooms (integrated into site components) Library - Teen Center Center for the Arts - Visual Arts Gallery (integrated into site components) Children’s Museum Retail Concepts Site Options *Council Chamber - Considerations* Incorporated - Shared Use (Second Stage Theatre) Multipurpose, Flexible Multi-use/Not Customized with Portable Technology High Labor Cost in Re-configuration of Space Potential Scheduling Challenges Dedicated Customized Space (Supports Education/Training) Customized and Embedded Technology No Scheduling Conflicts Council Chamber - Recommendations Recommended By City Council, Core Team, Consultant Team Dedicated Council Chamber Supports Very High Tech Embedded Technology Real Time Community Interaction Supports Education/Training Function for Staff and Community Adopt the Program for Council Chamber (Core Space Program) *City Offices - Considerations* Departmental Growth / Organizational Growth (5 Year Projection - Core Space Program) - Open Team Areas / Modular Furniture - Flexibility through Modularity / Conference to Office Long-term Growth (Beyond 5 Year Projection -Optional Space Program) - Interim Lease-able Space / Remodel - Build New Community Meeting Rooms / Remodel City Offices - Planned Expansion / Building Addition for City Offices *City Offices - Recommendations* Recommended By - Core Team, Consultant Team Adopt Long-term Growth Strategy (Optional Space Program) Allows for Future Flexibility for Service Delivery / Organization Interim Lease-able Space Space for Collaborative Partners/ Community Based Organizations Could Provide Revenue Source - Short-term Allows City Center to be Designed Holistically Adopt Program for City Offices (Core Space Program) *Community Meeting Rooms - Considerations* Integrated and Distributed Strategy (City Offices, Library, Children’s Museum & Center for the Arts) - Promotes Community Interaction with Each Component - Shared Use with Each Component - Requires Distributed Hospitality Support Centralized in a Single Location - Easier to Manage, Schedule and Secure - Accommodates Multi-venue Conferencing - Allows for Centralized Hospitality Support *Community Meeting Rooms - Recommendations* Recommended By - Parks and Community Services Commission, Library Advisory Committee, Arts Advisory Committee, Core Team, Site Component Staff, Consultant Team Integrated and Distributed Strategy - Supports Programmatic Shared Use - Promotes Vitality of City Center Site - Provides a Growth Strategy for each Site Component (Adaptive Re-use) Adopt Program for Community Meeting Rooms (Core Space Program) *Library - Considerations* Enhanced Services (Optional Space Program) - Additional High Tech Community Meeting Room Goes Beyond the Adopted San Ramon Library Services Master Plan Could Provide Potential Revenue Source Provides Space for Collaborative Partners / Community Based Organizations *Teen Center - Considerations* Youth Service Center at existing Library Building Allows for Expanded Youth Programs (For All Ages) Increased Operational Costs Efficiently Locates Expanded Services in Single Facility Locates Youth Program in Existing Retail Center Near Food No Cost Associated with New Building Construction (interiors only) Allows for a Total Youth Environment / Experience Teen Center in the City Center Project Considers Minimum Program Space for Teen Center Only Decreased Operational Cost Located Near Central Park and the Skate Park *Library - Recommendations* Recommended By - Parks and Community Services Commission, Library Advisory Committee, Consultant Team Include Additional High Tech Meeting Room (Optional Space Program) Adopt Program for Library (Core Space Program) *Teen Center - Recommendations* Recommended By - Teen Center Task Force, Parks and Community Services Commission, Parks and Community Services Staff Select Preferred Option: Locate Youth Services Center (including a Teen Center), at existing Library Building Secondary Option: Support including the Teen Center in the City Center Project Attached to the Young Adult Services Space in New Library, or As a Separate Facility on Site with Expansion Capability Master Plan for Building Expansion *Center for the Arts – Considerations* Defined Purpose for the Center for the Arts - Community Focus - Sub-Regional Recommended Revisions to the Original Core Space Program (Based on Joint Parks Commission and Arts Advisory Committee Recommendations May 17, 2001) - 650 Seats and Lobby to Accommodate - Community Meeting Room - 8 Cultural Classrooms - Scenery and Costume Construction Workshops - Rehearsal Room *Center for the Arts - Recommendations* Recommended By - Parks and Community Services Commission, Arts Advisory Committee Accept the Program as Revised (05.17.2001) for the Center for the Arts (Core Space Program Only) *Visual Arts Gallery - Considerations* Integrated and Distributed Throughout All City Center Components Art is Integrated into All Aspects of the City Center Includes a 2000 s.f. Gallery Space Adjacent to Theater Lobby More Difficult to Manage and Less Flexible Centralized in the Center for the Arts Easier to Manage and More Flexible Accommodates Larger Exhibits in Single Space *Visual Arts Gallery – Recommendations* Recommended By - Parks and Community Services Commission, Arts Advisory Committee, Library Advisory Committee, Consultant Team Accept Integrated and Distributed Visual Arts Throughout All City Center Components *Children’s Museum - Considerations* The Market - The service area population offers a strong base for Children’s Museum attendance Key Informants - Community leadership appears to be strongly supportive of a children’s museum in San Ramon Local and Regional Competition - A children’s museum in San Ramon would have little direct competition (but many competitors) Proposed Program Components - A comprehensive children’s museum serving tots through pre-teens *Children’s Museum - Considerations* Comparable Children’s Museums Children’s museums have high earned revenue ratios but still require annual funding Proposed Building Requirements 19,125 gross s.f. Exhibit Area should be large, flexible space Multipurpose Room for small events, performances, meetings, assembly to complement theater on site Gift shop accessible to non-visitors Outdoor space for events, programs Operating Forecast – Base Stable Year Operating Short Fall of 24% is with in Industry Standards and Will Require Annual Fund Raising *Children’s Museum - Considerations* Implementation Strategies - Valley Children’s Museum Roles & Responsibilities Undertake intensive awareness campaign Hire professional director and staff Fundraising for building and operations Open interim space in storefront Develop programs and prototype exhibits Provide tenant improvements and exhibits for new museum Staff and operate museum Implementation Strategies - City Roles and Responsibilities Include in City Center Program / Provide Site Develop Construction, Operation, and Maintenance Responsibilities Children’s Museum - Recommendation City Council Should Confirm that the Children’s Museum Should Be Included in the City Center Site *Retail Concepts - Considerations* Vision Resolution Complementary Small Scale Services – Civic Center Community Service Support Hours of Operation – Limited and Smaller Scale Lower Level of Activity Vibrant Full Service Larger Retail - City Center Regional Draw Hours of Operation - Expanded Use and Larger Scale - With / Without Multiplex Cinema Higher Level of Activity Small Scale Retail (15,000 s.f. to 25,000 s.f.) Development Options City as Developer/Landlord, Public/Private Partnership, Private Development Market Feasibility Feasible as Complementary Small Services to Civic Center Low Risk Needs Signature Restaurant(s) as Anchor Financial / Economic Benefits City as Developer / Landlord - Small Benefit Public / Private Partnership - Dependent on Development Agreement Private Development - $1.5 +/- Million One Time Developer Opportunity Payment Medium Scale Retail (70,000 s.f to 80,000 s.f.) Development Options Public / Private Partnership Private Development Through RFP Market Feasibility High Risk No Current Developer Market without Specific (Sports) Anchor Theme Underutilizes South Site Development (If this Option is Selected) Financial / Economic Benefits Public / Private Partnership - Undetermined Benefit Due to Limited Developer Market Private Development - Undetermined Benefit Due to Limited Developer Market Large Scale Retail (100,000 s.f. to 140,000 s.f.) Development Options Public / Private Partnership Private Development Through RFP Market Feasibility Lower Risk with Maximized Developer Flexibility - Market Timing - Retail / Entertainment Use Mix - Anchor Store(s) with Specific Theme (a Necessity) - With or Without Multiplex Cinema (40,000 s.f. of 140,000 s.f.) Financial / Economic Benefits Public / Private Partnership - Dependent on Development Agreement Private Development Through RFP - Up to $10 Million One Time Developer Opportunity Payment *Retail Concepts - Recommendations* Recommended By - Consultant Team 15,000 to 25,000 s.f. of Restaurant / Retail Adjacent to Civic Cultural Uses (Small Scale Services) The City Should Pursue Large Scale Retail To Create a Vibrant City Center Allow Maximum Developer Flexibility Market Timing - After the Construction of Some Civic Uses - Upon Market Demand Retail / Entertainment Use Mix Anchor Store(s) with Specific Theme With or Without Multiplex Cinema *Parking – Considerations* Assumed Stand Alone Requirements for each Site Component *Parking - Recommendation* Recommended By - Core Team, Consultant Team Shared-use Analysis in Phase 2 Dependent upon Program and Location Potential Sharing of Parking among Site Components Potential Sharing of Adjacent Privately-Owned Structure(s) Explore Development of Parking Structure at Bishop Ranch 1 Site Amenities Programmed and Developed in Phase 2 Master Planning Cost Model - Relevant Examples Cost Model – Civic / Cultural Financing Strategies The Administrative Services Director presented funding options and strategies that are available as the City approaches implementation of the City Center Project. City Center Financing Options Direct City Funding General Fund Reserves Debt Financing General Obligation Bonds Certificates of Participation Grant Funding Community/Corporate Fundraising Partnerships Children’s Museum Retail Developer Assumptions Conservative Approach Upper End of Cost Range Optional as well as Core Elements "Soft" Costs at 50% of Hard Costs (Including Escalation) Does Not Include Retail Development Costs or Revenue Commitment of 50% of Current General Fund Reserves to Project Costs Issues Certificates of Participation to Finance City Offices Other Debt Financing for Library and for Center for the Arts General Obligation Bonds Certificates of Participation with New Funding Source for Payment of Debt Service City Will Fund Only Site Improvements and Parking for the Children’s Museum Mayor Hudson opened the Public Hearing. *Bo Brummett, 7471 Interlachen Avenue, points of agreement: Diagram 8 or 9with development on one side of Bollinger Road to avoid problem of Bollinger separating the site Retail should be vibrant Teen Center in existing library San Ramon Landmark Dedicated Chamber 650 seat Center for the Arts Pat Tuohy, 319 Pine Valley* Economic Development Advisory Committee Met last month / review study / last evening Synopsis of Notes of Meeting: Retail Component Consensus Agreements: Medium in size / not more than 60k s.f. (Magnolia Square is 35k s.f.) Should be pedestrian in focus Supportive of the civic portion of the development rather than stand alone Include structured parking / no ubiquitous 2 stories in height / similar massing Integral part of whole complex and not isolated from customers / proximity to other buildings is key element to success of retail Assumed audience M-F is city and adjacent office building employees. Weekend is theatre and patrons of park and adjacent components Support concept small/medium to include mixes of occupants and support the medium mix provided definition of home furnishings does not mean furniture and definition of food means food to be eaten on premises Could include child care facility to serve employees and surrounding offices Could included elevated walkway to adjacent site *Mark Ballock, 9537 Sand Point Drive* Arts Advisory Committee 5 months study of several theatres in Bay Area Concepts and Plan for Theatre based upon other models Conversation b/w AAC and PCSC 650 seats (not an easy decision) – growth potential / will meet 20 year need Other Core Elements Visual Arts Gallery integrated in Theatre and across components of the City Center / not a major problem to curate shows and multiple exhibits / more work on committee members’ parts Adjacent to Lobby of Theatre and integrated across other components Need 8 classrooms as Core (need 4 today) in Theatre program Good presentation supported by AAC / PCSC *Donna Kerger, General Plan Review Commission* Compliment staff and consultants on information / handout material to follow presentation Current chair of General Plan Review Commission Numerous community workshops and public comments / May 10 meeting / voted General Plan to be presented to Community for approval in November - City Center Central Gathering Performing Arts Theatre Compatible Retail / Art Gallery Other Uses as Recommended by Task Force Appreciate Council support of City Center as presented *Dennis Noh, 1506 Dawn Court* Small retail / Beautiful landscaping / museum / multiplex theatre is a nice idea…Blackhawk Plaza Cannot support in San Ramon? Bollinger Canyon Road is vibrant now, can we increase the traffic? Civic Center not shopping center Stacy Ishigaki, 4017 Terra Alta Drive PCSC Student Member / Teen Council Member / behalf of TCTF and Teen Population Thank you for including the Teen Center Task Force recommended minimum of 3500 s.f. / desired s.f. at 10k Teen center built as a part of the new library would not provide a focused teen center Recommend use of (e) Library site and expanded programming and services If part of the Library / separate entrance, soundproof walls necessary for ownership Failure of Alcosta Room Teen Center as benchmark Youth Services Center with Teen component will be used by larger youth population daily *Rosalind Rogoff, 9913 Mangos Drive* Much in favor of all components recommended Some question about library / children’s museum – but these are vital to City Center and what attracts people CM in particular will become a magnet to draw people and provide San Ramon with a distinctive family friendly personality Dedicated Council Chamber / wired / insertion points for cameras / interactive video over internet / many uses for that type of facility Retail: not sure…flash of inspiration / the Sharks are looking for a place??? *Woody Herman, 3711 Mesa Vista Drive* Very good presentation Questions / Comments Initials does not provide audience with full detail (RFP) Components / 8 and 10 make a lot sense (north side) Questions: Hard to determine how much retail (medium rather than small?) Prefer small retail What would be the added cost to relocate recreational programs to other site? *Jerry Cambra, 9762 Tareyton Avenue* Concerns and comments about this presentation…would liked to have seen it earlier to digest 650 seats may put us in middle ground and we may not be able to draw the right types of performances Production companies: seats make a big difference to producers / contact them to find out what companies would be utilizing the facilities and what types of productions / cost and size / would fit Children’s Museum / Teen Center / Library Important to Civic / City Center Retail Little or no integration to existing retail (marketplace) – need to utilize and realize benefit of existing Not sure about central theme Traffic / Circulation / Parking Greater emphasis on Iron Horse Trail as access and focal point Utilize Iron Horse Trail as Central Theme These concepts tend to favor traditional transportation / cars Walnut Creek / storefront that doesn’t look like a parking structure might work here 4 site integration / connect Central Park with Marketplace and Bollinger Canyon Road sites Better circulation Better access Jim Blickenstaff, 2410 Talavera Drive Focused on basic motivations Develop city, culture, community, and resident based focus Beyond that can draw some from the region in the context of performing arts First scheme with potential is 2 with open space on the north and retail on south Opportunities for integration of open space use with the park and connectivity to the park / sports use and low intensity use Integrating uses on north side with community center and park to enhance the potential for the community Landscaping Walking paths Water component Green component Serious examination to Scheme 2 Attractive to community Low intensity aspects Draw citizens and families to area as opposed to drawing others (high intensity like Dublin) Big Box is not where San Ramon is going (whether Retail or Entertainment Center Not large, colorful or flashy, but more responsible that addresses the needs of the community / family More pedestrian friendly / utilize pedestrian and traffic aspect / includes bridge (2 if possible) across Bollinger Canyon Integrates Marketplace to Central Park and these two sites Utilize 11 acres in a way that enhances the community park *Greg Carr, 2730 Sherbear Drive* Presentation brought up good concepts on how to integrate elements critical to our community Overriding important element is Civic Center not City Center / focus on community and not retail Back years…element extremely important to many is Center for the Arts – long overdue Children’s Museum and Arts Gallery / Arts integrated into Center for the Arts Teen Center should be integrated into the Civic Center and not isolated in the outback / important to integrate all age levels Meeting Rooms: distributed among site components is excellent idea Parking / time for us to go up / city and consultant team have correctly included a parking structure / a word of caution / if you want something that will look nice, push the higher range in the cost model Open space to enhance the appearance of the whole plan (parking structured) Low end view of retail / share view as small as possible to complement civic structures to allow places to go at lunch and in the evening prior to a show… Integrate a child care facility / stand alone element / important to our societal way of life Layout: connect the open space as much as possible to Central Park/shift a ball field, etc. Do not put open space in outback – will be underutilized and integrated / may open up potential in the future to build upon??? Thinking out of the box…schemes may work 150+ million / dollars will go up / address phased construction / offer 3 phases and priorities Center for the Arts / Arts Gallery / Small Retail / Children’s Museum Council Chambers / Teen Center / Parking Structure (good and big) / Library City Offices Hope that the intent was to keep retail small and focus on Civic Center / functions for us on a higher level but does integrate elements that will be keep it successful *Connie Brook, 2313 Talavera Drive* Iron Horse Mother’s Club / St. Joan of Arc Ministry / Bollinger Hills Babysitting Co-op San Ramon Valley is child centered and family oriented / here to speak in favor of Children’s Museum Would fit well with City’s character Could become model city to others in the state Do travel to other regional museums / like to enrich our children and like to make a day of it…adjacency to central park and library is a good draw. People to visit from beginning increases chances of it becoming a mainstay…otherwise, like the Marketplace it may have trouble surviving Art programs in San Ramon Valley are limited / studies show that these programs are a vital part of growing children and museum will help fill that void Reach out to other cultures / san Ramon benefit Rainy days visits other than Chuck E. Cheese don’t exist / none offer educational activities Attendance: from schools, families with young children / after school programs / pre school / birthday celebrations / From visiting other parks in the Valley have met others who come here…many will frequent the museum and entire City Center Strongly urge the council to move forward with housing the Museum in Phase 1 of the City Center Steve Goins, 40 Ewing Drive, Pleasanton VCM Board of Directors Written comments provided / will review Site Alternatives Following Strategic Operational Plan Are in process of raising funds to Hire a director / reputable search firm on board Have considered storefront / timing contingent upon director (first order of priority) Have been busy with small scale programs / prototypes / other types of promotions in the past Looking at other awareness / publicity channels / continue to look for additional ways to further Support recommendation for city to provide assistance to acquire space and develop programs Fundraising activities underway / small and larger / embarking on early 2002 fundraising and looking to significant fundraising / hiring a director Corporate context / until we have a home, it is difficult for them to make a contribution Regarding challenge grant; would support that as well Regarding site options Believe that part of the synergy represented by the City Center is important to VCM as well, not isolated away from other civic/cultural uses Diagram 1 and 7 and 8 and 10 are scenarios worth exploring and present opportunities for the VCM. *Kathleen Weir, 12212 Toluca Drive* Children’s Museum / influx of young families with small children / would be fantastic to have in Civic Center Issues with 8, 9 and 10 Central park is spacious – and is currently used for events like the Wind Festival / can’t imagine utilizing Central Park with other two sites available Don’t take away anything we already have *Helga Glasson, 128 Waterman Circle* Iron Horse Mother’s Club and VCM Feel that there is tremendous support in the area / individuals, companies, corporations and community foundations that would support this component Area can support financially / service population / can’t think of a better place for the Children’s Museum to be… San Ramon can have a central place that many other communities are trying to achieve… Biggest thing in communities to day is to start with a Children’s Museum and build a town center around it Look forward to support of Council and residents of San Ramon and surrounding areas Duane Buck, 2547 Marsh Drive Small retailer; resident and opportunity for expansion or move of business Integrate the retail in the City Center / will draw for each other and create energy Small scale was 15,000 s.f. to 25,000 s.f. Magnolia Center has 2 major and 15 other stores in 30k s.f. 15k s.f. is not many stores and should be substantially more than that but not necessarily larger than medium scale Don’t see how retail will draw from each other with only 10 stores *Richard Moser, 2020 Wineberry Drive* Cinema and Theatre used; alluded in agenda: have we decided whether there will be a cinema in the larger City Center complex? If not decided, is there a deadline? Would like to see one to energize state and county and city uses / support in the day for use in the evening Does not have to multi – but 2 or three at one time and would architecturally be blended *Michael Foster, 10017 Santa Rosa Avenue* Small Retail: encourage integration of mixed-use (anything from ground floor retail / above office and/or residential housing units) General Plan suggests mixed use at City Center / would benefit downtown area and provide vibrant feel / day and evening *Mary Hanson, 222 Triana Way* Economic Development Committee / Citizen Great presentation and plan EDC looked at retail / reiterate medium level of retail…something beyond having a couple of deli(s) but not at the big box extreme (not an advantage) Specialty types of business / not in competition with existing retail centers and advantageous to everyone in the community Integrate geographically on the site and not isolated with other functions Anchor retail is not too big / a restaurant that turns people away is better than going out of business Did not see multiplex as valuable part of City Center Configuration 8 / City Center on North Side with pedestrian bridge with connection to Marketplace is critical / need pedestrian friendly and safe way to encourage crossover traffic Regarding Theatre Look at initial and ongoing costs / city subsidy? A theatre doesn’t pay for itself and we need to be careful about ongoing costs Civic Uses as first priority Get City Staff in Updated quarters and then incorporate other components Expandable spaces (growth strategies) make sense for Civic and other functions *Scott Couture, 166 Teracina Drive* Appreciate opportunity to get up to speed Support Civic not City Center Focus on Arts and Culture Not compatible with Large Retail Support thinking outside the box Keep parks and cultural aspects together Need more parks and open space / do not endanger future Small, compatible retail (synergistic types of retail) Key is synergy / Arts Galleries / Arts and Crafts Stores / Science Shops and Museum Shops / Onsite food is requirement / Large Complex integrating existing and new use Parking structure to support more open space If large retail, should be on the south site (but do not support) Do not support a Cineplex Not compatible with other uses More recreational activities across Bollinger / can separate these from cultural *Shirley Alberti, 20 Fircrest Court* Last 4 to 5 years…we’ve seen this grow from to a proper sized museum to a grandiose project Museum to Performing Arts Center, Restaurants, Cinema, Complexes, Retail Stores / Can’t have it all and the open space…additive elements which keep growing Is and should be a Civic Center If Retail involved at all, put on South Site Not sure how a decision could be made tonight – first time that site seen Figures are startling; Soft Costs emphasis (can add 50% to include furniture, etc.) Must consider before thinking about putting too much on this property Traffic must be considered. A large retail and cinema complex will create a lot of traffic at that intersection Combine use of buildings (Museum and Children’s Museum to share a building (2^nd floor) and Theatre all in one building) Allows more open space / outdoor activities Child Care facility / first heard / Does the City want to get into the Child Care Business? If for Bishop Ranch, they should provide. Necessary Service Privatization…For example, if this building (Community Center) were privately owned, would we be able to meet here? Private ownership on City Property may provide issues in the future / potential conflicts between City and Profiteer *Ed Cheng, 3148 Christopher Way* Wonderful presentation LAC Reiterate support of Core Space Program after review with consultant team Support additional high tech meeting room / San Ramon as a leader in the Bay Area as Small Business friendly Concerned that the funding of the library and Center for the Arts is GOB which has not been successful in the past and wondering if there are other funding sources, for example, capital projects programs… Council may ask LAC to solicit further public input on the use of the Core Space Program Square Footage *Don Miller, 14 Burns Court* Largest concern is Bollinger Canyon Traffic going east and west now is bad, worse as Dougherty Valley is built out Out of the Box Thinking Need Sunset Development help to potentially pull this off… Bishop Ranch 2 / why not do a land swap Build new buildings on South side and take over the west side buildings Everything on north side of Bollinger Canyon Keeps everyone away from that traffic and crossing issue Mayor Hudson closed the Public Hearing. *Council Questions and Answers* Comment: Move the road, connect the two sites and go around…slow the traffic down. Keep the structures together; swing Bollinger Canyon Road South around south end of south site Concerns regarding expanding the Center into the Central Park and impacting the Wind Festival Site / (The Meadow); that area should always remain green / open space Question Financing Options: What would be put before the voters in GOB / Amount and Duration and does it include Dougherty Valley Residents Could go ballot as two separate items (I.e. Library as X dollars and Center for the Arts as y dollars or single issue for both Cost per household – rudimentary numbers 4.75 per 100K assessed value per 10 million bonded 90 million Bonded, own a 600K house, 260 dollars /year +/- for 30 years Includes assumptions regarding growth and assessed value (Dougherty Valley) and applied conservative percentages Would include all residents / to include whatever portion is annexed / could condition new annexes / majority is to annex soon and potentially prior to vote Financing City Offices with COP(s) and voters for Library and Performing Arts Can we reverse and put City Offices to the voters Can any redevelopment monies be used for this? Bonded or borrowed to limit re: redevelopment at present time; looking to increase limit but does not look promising at present time Not in redevelopment area, but could use for Civic purposes (Library and Performing Arts, not City Offices) Can Bond Issues include Soft Costs 90 Million assumption includes soft costs, fully burdened costs May include furnishings, consultant fees (professional design and project management) and escalation How can we vote until we ask the voters? Are we putting the cart before the horse? Should be a question to answer tonight How can we define it without an understanding of how we will fund it Council Direction Program and Feasibility *Is the Children’s Museum Confirmed as a Part of the City Center?* Concern with confirmation is the cost factor / subsidy and comment that regardless of whatever we do that 51% of the control remains with San Ramon Negotiations ongoing via City Manager with VCM Site / Ongoing Subsidy / Construction Costs, etc.? Assumption Made (HM) is that VCM is provided a site, whether leased, purchased, etc. is for Council to decide. Assumed that CM would maintain and be responsible for operating costs and tenant improvements / facilities costs Cm. Tatarka’s motion to include the Children’s Museum as a part of the Civic Center was seconded by Cm. Raab and passed 4-1 (Cm. Kinney dissenting) *Will the Youth Services Center Be Located in the Existing Library vs. a Teen Center as Programmed Attached to the New Library?* Comment: if we build a new library, (no either way…). If there is no new library this is a moot point Recommend Youth Services Center at Existing Library Teen Center in past has failed as part of another building/use Teen Council has explored fully and made a solid recommendation regarding expanded programming services Youth Education Services Center = YES Center In favor of A Youth Services Center and not a Teen Center; utilized during the day not as a child care center, but where youth, infants to teenagers, can come to a central point to find available programs and services The Teen Council has done their homework; in support of an independent, stand alone facility (YES). They have done the research and they should have it. We have a Senior Center and are planning for the younger element, we need something for the teens. It is a first and can be a great asset to the community and can help the relationships and continuing relationships. Sold on previous recommendation; include Teen Centers as part of our gymnasiums. All of the Gym/Teen Center combined previously seen: Teen Center is only 4500 to 6500 s.f. – if expanded programs could potentially utilize existing Library facility. Do not want to pursue public child care. Incorporate as part of Gymnasiums. Disagree: need stand alone facility. Explored other operational models, stand alone works. As our community grows, can be used for a variety of programs and sends a message to our teens that we value you and we understand what you need. Cm. Raab’s motion that we use the existing Library (when a new library is built) and convert its use to a Youth Services Center was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 3-2 (Cm. Kinney and Mayor Hudson dissenting) Is the Program for the Community Meeting Rooms Approved as Distributed Through City Center Site? Great idea / possibly even more and explore shared use that will connect the site components and even expand the number of spaces available Excellent concept; quantity and number that we are looking at and where they are located Cm. Wilson’s motion that the program be approved as recommended was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0. *Is the Program for the Visual Arts Approved as Distributed Through City Center Site?* As the components are approved, if they are approved, would agree with concept Agree with overall concept; once approved it would need to be ‘tweaked’, but agree with overall concept Agree in this context and with recommendation of Arts Advisory Committee and their concerns Cm. Kinney’s motion to accept the program as recommended was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0. *Is the Program for City Council Chamber Approved as a Dedicated Space?* Agree that must be dedicated space After benchmarking and consultation with consultant team, need dedicated space (technology driven City) Utilize to fullest extent (I.e. revenue source during the day for corporate seminars, etc. or whenever available) Mountain View, Redwood City, etc. provides models for community and corporate use Comment regarding report correction about Council participation Cm. Wilson’s motion to accept program as recommended was seconded by Cm. Kinney and passed 5-0. *Is the Program for the Library Approved to Include an Additional High Tech Meeting Room (Accepts Optional Program Space)?* Yes at the recommendation of LAC Yes, definitely – other cities are building new libraries with high tech rooms – businesses are trying to incorporate high tech as well in our library Opposed to new library and this concept. The library in DV will provide sufficient space to the City If the library is voted by this council, it must go before the citizens for vote for a bond issue Cm. Raab’s motion to accept optional and core space program was seconded by Cm. Wilson and passed 5-0 Is the Program for the City Offices Approved to Accommodate Future Services and Growth Strategies (Accepts Optional Program Space)? Cannot avoid; must accommodate growth Can’t hold to 5 years…must include long term growth Leaseable space, do not impact community meeting rooms; do not design without holistic approach (build it later) Designate space for potential building addition over time If so, must project potential site Longer term projection flattens out… Cm. Kinney’s motion that the optional (leaseable) space is accepted and that we additionally include the potential for future building expansion was seconded by Cm. Wilson and passed 5-0. Is the Revised Program for the Center for the Arts Approved (No Optional Program Space)? Concern is that Danville has 300 seat theatre, Livermore and Dublin are building; concern about programming (can we get performances) as well as long term maintenance costs, what will the City have to subsidize 12 to 13 years have supported the Theatre. 650 seats is not adequate; we are limiting ourselves to who can perform, and may impact whether we have to subsidize. The additional seats may make the difference, and don’t believe that the additional costs associated with the additional seats is that large a factor Feel that the Arts Advisory Committee’s original 800 seat theatre is necessary. In favor of 800, not 650. 650 is a compromise, support and demand for larger number of seats. Must be marketed as well as our other, current services. Vital component and if we are going to build it, and once, would support 800 seats. Originally 250 to 400 or 500, Task Force was 800 to 1000, if we build this, it must be either small or large. 650 is odd. When the people of this community vote for a bond issue for this Theatre, we will know how large it will be at that time. 480 to 600 was the mark, now hearing that it should be larger. All in agreement to go for top number and take the one shot. More than plays, etc., will be incorporated into soft costs, etc. This will be the cultural heart of this city. Worried that this will end up like the Lescher, subsidized and not local. Impact to community and oriented to Region. Cannot accept over 650. Cm. Kinney’s motion to go to the voters with an 800 seat theatre bond measure was seconded by Cm. Wilson and passed 4-1 (Cm. Raab dissenting) *Retail Concepts* *Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved?* With Increased land could support small to medium (up to 40-50 K). Upscale restaurants, etc. and must fit in with Civic Center concept and uses (museum shops, galleries, etc). Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved? Risk associated – we need retail. Not sure of another movie theatre, in town and Dublin competition. We need something to bring people to the Center – retail and restaurants would add vitality. Would be willing to look at another theme. Shark Tank? Practice Rink? Open to the public for other uses? Open to this exploration. Get back in the box. The library is 18 k, O’Kane's is 10k, another 18k. Reference for people to see the size and density relationships to the concepts we are looking at. The key is…usually I’m uncomplimentary, but absolutely impressed with everything done – financing as well. Retail on South Side and potentially small scale services with Civic/Cultural uses. Recommend we have both a Civic and City Center. If we can get the Cineplex, it is the easiest way to generate traffic all day long. Need flexibility, don’t rule it out. *Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved?* Medium. Adamantly opposed to multiplex. Won’t work here. Should be a sense of pride, and feel that the Center should provide retail for families and adults. We are individuals and adults in San Ramon need an escape – it would be nice to go to an upscale restaurant, a gallery, browse. Retail should be cognizant of being comfortable during the day, but provides an evening destination and provides exposure for our children to cultural aspects of life. Don’t want this to model Dublin, like combination of resident friendly. Country chic – very plain, very simple. Combination of SF Embarcadero, Walnut Creek and enough land and green around it to make it San Ramon but also sophisticated – shorts to tux Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved? Creating a Civic Center – they are of the mindset that we have small retail, ancillary to Civic and Cultural uses. Concern with midrange because of consultant risk assessment. Concern with large concept because of traffic and impact to existing businesses. Business concern about what retail is to be included in Center. Need small, ancillary retail and keep whatever we can as open space. Original plan was anything but pedestrian friendly. Give the South side back to Sunset and get our money back…do not create a shopping center. Look at small and medium range, would need more study on what is the theme… Traffic issues: peak hours of traffic is going to reach a point at which we revisit traffic. We may end up with less homes in DV if we experience too great a traffic impact. Do we want a City Center, Civic Center or both? We can have it both. The City Center exists (larger acreage); this should be a Civic Center Suggesting that we have the opportunity to have both Civic and City portion – give a developer the most flexibility to make it successful – we will still get benefit from development ($). Do you want to create synergy, or just a Civic portion? Small retail in Civic, but retail in City portion. Integrate retail into existing site components *Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved?* Recommendation looking at from consultant team was small or large – if a sports center, medium is totally feasible. Let’s look at all three options (small, medium and large). Opposed to open space as most expensive land use. City acquired land for Civic uses – not for conversion to retail. City is not a developer. Sell the land and use the money toward the 11 acres and civic use. Agree – at this point with cost factor, would be appropriate to do that. Would argue that we’d get the money back – we are not going to give it to someone – not a public but a private project. What do we get back in synergy? Project would meet criteria. Do we want just a Civic or City and Civic Center. Is the Recommendation for Inclusion of Small Scale Services Adjacent to Civic / Cultural Uses and the Inclusion of Large Scale Retail as Part of the ‘City Center’ Approved? Does Sunset have first refusal at price? Can we sell the land at greater? 7.7 acres at BR1. Agreement in negotiation. Cm. Raab made a motion not to exceed the medium retail recommendation (70K). Cm. Kinney’s motion to accept recommendations to include both small and large and study Sports or other Theme to mitigate risk was seconded by Mayor Hudson and passed 3-2 (Cms. Raab and Tatarka dissenting). Site Configuration / Land Use Options Should the Consultant Team Consider the Inclusion of Central Park as a Site Option for Next Steps? Get back in the box. Invested a lot in Central Park and Skateboard Park. Protect the Meadow…Would be opposed to including Central Park as a site option. Diagram 8 – Don’t mix uses at two ends of the magnet. Phase in the Civic Center from the baseball and active uses into the Civic uses…from Design Competition Cm. Kinney’s motion that we do not include Central Park as site option was, seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0. Next Steps Do You Approve Moving to Next Steps? Mayor Hudson’s motion to approve proceeding to next steps was seconded by Mr. Wilson and passed 5-0. Approval to Proceed to Next Steps Phase 2 Master Plan Phase 2 Site Master Planning Conceptual Building Design Open Space Program and Conceptual Design Conceptual Level Cost Estimating Refinement of Financing Strategy Phasing Strategy Develop Public/Private Retail Strategy Develop Operational Costs Comment regarding timeframe – 3 to 4 months There being no further business to come before the City, at 11:15 p.m. Mayor Hudson adjourned the meeting to Closed Session. David E. Hudson, Mayor Judy Macfarlane, City Clerk Home \| City Council \| City Council Minutes Index