Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/01/09 - Minutes - Adjounred Joint (Park and Recreation Commission) January 9, 1991 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Adjourned Joint Meeting City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission A. C~T.T, TO ORDER - CITY COUNCIL An adjourned joint meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council and Park and Recreation Commission met on Wednesday, January 9, 1991, in the Tri-Community Conference Room of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to at 6:40 p.m. by Mayor Dennis L. Stout. Present were Councilmembers: William J. Alexander, Charles J. Buquet II, Diane Williams, Pamela J. Wright, and Mayor Dennis L. Stout. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Linda D. Daniels, Deputy City Manager; Rick Gomez, Community Development Director; Olen Jones, Sr. RDA Analyst, LeAnn Smothers, Redevelopment Analyst; Joe Schultz, Community Services Director; Tarry Smith, Park Planning/Development Superintendent; Kathy Sorensen, Recreation Superintendent; Paula Pachon, Management Analyst II; Kathy Scott, Administrative Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer; Robert Zetterberg, Public Works Maintenance Manager; Jeff Barnes, Parks/Landscape Maintenance Superintendent; and Jan Sutton, Deputy City Clerk. B. CONSENT CALENDAR B1. Approval to award and authorize execution of contract (CO 91-001) for Traffic Signal and Street Improvements located at Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue for the amount of $411,914.00 ($374,467.01 plus 10% contingency) to Oliver Brothers to be funded from Systems Development Fund Account No. 22- 4637-8942. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Alexander to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. , , , , , , City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 2 C. CALL TO ORDER - PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION Present were Commissioners: Whitehead. Bruce Ann Hahn, Pam Henry, Ann Punter, and Mark Absent was Commissioner: Molly Mitchell. C1. Administration of Oath of Office to Mark Whitehead and Ann D. Punter. Mayor Stout administered the Oath of Office. , , , , , D. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION D1. DISCUSSION OF FORMATION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND RECREATION OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Staff report presented by Joe Schultz, Community Services Director. He introduced Supervisor Jon Mikels, and Jerry Newcombe, Interim Director of the San Bernardino County Park and Recreation Department. Supervisor Mikels stated that when the District was first proposed it came out of the County's Growth Management Task Force, which was somewhat of an outgrowth of Measure I. He stated he felt the original measure contained two areas that would have made him oppose the measure, one was there was a large disparity between the dollars generated in this district and the amount of funds coming back to this district, and the second was that there would be no regional park in the district. He stated the way the Open Space District boundaries have been drawn, it has been divided into the West Valley, Central Valley, and East Valley. He stated those lines are not coterminous with the Supervisorial District lines, so the only other entity in the West Valley District with Rancho Cucamonga is the City of Upland. He stated the City of Upland has indicated they will not be agendizing the item, which leaves in the West Valley portion of the 2nd District only Rancho Cucamonga. He stated the original disparity between the revenue generated and money spent in his Supervisorial District was approximately 36-7, which was too wide a margin for him to consider support. He stated those figures have been re-worked to provide equity across the County in terms of where funds are generated and where they will go to provide open space. He felt the revision did not present a problem to him any longer and would be equitable to Rancho Cucamonga. Supervisor Mikels stated that the second problem was there appeared to be insufficient language that provided the guarantees he needed to insure that the money raised in his Supervisorial District would stay in that district. Even though this is an ongoing project, there had to be some cut-off point, so they were looking at a ten-year plan for generation of revenues. He stated the Open Space District will be such that 50% of the revenue will go to independent park districts and city councils that choose to participate in the vote, with the City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 3 other 50% going to the regional park system in the County. He also felt it would be fair if some of the revenue generated in the West Valley District go to the Cucamonga/Guasti Regional Park since it is used frequently by Rancho Cucamonga residents. Supervisor Mikels stated he has been trying for some time to coordinate all of the elements for the Deer Creek Regional Park. He stated if the Open Space District is passed, the portion in this area would include San Antonio Heights, the sphere of influence for Rancho Cucamonga, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. They were looking at generating approximately $1 million per year. He stated currently the allocation would be 20% would go to the Cucamonga-Guasti Park, and 20% to the Deer Creek Regional Park. He stated the County has an RFP for a County-owned but privately operated golf course in the Deer Creek spreading grounds, about 500 acres. The golf course development cannot be incompatible with the uses the Flood Control District needs to make of that property, but they can be jointly exercised. He outlined the other areas for the proposed Regional Park, consisting of property where the Rock Crusher was proposed, University of California owned property, and Flood Control District property. He explained some of the trails that would be proposed for this area. He stated the concept was to have a nature park, and if they are able to acquire all of the parcels, it would provide over 1500 acres to be used in conjunction with the golf course. He stated the biggest problem is generating the revenue to develop it, even though it would not cost as much as active areas. Supervisor Mikels stated the Open Space District should generate approximately $500,000.00 per year, over ten years it would be approximately $5 million. He felt that would be more than ample to acquire the property and develop the concept. He stated the County owns most of the property but they do not have the revenue to develop it. He felt the Open Space District would be the only vehicle that would generate funds to develop the Deer Creek Regional Park. He stated they will ensure in the resolution that the dollars generated will stay in this area, and much like Measure I it will be constructed so that the major projects will be defined, and that build-out of the master planned facilities would be guaranteed by the resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors. If those guarantees are in the resolution, then he will support it. He stated that if Rancho Cucamonga did not join in the District, as the City of Upland has chosen to do, then there would be no revenue at all. He felt this facility would be a direct benefit for the community, and would only support it if he was assured that the revenue generated here will benefit the community in perpetuity. Councilmember Alexander felt the proposed plan was much better than anything offered, and approving to participate in the Open Space District now only meant it provided the citizens the right to vote on the issue. He asked about the maintenance costs for the facility. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated a portion of the revenue for the first five years, 50% of each participant's share, would go towards operation and maintenance. After that five year period there is no limit. He stated this measure allows for funds to be used for operation and maintenance. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 4 Supervisor Mikels stated it would be available if necessary. He stated currently the other regional parks in the County generate close to 100% of the operation and maintenance costs. He stated the benefit of a master plan is that it can help develop a cost plan. Mayor Stout asked if the election could be structured in such a way that the City's option to be in or not is covered by the election. Supervisor Mikels stated he could not say for sure. He stated his understanding of the way it is to be proposed is that it is a County-wide District that will pass or fail County-wide. He stated that if a particular city's residents oppose the District, and it passes County-wide, you would still be in. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated they have checked with the County's attorney and they have stated it would not be possible to make the District formation or the choice to participate contingent upon the voting results from a particular city. If the City opts in now, then they are in for the election. He stated a way out would be once a special assessment district is formed, then you could apply to LAFCO to be released from the district. He stated the District would not oppose anyone from detaching from it immediately after the election based on their city's results, but they could not guarantee what LAFCO would decide. Councilmember Williams asked about the language that would be used in the resolution. Supervisor Mikels stated it is a Board of Supervisors resolution that authorizes formation of the District, and authorizes its presentation to the voters. He stated that resolution, like Measure I, will spell out specific projects, and in this case spell out revenue generated in the area flowing to those projects through their Master Plan build-out, or he would not support it. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated the Board is meeting on February 4, 1991, but that they are preparing the draft now. He stated he could list all of the proposed projects, but depending on which cities decide to participate, it could change that project list if there will not be the revenue to support them. He stated he can share the draft prior to the 15th of January for the West Valley area. Councilmember Buquet stated that if Upland does not get involved, then there really is no other community, per se, that would be in this area, and did not see how this project would be subject to a change. He stated that Measure I was set up using the best-guess figures projected upon certain types of participation and distribution of the amounts, and they made the commitment that if it was successful, these projects in would be performed in a certain order, and felt that is what they needed here. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated that is what they will do. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 5 Supervisor Mikels stated they could provide that draft, but it would not be ironclad until the Board votes on it, but the language included would guarantee the revenue stream. Councilmember Wright wanted to clarify that the revenue generated for the County would be approximately $1 million. Supervisor Mikels stated that unlike the funds for Measure I which was based on projected sales tax revenues, this is $36.00 per parcel which brings the numbers to a little over $1 million per year for 100%, so the City's portion would be $500,000.00. Councilmember Wright asked then what they expected would be available for the Deer Creek Regional Park per year. Supervisor Mikels stated approximately $400,000.00 per year for 1,500 acres. Councilmember Wright stated she was still leary on this project until she heard more specifics. She wanted to be sure they were not just creating more access to scrub, which they already have, and would like to be shown some other things that would be there that will benefit the citizens. Supervisor Mikels stated his ideas included a nature trail system on approximately 200 acres, as well a couple of ideas for the central area, but with only $400,000.00 per year it would not be developed very quickly. He would envision developing a master plan in conjunction with the City for the area, and then working together on building out that master plan development. Councilmember Buquet stated in the last few years they have had a problem with the Flood Control District wanting market value for their property, and asked if that would be a problem for the Board. Supervisor Mikels felt that would not be a problem. Councilmember Alexander asked if there would be costs to the users, such as parking fees. Supervisor Mikels stated that would be something they need to address. He stated parking fees generate revenue at all of the County regional parks, and that revenue can be used for operation and maintenance costs, which would make more of the assessment revenue available for other uses. Councilmember Alexander stated the reason he brought it up was because if the citizens decide to participate in this, but the facilities will be used by people who did not participate, would there be some way to differentiate between the people who are and are not paying for the assessment. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 6 Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated one of the provisions in the legislation allows the Regional Parks Department to give back to each parcel owner who pays an assessment discounted use of the regional parks in the amount of the County's share of the assessment. So for the planned $36.00 per parcel, they would issue a coupon to each owner for $18.00. Commissioner Henry inquired about item 11 in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) where it references an intent, and if the Council agrees to participate, is there some way to lock down this project and that the City's funds, if passed, would go to that specific project as covered tonight; and if they did not go to that project, would there be some way for the City to get out of it. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated the intent of the paragraph was to say that currently there is no District, but the MOU is to define the relationship between the District and the participant when it is formed. He wanted it to be clear that no one was signing a binding agreement because there was no District to sign. It was basically a good faith intent, and this would be the document intended to be executed once the District was formed. He felt one thing they could do would be to put very specific language into the Board resolution, and have that same language in the MOU. Supervisor Mikels stated that Jerry Newcombe is still working with the County Counsel to revise the language, and wanted to be sure the City was satisfied with the language. He stated they will have the generic language developed that will have the guarantees the City would like to see. Councilmember Buquet felt if they could work in conjunction with the County counsel to help develop the language prior to the next City Council meeting, it would help to speed up the process on the Council's part. Jerry Newcombe, Acting Park Director, stated he would be available to work with representatives from the Council in the next few days to draft intent language that would be acceptable to the City, then give it to the attorneys to put in the legal format. Councilmember Wright concurred that the Council needed to be involved in the development of the language of the resolution. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public comments. Addressing the Council were: Lettie French, member of the County Parks Commission, felt as a lifelong resident of the community this was a tremendous opportunity to obtain some open space and preserve the area for a small amount of money. Catherine Bridge, 8715 Banyan, presented information on the first regional park district formed in the San Francisco Bay area in 1934, and felt that voters recognized the benefits of parks that are outside of their boundaries. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 7 A woman in the audience stated she was an eight year resident of the area, and was in favor of having the open space. A man from the audience stated he has been involved with the Friends of Cucamonga/Guasti, and felt there was broad based support in the community for open space preservation, and that his group would be willing to lend support to get the measure passed. There being no further input, the public comment session was closed. Commissioner Hahn asked if the revenue generated from the golf course go towards buying more property. Supervisor Mikels stated the revenue from the golf course would probably go towards Flood Control District projects since this plan was designed as a means to generate funds for the District. Mayor Stout stated that the Council has scheduled this item for their next meeting on January 16, 1991, and that they will be making a decision at that time as to whether to affirm this or not. Councilmember Wright stated at the January 2, 1991 Council meeting, the Council asked to be provided a comparison of the City providing a similar project and have it just be a $36.00 City assessment which the City would get 100% of as opposed to the County's proposal where they share the money, and what the pros and cons of both would be. She stated she would like to have that information prior to the 16th when they make their final decision. ACTION: Councilmembers Buquet and Wright to work with Jack Lam, City Manager, and the County on developing acceptable language for the County's resolution. Mayor Stout stated he would like a written memo to go to the Council on the results of that prior to the meeting on January 16th, along with the comparison that is being prepared by Community Services. Mayor Stout called a recess at 8:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:15 p.m with all members of Council and the Park and Recreation Commission present (Mitchell absent). D2. DISCUSSION ON CENTRAL PARK LIBRARY AND OTHER FACILITIES Jack Lam, City Manager, stated this item was on the agenda to bring the Council up to speed on the project, and to get the Council's direction on how they would like to proceed at this point. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 8 Staff report presented by Joe Schultz, Community Services Director, who proceeded to introduce Bob Mueting from RJM Design Group. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, introduced the other members of the design team that were present that evening, and provided background information on the development of the park and its structures from its early stages to its current configuration. Mayor Stout asked Bob Mueting if he would review for the Council and the Commission how the subcommittees were selected. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated that to the best of his knowledge the Library subcommittee was formally established by the City Council, and members were selected by the Council to sit on the committee. He stated the other groups, the task forces for the theater, the community center, the arts center, and the sports center, were made up of staff with the assistance of members of the community who were specialists in the various areas. Joe Schultz, Community Services Director, stated staff helped out because they were not dealing with the facilities, per se, but with the programming element of what would go on in the facilities. So not only did they use their expertise, but they also located experts in the particular areas to provide input. Councilmember Buquet asked what percentage of the discussion or focus has been on the financial considerations. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated the committee process was essentially driven by need as far as what services would be needed by the community, and not what was the budget needed to build this particular library or theater. He stated they have discussed with staff the impact on the design budget as the facility sizes were increased, but essentially the direction was to proceed with the library driving the process, to accommodate those programs, and to meet the deadline for the library grant. Councilmember Buquet stated he was interested in what degree of discussion was there as to the long term costs, or potential costs to develop these buildings. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated they have prepared a number of budget updates at various points in time. Councilmember Wright asked who were those updates given to, and who approved those costs. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated they were given to staff, and the direction was since the facilities were changing so rapidly, to wait until things settled down before going to the Council for approval of the changes. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 9 Councilmember Buquet stated that was still not answering his question. He stated that originally the Central Park concept had an envisioned cost, which has grown considerably, not just in construction and development costs, but it also now includes issues such as operations and maintenance. He wanted to know what has been considered in that regard. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated the budgets were not discussed with the subcommittees or task forces, or with the Planning Commission. Jack Lam, City Manager, felt the City Council was concerned about the cost of the project, as well as vision, because while you have the vision you still have to balance it with how it was going to be paid for. He felt that RJM was concerned with the design process which involves an envisioning process, with determining what could happen on the site, and determine what the maximum accommodations would be for the benefit of the community, the size of the property, etc. He stated the what the Council is interested in, is before anything sticks in concrete, that they have an understanding of the costs, not only for the facilities, so the Council can decide if that is what they want to do, or trade-off something for another option. He felt the Council was concerned they do not get too far along in the process before that is understood. He felt the answer from RJM would be that consideration has not been taken yet, that nothing has actually been designed other than the concept and the footprint for the facilities in order to further along the design for the library facility. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated that was correct, that the plans for the facilities could still be considered as schematic plans. He stated the only thing that has been approved by the Planning Commission has been an architectural concept for the library. Councilmember Buquet stated his concern stemmed from a Council policy that prior to the construction of new facilities, there would be a financial assessment as far as construction and long-term O&M, and included in that would be an evaluation of different alternatives. He stated that even though they are not to that point yet, he felt the reason they were having this meeting was there might be members of the Council that feel this has gone along without there being enough communication back to the Council on the changes. He stated originally it was a $35 million project for the whole park, and he was sure that cost has increased significantly without the Council being apprised. Councilmember Williams asked if they had a current estimate for the project. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated the current figure was approximately $90 million. He stated the $35 million was the master plan estimate about three years ago, and that figure was updated to $47 million when they started the design of the project. He stated a large portion of the increase in the cost has to do with the increase in the size of the facilities, as well as inflation and other factors. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 10 Councilmember Williams stated she was concerned about the parking structure and the cost involved. She asked for a comparison in cost between a flat and multi- level parking area. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, stated it was approximately $2.50 per square foot for a flat parking area, a parking stall being roughly 300 square feet, to allow for calculation of a ballpark figure per stall. He stated the cost goes up substantially for multi-level, approximately $27.00 per square foot. Councilmember Wright stated it might be realistic then to consider that if they cannot afford the cost of the parking structure and have to make it a smaller size, that could conceivably change the design and size of the buildings so that they would not be too large for the available parking. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, explained how the parking has been looked at in the design process, but stated that Councilmember Wright was correct in that the parking could have an effect on the whole park itself. Councilmember Wright asked about the changes in the library design. Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, presented slides on that subject and outlined the various stages of the design of the library building. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated in October Council had asked that the residents in the area of the park be contacted to bring their awareness level up on the Central Park development, and advised that the drawings for that are being prepared in anticipation of direction to start that process. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated the State has changed some of the criteria in the grant application. She stated they are currently ranked 60th on a list of 104 applicants for the library grant, but that they should not be discouraged by that ranking. She stated staff is working on the final application with Mr. Ray Holt and his wife Sara, who would like to identify for the Council the library project and some of the things that could better the City's position with the Council's approval. Mr. Ray Holt presented information on his background and qualifications, and other areas where they have worked as library consultants, and gave an overview of the design needs as given to staff and the design team. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated it was important for the State to see on paper what the City was expressing. She stated Mr. Holt felt it would be proper to identify the square footage for the entire shell, including the enclosed parking, which would be approximately 125,000 square feet, which conceivably could be active space in the future instead of support space. This would help improve their application. Mayor Stout asked if Mr. Holt had reviewed the City's preapplication, and what in his opinion was wrong with it for it to be ranked so low. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 11 Mr. Holt stated he did not feel that ranking was relevant because the two major factors that have yet to be seen by the State Library are the building program and the drawings, and a lot of emphasis will rest on those two documents. He stated there are many requirements which the other applicants may not meet, and outlined several factors that could disqualify applications. He stated when the applications and plans are received, staff will review them at the State Library, then will compile a priority list of the applications best suited for funding. That list will go to the Board of the State Library, consisting of the State Librarian, head of the State Department of Grants, the State Treasurer, Senator Keene and Assemblyman Klute. At that point they can do anything they want, accept it, reject it, pick the bottom one, anything. He stated the Board will meet on January 22, 1991 to determine the selection process. He suggested that any political contact the City can make to advise the Board of their need for a library could not hurt. He also stated one other thing they could submit with the application was a video tape. It could not be longer than ten minutes, and could only show the site and the existing library. Councilmember Buquet asked how the Council can help with the grant process. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated staff is suggesting the Subcommittee for Central Park work with staff and Mr. Holt in preparation of the application which will come back to the full Council on February 6, 1991. She stated they will be hand delivering the application on February 14, 1991. Mr. Holt stated one of the things the Board will be looking for on the applications are those projects that can meet a very short schedule in terms of review time. The architect needed to have drawings done in short order. He stated if the Council wanted to be ahead of the game and show good faith, they could authorize the architects to proceed with the design development drawings, which would show confidence that they have an excellent application. He stated that would save three to four months in the process. He stated that some applicants already have construction drawings done, even though you can only submit concept drawings with the application. Those applicants would be ready to go to bid immediately after receipt of a grant. He stated the City would want to be as close as possible to going to bid after receipt of an award. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated staff would recommend they go ahead with having the drawings done up for the library now since the Council is committed to the project. Councilmember Wright asked about the multi-level parking, and how tied in was that to the proposal. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated that the parking is important to satisfy the State Library's needs, and she stated there are two ways to approach that. The State was asking for more stringent parking requirements than the City's Development Code by approximately 100 spaces. Staff and the consultants would like to propose that the first phase of the library and the parking to support that stay within the confines of the parking structure, which could eventually develop over that, but would not be developed now with the library, City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 12 so you would have flexibility to work with that in future phases. She stated what needs to be considered is that all but 100 spaces can fit within the confines of the parking structure, which means to meet the State requirements you would have to go out of those bounds and build parking, which when the structure is built you would eventually loose those dollars that went into the parking. Mr. Holt has said you could also just provide what the Development Code requires, but it would be considered a point against the application, which in itself might not be bad, but if there are other points against the application, it all adds up and could lessen the City's chances of a grant. Councilmember Wright asked how bound would they be on the parking issue by the grant. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated the Board is aware that the library is part of a cultural center, but if things change on the cultural center outside of the scope of the library, it will not affect the grant. She spoke about various options for the parking. Discussion ensued regarding design of the library as a stand alone building, options in case the grant was not awarded, costs for operations and maintenance, and the use of the library as defined in the grant application. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated the first phase of the library will consist of public improvements along Base Line Road, the library facility itself, access road improvements, and the undergrounding of certain utilities. She stated that would cost approximately $27 million. They are asking for a $13 million grant, with the Redevelopment Agency funding $17 million, which should provide enough for construction and any contingencies, and as with the Civic Center, the interest earned from the funds will pay for the furniture and the fixtures. Mr. Holt stated the parking situation is an important consideration for the State, and recommended the City should meet the State's requirements on the parking for the application to increase their chances, and then if they found they had to meet that requirement, they could bite the bullet at that time. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated they could submit it that way, and if they do not get the grant, they could do whatever they wanted in regards to the parking. Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager, stated the direction staff is looking for is to consider the Central Park design as it is now to meet the needs of the residents in the future, and to accept that design. The second item is to authorize staff and Mr. Holt to pursue the library grant, and as part of that to agree to the redefinition of what is building area and to identify that lower level parking area as expansion area, and the parking lot direction. The third thing is to consider the request by RJM Design Group for an additional $485,000.00 to complete the work on the library necessary for the grant and the surrounding facilities enough so that when the grant is awarded they have enough to go immediately into construction drawings on the library. City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 13 MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Alexander to go forward with the library grant and authorize staff to do the final preparation of the grant to submit by February 15, 1991. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. MOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Alexander to increase the amount of RJM Design Group's contract by $485,000.00. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated for the third motion would the Council consider accepting the conceptual design for public review and financial study, because they needed something to begin with to determine cost, to find out what the public thinks about it. Councilmember Wright stated as long as it was clear that she still had deep reservations about Milliken and the affordability, and that all she wanted was to get more information and did not really approve the conceptual plan. Councilmember Buquet stated he would be more comfortable if the Council formed a Subcommittee, or maybe set up a mini task force to look at some of the costs, and then after that was fine tuned, to take it out for public meetings. He stated he would like someone to review it, and then put it out for the public for their comments, then have it go back to the task force. Councilmember Wright felt that if they were to take it to the public based on what it is without addressing the financial implications, then if someone does not like the fly tower, what they would do would be to attack the $90 million and kill the whole project. Jack Lam, City Manager, suggested they authorize to accept the current concept to do a financial analysis first, and then the Council can give further direction on how they would like the process to go forward. MOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Wright to accept the conceptual design for financial analysis. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. D3. DISCUSSION OF ISSUES OF MUTUAL CONCERN No items of mutual concern were discussed. E. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC El. Bob Mueting, RJM Design, stated he would be happy to make a presentation for the new Commissioners and Councilmember at their convenience, if they so desired. , , , , , City Council/Park and Recreation Commission Minutes January 9, 1991 Page 14 F · ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Wright to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. The Council meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. MOTION: Moved by Whitehead, seconded by Hahn to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously, 4-0-1 (Mitchell absent). The Commission meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, jn~Sutto~n~ Deputy City Clerk Approved by the Park and Recreation Commission: February 21, 1991 Approved by the City Council: March 6, 1991