Create an Account - Increase your productivity, customize your experience, and engage in information you care about.
Show All Answers
The Library is FULLY funded via separate Library Funds and Measure L did not restrict their use. Measure L essentially restricted the use of the Town's General Fund for the project.
As of May 2017, design costs for non-Library portion of the project is $3.3 million. Basic construction costs are estimated at $22.6 million. This brought the required funding total to approximately $25.9 million for design and basic construction. Approximately $1 million was allocated to pre-project costs dropping the requirement to $24.9 million. There was $2.9 million available in building fees funds dropping it further to $22 million. Approximately $7 million was raised by Atherton Now leaving a required funding gap of approximately $15 million. Acknowledging this, the City Council returned to the voters in 2017 with Measure A.
Measure A authorizes the Town to use available unallocated General Funds toward the project - $10 million or 38% of the total project is funded by private donations and building fees.
As of June 2017, Atherton Now has raised nearly $7 million toward the project. Agenda Archive for the City Council
Currently, the Police staff use approximately 600-800 square feet in the garage for this training. In the space is workout equipment (all donated by the community and the officers themselves), mats and other training gear. The space is actively used - with one caveat - because parts of the space doubles as the weapons cleaning station, parking of motorcycle vehicles, vehicle repair area, and evidence storage - there are limitations on its use. This will be remedied in the new buildings where the spaces are built as they are required to be built by law and up to OSHA standards.
Of that total $52 million cost, the Library represents $18.8 million. The Library portion of the project is fully funded. That leaves a remainder of $33.2 million.
Included in that remaining $33.2 million is the pre-project environmental work and other geotechnical work totaling approximately $1 million. That leaves $32.2 million left for the project.
Of that total, $3.3 is architectural and design costs leaving $28.9 million. Of that total, $22.6 is construction, $2.2 million is for furniture, fixtures, and other building equipment (mostly post project), and $4.1 million is built in for contingencies. These are both design and construction contingencies.These contingencies are built in to accommodate potential changes to the project design as the project moves along and potential change orders for construction or cost escalation at bid.
At the end of the day, the true construction cost for the project will be what the market bears at the time of bid. However, the Town has hired Mack5, a professional construction estimation firm, to analyze the project in detail and provide as accurate a cost estimate as possible. The estimated cost of the project's construction is $22.6 million.
After review of bids, the Council can award a bid to a qualifying contractor. That is anticipated in March/April 2018. The project has a 27-28 month construction timeline. Construction would begin in April/May 2018 and continue until at least August 2020.
With that construction timeline, the project will cross over multiple Fiscal Years and Town Budgets - FY 2017/18, FY 2018/19, FY 2019/20, and FY 2020/21. This is where the funding timeline comes in for the project. Given that the project crosses 4 Fiscal Years, the Town is able to use funds from each of those fiscal years in its projections for funding availability.
Presently, the project is designed with 7 Alternates (some could add cost some could deduct cost)
Alternate 1 - Deduct: Hyrdoseed at City Hall instead of the designed planting plan -$223,000Alternate 2 - Add: Energy Monitoring at City Hall - $13,000Alternate 3 - Add: Microgrid at City Hall - $594,000Alternate 4A - Add: Photovoltaic at City Hall - $539,000Alternate 4B - Add: Photovoltaic at City Hall - $527,000Alternate 4C - Add: Photovoltaic at City Hall - $1,130,000Alternate 4D - Add: Photovoltaic at City Hal - $124,000Alternate 5 - Add: 25,000 gallon thermal energy storage tank - $192,000Alternate 6 - Add: Use copper gutters instead of painted aluminum - $75,000Alternate 7 - Use Stone Veneer instead of pre-cast concrete at wall base - $21,000
The deducts and/or adds are NOT included in the base costs of the building. They are only added or eliminated (deduct) if selected by the Council at the time of award of bid. The City Council is also looking at additional items to add to this list. These include:
- Eliminate the Corporation Yard- Postpone the New Council Chambers- Replace the Clay Tile Roof with Asphalt Shingle- Replace the CMU Fencing with Chain Link- Simplify or Reduce Interior Finishes- Change Traction Elevator to Slower Hydraulic Elevator- Postpone the renovation of historic Town Hall- Remove any custom built furniture (counters)- Replace rammed earth walls with typical wall construction (library)- Replace wood window framing with aluminum- hydroseed in lieu of planting
These would need to be designed so that they could be bid as deducts. If selected, these would reduce the cost of the construction by approximately $4.5 million.
CARRIAGE HOUSE SQUARE FOOTAGE – 1160
JENNINGS PAVILION SQUARE FOOTAGE – 2360
The fact finding panel is charged with making written findings of fact and advisory recommendations covering unresolved issues during negotiations. The panel is empowered to conduct investigations, hold hearings and take any steps it deems appropriate to resolve the bargaining impasse, including the issuance of subpoenas requiring witness testimony and the production of evidence.
If the impasse is not settled by the panel within 30 days after appointment, they must submit any findings of fact and recommended terms of settlement to the parties. The public agency is required to make these findings and recommendations publicly available within 10 days of receiving them. After applicable mediation and fact finding procedures have been exhausted, but no earlier than 10 days after the issuance of the panel's written findings and recommendations, a public agency may implement its last, best and final offer. Prior to doing so the agency must hold a public hearing regarding the impasse.
Agency experience with the 2012 State law has revealed that the new fact finding/impasse tends to be a costly solution to negotiation stalemates.
The project will have significant traffic and neighborhood impacts on Marsh Road in order to perform the work and to allow for construction equipment and material staging. There will be unavoidable impacts to traffic flow and significant impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods (traffic, noise, etc.). The project construction is wedged between the immovable boundaries of April 15 and October 15 (State law). The project is further constricted by school traffic/timing and the Town’s waste hauler route audit. It has also been suggested that the project limit its impact during the school year (mid-June and early-August) – to accommodate these boundaries, the project construction period would be limited to mid-May 2016 to mid-October 2016 (5 months) – pushing the project to school year end or school year beginning, but not both.
If all the weekdays in the above period were open, this limits the project to 100 construction days; assuming the project is confined to the Town’s established Monday through Friday, 8 am to 5 pm construction requirements. That is not sufficient time for the project to complete. Staff worked with the construction management professional and developed three potential construction schedules addressing the concerns as much as possible. In broad summary, the proposed construction schedule would involve an 8-week full closure (48 working days) of Marsh Road (access to local driveways permitted) with active construction from 9 am to 8 pm, Monday through Saturday. The remainder of the necessary construction period (42 days) would have daytime flagging of 1-lane, 2-way traffic control and active construction from 9 am to 5 pm, Monday through Friday.
The Council was and is keenly interested in the opportunity to cover the channel at a future date with the possibility of bicycle and/or pedestrian pathways along it. However, there are a number of issues to work through first - 1) environmental review; 2) termination of the bike/ped at Fair Oaks in the County...then what? 3) capacity issues related to the covered channel
The addition of an emergency response lane is something that the Menlo Park Fire District has suggested as a priority when/if the channel is ultimately covered. Because Marsh Road is a detour corridor for Highway 101, a thruway for travel through Atherton to other destinations, and an emergency response route to areas around Atherton, the question becomes who should contribute to the widening of the roadway? Should the cost be borne by solely Atherton residents? Or, should the cost of the project be spread amongst the State, the Fire District, and other regional agencies with an interest in the improvements?
At the present time, the Town is solely interested in a project that can rehabilitate the channel. It is currently deteriorating to the point that the roadway itself is in jeopardy of failing. The cost to do this incremental repair is nearly $3.5 million (all in) - all at the expense of Atherton residents. Bigger projects addressing bigger issues with far more substantial costs will be considered at a later date. Roadway safety is the primary issue driving the project at this point.
Sharrows do not represent a designated traffic lane for bicyclists - they serve as a lateral guide for bicyclists and an alert for motorists. A bicycle lane is a designated traffic lane for bicyclists and is represented by a solid white line, typically breaking into a dotted line ending before it reaches a corner.
The California Vehicle Code provides Safety Tips for Bicyclists and Motorists to assist bicycle riders and motorists alike in managing the rules of the road. Bicycle riders on public roads have the same rights - and the same responsibilities - as motorists.They are both subject to the same rules and regulations. The California law requiring motorists to leave 3 feet from a bicyclist as they pass applies on shared roadways. The law applies to any place a vehicle passes a bicyclist - regardless of whether there is an identified bicycle route, lane, or not. If there is not enough room for a driver to give three feet of space, the must slow down before safely passing. Bicyclists must obey traffic signs and signals - just like any other vehicle.
In 2014, the City Council confirmed the priorities and accepted the Town's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The Town of Atherton has developed a Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. The primary purposes of the Plan are to:
• Provide a comprehensive plan for bicycle/ pedestrian improvements throughout the Town; • Provide connectivity with adjacent agencies; • Improve bicycle and pedestrian safety; • Become more strategic and successful competing for bicycle/pedestrian grant funding; and • Identify barriers and solutions for residents to safely access bicycle and pedestrian destinations within the Town of Atherton and to other regional destinations.
Phase I Implementation involved the installation of Class III Bicycle Routes - identified routes to connect cyclists moving through Town North/South and West/East. There are sharrows on the pavement and associated signage. The routes direct cyclists N/S along Fair Oaks Avenue, Atherton Avenue, Watkins Avenue, Park Lane, and Camino Al Lago. The routes also direct cyclists W/E along Elena Avenue, Faxon Road, Barry Lane, Selby Lane, Dinkelspiel Station Lane, Austin Avenue, and Emile Avenue.
The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) controls how and where sharrows may be placed and are based on a number of factors such as road width, curb presence, parking, etc. In some areas, you may see a sign that says "Bicycles May Use Full Lane" - this is because under the California Vehicle Code, the sign is required along routes where there are no designated bicycle lanes or shoulders that are usable by bicyclists and where travel lanes are too narrow for bicyclists and motor vehicles to operate side by side.
As mentioned above, sharrows are used to assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle to travel side by side and alerts motorists of the lateral location of bicyclists likely occupying portions of the traveled way. On Atherton streets, the MUTCD requires that the center of the sharrow be at least 4 feet from the edge of pavement where there is no curb. The bicyclist should ride to the right of the center of the sharrow.
The Town is also moving forward with analysis for Class I and II lanes along Selby Lane, Watkins, Atherton Avenue, and Valparaiso. For more information on the Town's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan visit the Town's website.